La Dee-vina Comedia

I tried doing it then and the MCC website wasn't allowing it either! The MCC site theoretically allowed a member to sign up with any AFL club* but the system didn't actually work. *Personally, I think anyone who joins an AFL club other than Melbourne should have their MCC membership cancelled as it's a clear sign that the person does not have the requisite integrity or intelligence expected of an MCC member.

Bernie himself hinted at it in a media piece after he retired which talked about how he'd formally qualified as a real estate agent but wasn't sure if he'd follow that path full-time given he may take a possible role with the club.

If Melbourne is to be typically Melbourne, it should start by using correct grammar. The club is singular, therefore the statement should be "Melbourne is entering an exciting era". Unless, of course, Pert was being deliberately ironic and making a statement about the ignorance of the average non-Melbourne supporting Melburnian.

And nothing says "common" more than a Richmond or Collingwood membership.

It's not long ago that an appointment of an ex-player in a part-time position might have looked like a "job for a mate" without there necessarily being a genuine role for the ex-player concerned. I don't know what Bernie might be doing but I feel much more confident that it will be a genuine job using his specific skills for a good purpose.

I imagine that at some time in the not to distant future the Players' Association will say that players are being unreasonably coerced to attend the club during their supposed break. It will only take one club being unreasonable - and there will eventually be one - before the dam wall breaks.

I think this is one of the greatest posts on Demonland ever. I don't quite know what it means but " a royal commission for scum bags" just rolls off the tongue delightfully. Sounds like Paul Keating in Parliament circa 1990.

I'm not disputing this statement, but how does it fit in with the Collective Bargaining Agreement? I see no problem with players voluntarily doing extra work, but are the club's fitness and conditioning staff able to advise the players on what they should do during their break? Wouldn't that breach the agreement? Conversely, if the club's staff are not able to advise players on what they should do, how is the "extra" work monitored to ensure it fits with requirements and, more importantly, doesn't lead to players over-exerting themselves or potentially causing themselves injury?

I've just tried to renew online. I'm an MCC member wanting to take up the MCC/MFC offer but I can't renew online. Anyone else having the same problem? (I will ring the club and renew, but my concern is with the inefficiency of the membership renewal system).

Is that even possible? Can salmon coloured boots be beautiful? Makes me doubt the credibility of the rest of your posts (not).

Unlikely. His history has been to pick a name based on a player who seems to have minimal time left at the club. Whether it's an omen or just bad luck I'm not too sure.

One of the data conundrums would be whether things are better if that figure of 60% goes up or down. If it goes up, does that mean the club has better data or does it mean worse player management?

I've never thought of it this way. There would be hundreds or thousands of wannabee ruckmen who have some of those traits (or all of them but with no football ability) which just goes to show how tough it is to find a decent one, let alone the best. And we have him.

So, you're the one who watches her movies.

For every person who thinks one year out of the game is not enough to recharge there will be another who thinks that anything longer would be too long and too hard to get back in. I admire Pert for taking on this job. Without denigrating Jackson, there was a lot of low hanging fruit when he arrived. He picked all that off and then went on to the more difficult matters and will be rightly remembered as one of the best CEOs the club has ever had. So Pert comes into a job where all the "easy fixes" have already been done and will have to suffer the inevitable comparisons with his immediate predecessor. He would be smart and experienced enough to know that, so I admire him for taking on what has become difficult job to be seen to be successful in.

But doesn't he have another year on his contract? Delisting wouldn't have been possible, although a "negotiated retirement" might have been if both parties wanted it. (I'm not buying into the debate of whether he should still be playing; just making the point that contracts require adherence from both sides.)

Which is now where he belongs...unless he lets you alter your avatar to save the rest of us from cringing every time we read one of your posts.

Thanks, that explanation is both interesting and helpful.

I don't know what the bolded bit actually means. But doesn't someone have to decide which actions should be measured and recorded in the first place and how much to weight a handpass, kick or tackle? And who decides what qualifies an action to be a "1 percenter"? This is what I meant by referring to assumptions having to be made by people who build the model in the first place.

I swear every year the new recruits are getting younger and younger. Maybe that's just me getting older and older. Anyone else feel the same way?

How unhygienic is it for Champion Data to be drinking our bathwater? It seems to me that Champion Data's statements are based on raw stats processed by an algorithm. There must be assumptions incorporated into the algorithm and those assumptions are created by people. Hence, it is not entirely incorrect to refer to CD "analysing" the stats and providing its "opinion". Seems to me, though, that the moment organisations state that they've used an "algorithm" to do something, the belief given to whatever follows seems to increase by about 33%. (Note: that last figure is not created by an algorithm so please treat it with caution.)

No such thing as "just a nurse". Spoken with unnecessary humility.

I'm not sure we should own it. I expect it would be more economical for someone else to own and build it and for us to take out a long-term lease as a key tenant (say, 20 years with a 20 year option). Or we could master lease the whole thing and then sub-lease components, such as the office space and any F&B outlets. I would have thought the less capital we tie up in something like this the better. (That goes for any development, whether it's Yarra Park or elsewhere).

That photo Saty took of Bedford makes him look like some sort of magician who has superb levitational skills. The laws of physics suggest that ball shouldn't be where it is.

Unless he chooses to play cricket over football.