La Dee-vina Comedia

Actually, I used to admire DeeSpencer's comments. But I'm done with DeeSpencer's cheap comments. I'm done with his know-it-all approach. And I'm done with his vitriol. Move on.

Strong statement. Who do you have in mind?

Makes a change from 2013 when we had to have the membership tents outside the 'G' before the game to catch people on the way in when they still had hope rather than on the way out when their dominant emotion was despair.

Code for leaving Mt Buller?

Maybe we should change the word "demoted" in the thread title to "promoted".

Indeed. I fully expect that part of any major sponsorship package is access to the membership database. Whether it's email addresses or residential addresses, sponsors would see great value in direct marketing to members.

Just hope the caller wasn't referring to Max and Mitch King.

I like the way you've covered up the real reason for crying into their porridge by claiming it's a dental issue when everyone knows the real reason is their incarceration in prison.

I'm not sure if he had any sons, but Robert Flower combined with the zero games played by any sons he may have had was still a better combination than most of the father/son combinations we've had to date.

Fitzroy definitely did it...against us. They kicked a then record score of 36.22. 236 to our paltry 6.12.48 out at Waverley in 1979.

Thanks, that's helpful. While media often "beat up" (or sometimes even "make up") a story like this, you'd have to assume Tim Watson knows more than most given he was part of the 1993 premiership team.

That little bit of data is completely meaningless without context. For example, what's the usual number who might turn up for any other club's 25 year reunion? What were the reasons behind why the seven didn't go (illness? travel? work commitments?, etc) Frankly, without additional information the point that 7 didn't go is a fact in search of a meaning.

You're quite right. I should have said that the evidence before it was contaminated might have helped clear or damn the defendants.

I don't disagree with your concern about the flawed process, but it's equally possible from where we stand that without the contamination, the evidence could have damned or cleared the defendant.

That's where we differ. I don't think poker machines are evil. I don't play them but have no problem that other people who wish to do so can have that choice. Note: I find it ironic that it's someone called Beelzebub that is concerned about the facilitation of evil.

I find it strange that when this site discusses drugs, it's the users who are generally criticised yet when the discussion is about poker machines, it's the machines that are the problem.

I agree, but for the avoidance of any doubt let's also make clear that the runner up doesn't get the premiership by default. I couldn't bear the thought of Collingwood being rewarded for giving me so much enjoyment every time they came second.

At least he's wearing some protection on his head.

He didn't just learn a trade, he also learned some business strategy. In the business world they would call that vertical integration.

I'll just leave this here. Personally, I don't think there should be any further comment given the seriousness of the matter.

Yes, but only because they didn't think of "Charlie out of the spa - go time!"

The problem with this theory is that Essendon played finals last year. It's hard to see how that fits your narrative. It's just possible that they're struggling this year for other reasons, not the least being that three of their losses have been against potentially good teams (Freo, Collingwood and Melbourne). Add to that, their two wins are, somewhat ironically, probably against teams better than the ones they've lost to.

Irrespective of who's who, that's a lot of people in the coach's box. I'm not sure if I was senior coach I'd want that many people all trying to advise me. If, however, half or even two-thirds of them are just there to watch and can keep their mouths shut, I could live with that.

I'm not in favour of "term limits" for club Presidents. As long as Glen Bartlett continues to show he's an effective President and wishes to be re-elected, he has my vote. But for all the talk about Nathan Buckley's tenure, how does McGuire's position as President of the Pies not face scrutiny? I don't deny that he has done a lot for that club, but given the ongoing on-field poor performance, what appears to be a declining membership and frankly, declining relevance, where is the anguish among Collingwood supporters for renewal? I find it all quite strange.

He will look like a combination of the Collingwood and Essendon jumpers - a mix of white rage, boiling red blood and a face as black as thunder.