La Dee-vina Comedia

But at least you've come to the right place for abuse.

"If Richmond don't recover from this quickly, it may be the end of Damian Hardwick's coaching career."

The Melbourne v Geelong "history" game is a good idea but doesn't necessarily have to be a Round 1 game.

Fair point. I'd be worried about young kids at a crowded station, too. But if they've coped with feral Richmond supporters all night, I have faith they'll tough it out.

At the train station. I realise it may not suit everyone, but if it's possible it is by far the easiest way in and out of the MCG (unless you live close enough to walk).

Where is the back of headband sponsorship thread?

No. But thanks for asking.

My rudimentary understanding of meteorology suggests that thunder is accompanied by lightning. Does the AFL have a rule that stops play if there's lightning? I can't recall a game ever having been paused for this reason but surely it's an OH&S issue for players and officials if there's lightning about. PS: Thunder and lightning seem appropriate to get the best out of demons.

Wonder, just wonder.

As some of you may have noticed, I've been concerned about the lack of originality in our players' nicknames. Adding a 'y' or an 's' just seems apathetic. Given his recent performances, perhaps we've found a new nickname for Jakey.

Mind you. He may have records that prove they were innocent but in so doing prove someone else is guilty. Is that why he was shot at? As a warning to keep those records a secret?

Is that what you really meant? Or did you mean you couldn't think of any gambling advertising that isn't on sport? Because if you really can't think of any gambling that isn't on sport, you really need to get out more. Like, go to a casino, play the pokies, buy a lotto ticket, have a bet on the horses or the greyhounds. Or buy an MFC raffle ticket next time they're being offered.

I'm just guessing here, but every betting operator has as agreement with the AFL. I suspect the agreement requires the betting companies to notify the AFL of any suspicious activity. I further suspect that the betting operator noticed suspicious activity with Melksham's account - perhaps betting in amounts different to Melksham's traditional patterns - and notified the AFL. As part of the AFL's process, they probably questioned Melksham about it at which time he provided some misinformation. Perhaps he was protecting someone else. Or maybe he's just not that bright and mislead them accidentally (doubtful, though, given the size of the fine).

Has there been any suggestion that Kent is injured? I find it hard to believe he'll be dropped. While I didn't think he was particularly good last week, I also didn't think he played badly enough to be demoted. PS: Saty, I miss your training reports.

I'm struggling with this statistic. Is it up because we've been inaccurate? In other words, is (say) three shots at goal but all scoring behinds really better than one shot which scores a goal? I would have thought not. And does it go up because scoring more behinds means the ball's in the forward 50 more because each behind means the ball is being kicked in from the goal square rather than starting in the centre square?

Selective much? You seem to have forgotten Cross, Vince, Garlett, Frost, Bugg, Lewis and Pedersen (and others). Sure, not every trade is a winner, but neither is every new draft choice.

We appear to have the ability to make a sponsor's logo visible even through a person's body. How else to explain this photo showing the AHG logo visible in front of another player's arm? Surely that's a selling point.

Reading the story, he wasn't betting but someone else was using his account. Who that was isn't disclosed.

He needs help. He is still stuck somewhere between denial and anger.

I like the way you managed to put in some gratuitous but irrelevant criticism of the Poms.

You do realise that under the Federal Government's new citizenship test a Melbourne supporter hoping for a Collingwood victory is deemed to be un-Australian and you may be deported?

I think Melksham seems fine with respect to his body "standing up". It's his skills which are poor and always have been. I think he's playing just as he was, no better and no worse.

I'm trying to work out whether Hemingway is attempting a pun here. If he is, I'm afraid it doesn't cut it.

Didn't our former coach say something similar about our team after Round 2 last year? What those summaries don't say is that Watson and Stanton might have retired but for their year out and Howlett and Hocking weren't necessarily starting 22 players anyway. Also, Hooker is being played out of position. Apart from the injured players (eg Myers), it's really only Hurley and arguably Heppell that aren't performing as expected without an obvious reason. That's really no different from any other team - all teams have players not living up to expectations. For example, Jack Viney.

Keep in mind we may have been only getting bush league dollars then. I have no idea why we don't yet have a BOJ sponsor, but refusing to sell the space at a discounted (bush league) price might be a reason.