La Dee-vina Comedia

Dylan Grimes has now played 79 games with Richmond and may, by the end of his career, play more than his older brother. Does anyone here think Dylan is a better footballer than Jack? I only make this comment to point out how badly Jack has been let down by the club that drafted him.

And you can use Stephen Dank and Dean Robinson as the witches.

I assume DD episode means "drink driving" episode. Did we ever get definitive confirmation whether he was driving at above 0.05% or whether it was above 0.00% (the limit for probationary licensees which he would be given his age)? While I accept that whatever it was he had breached the law, in my mind driving above 0.05% for a probationary licence holder is a more significant event than if he was, say, driving at 0.01%.

Tania's request for privacy resulted in the Herald Sun publishing 5 pages of coverage. I wonder what they would have done without that request?

Ditto

Saty, by way of comparison, how did Max King look when he first arrived? Obviously for whatever reason King's career didn't progress, but is Filipovic starting from a similar position?

I suspect you've got the right person (at least one of them) but for the wrong reason.

I know you were responding to a question about three players being delisted, but to get the three vacant slots required by AFL rules, list changes can occur without delisting via trades and retirements. For example, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Vince retired at the end of this season. I'm not hoping for it, but if his 2017 is anything like the last half of 2016, it will look a lot like age has caught up with him. Lumumba's retirement will also free up a spot.

Whether it's "painfully obvious" or just questionable, I think we should be able to say so. What I object to is disrespectful commentary, such as calling players "spuds". To be clear, Old Dee, I don't think you've been disrespectful at all. I don't see how consistency of argument (ie, the polite way of saying repetitive) is in any way inappropriate.

Surely the content on the site is the club's responsibility? (Having said that, I could see that the specific point being made on this thread about a meter showing the number of members might actually be the out-sourced contractor's responsibility).

Not just in personnel. In a previous thread I commented that your photos of the current team show impressive muscle definition which I had not previously observed. These photos show a distinct lack of muscle (with honourable exceptions of Tom Couch and James Magner).

Speaking of which, 3AW's Rumour File had a story today that TB4 is about to be removed from the WADA list of banned substances. Cue Mark Robinson. Note: Let's not derail this otherwise excellent thread. If anyone wants to discuss that saga any more, I'd suggest a new thread might be better. (If mods want to delete this post because it's off topic, I'll understand.)

I think I was reading about as much into the photo as you were into my post.

Great photos, once again. These supplement the training reports so well. I'm troubled by my emotional response to one of the photos, though. It shows Hogan chasing Trengove. My first thought was "I hope he catches him. It's good to see the big players chasing down the smaller ones". But then on my second thought I wanted Trengove to be able to sprint away to show he's still got (or has recaptured) his pace. I'm not sure what the correct emotion is meant to be for a photo like that.

Thanks. I had a 50/50 chance and guessed wrongly.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2017-01-09/list-update-hibberd-hogan-and-hulett Describing someone as a "pretty good player" doesn't sound that good. It's like using "average" and "ordinary" to mean anything but. Hopefully McCartney was using it literally.

Hunt or Hulett? And thanks for the great coverage.

Great photos. What stood out for me was the extreme muscle definition in so many of the players, particularly Watts, Lewis, Brayshaw and Jones. I haven't noticed this as much in previous years. Whether that's because I've not been observant enough or whether the extra work over the last few years has made the difference, I'm not sure. Perhaps our resident track watchers have a view. [edit - unnecessary comment, irrelevant]

We are used to regular mis-spelling of players' names on Demonland, but the club should make sure to get it right on its own website - see the 'Latest DeeTV' heading regarding Filipovic.

Is it possible that the scan is a second or subsequent one to see how the recovery is progressing?

Who exactly was at this camp?

Thanks dee-eee. I've corrected the OP accordingly.

To answer my own question, it looks like behinds and presumably therefore behind posts were introduced in a modification to the rules made in 1897.

This article published a few days ago in The Economist is about an art exhibition which is currently showing in London. It includes paintings of Tom Roberts, Arthur Streeton and Charles Condor. One of Streeton's paintings, called "The National Game" is of an AFL game but appears to show only goal posts. Which makes me wonder...when did behind posts become part of the game? I think "The National Game" was painted in 1889. Here's that picture. Anyone know when behind posts were added?

Great article, WJ, although you did momentarily frighten me when you mentioned Mark Latham. I'm now imagining a team with Mark Latham in it. I would expect Latham's career to last about one match before he stabbed the captain in the back and then abused the media.