La Dee-vina Comedia

Yep. I'll keep saying it until it's proven to be a success. The jury will continue to stay out otherwise.

I should have added that there's insufficient evidence to also claim that the creation of GWS has been a success. I've consistently supported the principle behind the establishment of GWS and the Gold Coast Suns, but I'm not convinced that we know yet whether the investments in either jurisdiction will become long-term successes or failures.

It might be that Sydney (the city) doesn't have much interest in attending anything. The first week of NRL Finals (4 games) attracted only 75,000 in total, with the largest crowd (about 22,000) being in Melbourne. That doesn't mean the GWS experiment is a failure...just that anyone expecting Sydney residents to buy a ticket to watch them might have over-estimated the willingness of Sydney-based supporters to bother turning up.

Here's something to make everyone envious. Joel McDonald started a logistics company called "GetSwift" which is now listed on the ASX. He's Managing Director and owns about 36 million shares in the company which are worth, on the current price of $2.13 a share, about $72 million. I think James Strauss is also a significant founding shareholder, too.

The bye was introduced because the AFL didn't have the courage to do what they should have done which was suspend Ross Lyon (and Brad Scott the next year) for not picking the best possible team to play in the final round. They may not have been "tanking" in the traditional sense, given that the team they picked tried to win, but they didn't give their teams the best possible chance of winning the final home and away game. Suspending a coach for a few weeks, say 4, would surely fix the problem. Once again, the AFL introduced a "solution" which just created a different problem.

I'll take a wild guess and say "money". Champion Data's business model requires monetising the information collected. The more they give away for free, the less they can sell.

While I agree with you, don't forget every player has an agent whispering in their ear who gets a percentage. I'm not saying agents are unreasonable but they are, by definition, conflicted in the advice they provide.

I've come across an interesting article which harnesses some raw data to allow a more detailed analysis. Essentially, it's created some new metrics using data that's publicly available (although, as the article says, not always in AFL-approved sources). It attempts to drill down in more detail into what raw statistics on their own don't say. For example, the data includes the following (which I won't explain, because it's all in the article) and then identifies those players who score the best (and worst). A few Melbourne players get mentioned, mostly on the good side: Giveaway Rate (clangers less free kicks against, divided by disposals) Around the Ground Work Tackle Rate (tackles divided by disposals) Metres Gained per Disposal Score Facilitation Score (total score involvements per game that were not goals, behinds or direct goal assists)

Just diverging for a moment, just before Hells Bells is played at the ground the sound system plays a "heartbeat" sound. You know the one...thump, thump...thump,thump. Last week when that was being played, the scoreboard showed a woman standing and hitting her chest with her closed fist mimicking the visual of "thump/thump...thump/thump". It made me think that if all Melbourne supporters at the ground started doing that at it would make a great visual and involve supporters in a passionate demonstration of their support for our club. I'll be there on Saturday and intend to start copying that lady's moves. Feel free to join me.

The amusing thing about this thread is the various convoluted explanations which all come back to the same thing...Watts and Salem in for Wagner and Stretch.

Check the date on that paper. It might be referring to James Kelly going to Essendon as a top-up player.

I'm grateful for Tom Wills, Henry Harrison and the others who invented the best, damn game in the world. Win, lose or draw, it's given me years of enjoyment (the wins, of course, being that much more enjoyable).

Perfect opportunity to roll out one of Dennis Cometti's best ever lines. When asked who he'd want kicking for goal if his life depended on it, his answer was (paraphrasing): "My mother. At least I know she'd be trying". If it's after the siren and between 40m and 50m I do go for Jones. There's enormous pressure under such circumstances and I'd be a bit worried about Watts in that circumstance. Jones has become a very reliable kick and I don't think pressure would worry him. Salem would be my next choice. Over 50m and I'd choose Watts as his technique and range is better than Jones or Salem at that distance, even with he pressure added. And I'm not sure why anyone wants Garlett. He's great on the run, but not so hot on set shots.

Or convince the AFL to introduce a concussion sub.

Hogan and Brayshaw don't make the list because it's based on 2017 performance. And for those wondering about the age of the players the article makes quite clear that player must be 22 or under for the whole of the season, including finals. In other words, anyone who doesn't have their 23rd birthday until Sunday 1 October is eligible for consideration.

It's called conditioning.

Check the date for the millionth time to make sure it's not actually April 1

I think I might have found a flaw in this argument. If Goodwin has already worked out what Watts needs to play at his best, why is Watts playing in the VFL?

It's a bit hard to believe that Collingwood doesn't already have enough information to decide whether Buckley will be re-appointed for 2018. In other words, the performance of the team or the coach shouldn't make a difference if Collingwood was a well-run club. But it obviously isn't, so it's conceivable that this game might actually make a difference to that decision. Which might make it more problematic for us than it otherwise should.

Yes and no. Agree with the changes, but I think Watts should stay forward and Neal-Bullen should play more on the ball. In other words, Watts takes ANB's role and ANB takes Stretch's. ANB has been a more than useful linkman and plays better in and around the midfield than he does as a pure forward, the role he played last Sunday. And Salem plays Wagner's wingman role (unless Brayshaw does and Salem takes Brayshaw's HBF role).

Having invented Australian football, I see the club has now created the new game of "lawn bows green". Not sure whether it involves arrows, ribbons or bending at the waste. Sounds like fun, though.

This year Josh Kennedy, who's missed a few games, is leading the Coleman Medal race with 64 goals. I miss the days of key forwards regularly kicking over 100 in a season.

Well said.

According to the AFL website, time on ground for Brayshaw was 63%, which compares with Wagner (62%), Stretch (66%) and Tyson (68%) as the others in the 60s. Other nominal onballers were Melksham (85), Jones (85), Lewis (85), Oliver (75), Petracca (78) and Neal-Bullen (84). I can appreciate that Wagner and Stretch might have had their time shortened due to their performance, but I can't understand why Brayshaw and Tyson played unders. (Cue Tyson critics...)

I thought all those 50 metre penalties were correctly paid. But... 1. There were two to us that seemed identical which were not paid. I can't remember the details, but one was a marked ball punched away and the other was holding on too long after a mark. 2. The rules which require that a 50 metre penalty be paid might themselves need to be re-considered.