La Dee-vina Comedia

To be fair to Jacobs, Hunt knocked himself out by running headfirst into the immovable object.

There's always going to be differences of opinion on starting times. I happen to like the 3.20 start. And what we like or don't doesn't matter. The timeslots aren't chosen with ground spectators' interests in mind. Furtheremore, the 3.20 start is here to stay as long as there's a live football match broadcast on free to air TV.

Joeboy's deliberate pun?

Not sure how much more HB Salem can play! But I like the idea of Fritsch going to the backline and another player (obviously Melksham if fit) replacing J Smith. if Melksham's not ready, may be it's time to reconsider Tim Smith or Weideman. (The pessimist in me sees the possibility in this game of having to send Tom McDonald to the backline). I believe that right now JKH provides more value to the team than Spargo who seems to run out of steam very quickly. (In the longer term, I expect Spargo to be a very useful addition). Garlett played yesterday like he expected Melksham to be back next week and realised that one of the small forwards would have to make way and he didn't want it to be him.

Interesting to read through and see the consistency. Almost everyone had the same 5 players (Oliver, Hogan, Salem, Brayshaw and Harmes) although not all in the same order with a wide range of players getting the sixth vote (Tyson, Jones, Garlett, Frost, ANB)

6. Oliver 5. Salem 4. Brayshaw 3. Hogan 2. Harmes 1. Jones

Mark Knight is surely Australia's greatest cartoonist. The poignancy of this work is amazing - look closely and you can see Lyle's wife and kids.

Photo posted 11 hours ago and not one post complaining Max is soft for wearing a beanie at training. I like this new attitude.

It will be easy to find. It'll be the one absolutely covered in pigeon excrement.

And we shouldn't until we've all had a rabies vaccine shot.

I'm surprised you seem to think not supporting the imposition of a ban means the same thing as "encouraging the drinking of alcohol". That's a big leap.

It only matters when trying to compare clubs with one another. Otherwise, who cares what's counted and what isn't? If a club chooses to let someone be a member for zero dollars and who never intends to attend a match, does it really matter? To answer my own question: Unfortunately it probably does because the TV networks are run by morons who probably don't understand what these numbers actually mean.

Ridiculous presentation of statistics. It is so silly to say "18.75%". Why not just say 3 out of 16?

Arguably the second best football quote of the year came from Oliver when he was interviewed on the ground after the Adelaide match. He was asked what it was like having Max as a ruckman and he responded (and I'm paraphrasing), "Amazing. I just tell him where I'm going to run to and he taps the ball to that spot and it lands in my lap". And the best quote? Just after Zac Toohey kicks the winning goal and James Brayshaw calling the game on 7 says (and, again, I'm paraphrasing), "Which boy doesn't grow up dreaming of kicking a goal after the siren to win a game of AFL football?...(short pause)...Oh, probably Zac Toohey. When he was growing up he had probably never heard of the game."

Apologies. My mistake.

Your name and insightful comments tell me you're a real doctor. Or perhaps a professional MurDerer specialising in executions starting with the feet and working your way up. If it's the former you're welcome to work at the MFC; if the latter, I'd like to offer you a job at Richmond.

I'm old enough to remember Greg Parke. I think he was the consistently best contested mark I have seen, playing back in the day when most marks were contested because of the man-on-man style of game played back then. His kicking though...

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Salem was training with the midfield group over summer with the expectation that he would play there this year. And I think in the first few games he did. If my memory is correct I wonder whether he was moved to the backline as a necessity (because the backline needed strengthening) or whether the coaches felt he wasn't a success as a midfielder. Either way, it's good to know that he is clearly a superior backman who has some practical midfield experience should the need for him to play there ever arise.

That's an extraordinary effort by Patrick Cripps. In our recent past when we were down the bottom, we had no-one anywhere near the top in any awards. It's reminiscent of how Flower stood out in a barren field throughout much of his career.

The 3rd quarters are often where we switch from having played ordinary or even poor football to exciting, winning football. It makes me wonder two things: did the players not listen to the coach before the game but somehow are more receptive at half time? has the coach got the gameplan (using that word broadly to include match-ups, etc) wrong before the game but worked out how to rectify it and explain to the players what they need to do? Either way, I suspect it's not just coincidence. I expect something happens at half time which suggests Goodwin and his coaching team are earning their money.

She's never heard of Bernice? or Bernardette?

I'm not convinced that we should play both Garlett and Spargo. Spargo seems to show more drive but can't do it for a whole game just yet. Perhaps Spargo should go for vandenBerg (if he's ready) or Kent. I'm no fan of Wagner, but he's in real trouble if he can't get a game ahead of J Smith.

Joeboy, your list this week is a bit like a Melbourne game. Good for the most of it, brilliant for sustained periods but with a bit where substantial improvement is still required. It's unfair to be critical without putting my own neck on the line, so I disagree with you with O Mac, Jetta and Smith. The first two I thought were very good; the last shouldn't be in the team.

6. Oliver 5. Gawn 4. Neal-Bullen 3. Harmes 2. Frost 1. Brayshaw Honorable mentions to O Mac and Jetta. The defenders did a great job, given that when Joel Smith is on the ground his game immaturity shows. (Yes, I'm trying to be polite.)

The article is, like his coaching, a bit incomplete. It says that Neeld "admitted that in hindsight he should have trusted his own judgment more when implementing the Demons' plan to rebuild once again" but doesn't explain if it wasn't his, whose judgment he did rely on. I suspect there's a fair bit of dissembling going on. I hope he can find a proper future. He's never going to be a senior coach again and he probably should never have been one, but I don't for one moment think that he wasn't trying to do his best when he was with us.