La Dee-vina Comedia

The poster who points out that teams lose their next match after playing West Coast adds fuel to the argument that playing the Eagles this year is equivalent to a bye.

I wonder what your ex's version of events might be? Would he argue that he was just exercising his free agency rights?

Can't agree with this. In his prime, Max was the best tap ruckman I have ever seen. He had a 360 degree range with either hand. And his prime was for many years - it's not like he had one stunning year out of an average 10 year career.

Apologies. I wasn't expecting anyone to take me so seriously. That's why I referred to the numbers being able to be diced and spliced every which way. I was just enjoying seeing teams like Carlton and Essendon being premiership-less this century. (I'm surprised no-one picked up on the fact that I'd selectively limited the premierships to having been won this millennium when the list itself went back a further 10 years).

It would be nice to think that football clubs are more sophisticated in their decision making about a coach's future than a win or loss at one particular ground. I fear, though, that you are probably right that it might hasten a decision one way or the other.

I still believe this issue is an overrated concern. You can splice and dice the numbers any way you want, but the five teams that have played the most games there have won 4 Permierships this century while the bottom five have won just the one between them.

Serious question: Has hypnotism ever been used to assist an AFL player?

An appropriate choice. The Suns are used to misery.

None of us know, though, whether that's something to do with the players or the coach. Did those players only work hard enough to be selected when they reached their second club?

If a newspaper ever used the headline "Petty problems" on the sports pages I'd have no idea what to think.

Really? I thought you'd prefer to be takin' care of business with the Bachman-Turner Overdrive. Or maybe attending a tea party with Michelle.

I think that's most unfair. Who knows how he would have gone if he'd come to the MFC? Different players, different recruiting set-up, different board, different supporters. For all we know (and we'll never know, of course), he might have coached us to three Premierships by now.

Most years it appears that nominations are awarded in the last few rounds of the season to eligible players for their body of work throughout the year. McVee should pick up a nomination before the end of the year on that basis. But being realistic, he's no chance to win over players like Ashcroft and Sheezel.

We're pretty good judges. Compare with the Coaches Votes. The same top four, in the same order. In addition, we have Max 5th while the coaches have him 6th (with Lever 5th). Also, I note how well Salem is going. He's only played 7 games and is 9th on the Demonland ladder.

I doubt it's that simple. Almost certainly the AFL agreed to play a certain number of games per season at Kardinia Park as part of the deal to get government funding. In addition, it's likely that the government required average crowd sizes of a particular minimum number, too, which might require that some large drawing games be scheduled there.

According to AFL Tables, Shane played his first game aged 20 years and 258 days; Taj was 20 years and 104 days. AFL Tables also says Shane was 185cm tall and 83kg while Taj is 182cm and 81kg - but I'd suggest taking that data with a grain of salt. I have no idea when those measurements were taken (at the beginning or end of Shane's career, for example?)

Both coaches agreed to give votes to two of the three St Kilda players. You could throw a blanket over another 15 players for the remaining single votes.

Looks a lot like his father on the field, albeit a touch skinnier than I remember his father being.

I agree with you. Unless we win.

I'm facepalming myself, not you, LFS. Good pick up!

6. May 5. Petracca 4. Sparrow 3. Brayshaw 2. Jordon 1. Lever Honorary mention to the Channel 7 Director who must have a crush on Oliver and gave us more shots of Clarry than when he's had a 40 disposal game.

Which one? "Death and the Maiden" by Schubert? I must admit, I hadn't realised Pickett could be motivated by classical strings. Seriously, what do we think might be wrong with Pickett? He's obviously not playing anywhere near his best. But why has he not been in any centre bounces for 10 weeks after being their occasionally in the first few rounds? Does this mean the club is helping him manage an injury?

It's quite extraordinary how unhappy are the supporters of the teams currently sitting in 4th and 5th on the ladder.

I think Spargo will have a whole chapter. He's earned it and needs to understand that ducking into tackles doesn't work anymore.

Some random thoughts: 1. I suspect Smith was dropped because his defensive work on Tom Stewart and Nick Haynes was not good enough. Perhaps Melksham has been given that role this week. (For what it's worth, I don't believe in the concept of "defensive forwards". I'd rather 6 attacking forwards causing problems for our opponent's defenders). 2. With Jordon and Woewodin selected, I suspect Petracca may spend more time playing as a forward. 3. I wish people would stop judging players on their disposal numbers. Players are given different roles and responsibilities. Some have the job of accumulating the ball (Oliver, Petracca, the wingers). Others appear to be there to play defensive roles and/or create space for the ball accumulators (Neal-Bullen, especially). If someone is playing a defensive forward role (see Point 1), please don't judge him on how many times he gets the ball or how many goals he scores. Instead, judge his value on whether he stops his opponent.