La Dee-vina Comedia

As matter of interest, who is more at fault: The player in a poor position calling for the ball to be kicked or handpassed to him? Or the player who sends the ball that way when it's a poor option? My creative solution is to educate players to call for the ball only when they are in a position to do so. (Sub-clause: They have to be prepared to work hard to get into that position).

I must admit, I'm surprised we haven't yet tried Tom McDonald as the second ruck support. I would have thought he's in the Blicavs mould of someone who can run all day and as such would be worth trying. Nevertheless, overall, I still prefer a proper second ruck option. My view is that the on-ball work is where a game is won or lost. Therefore, it's more important that your second ruck can really do that role properly and pinch hit forward rather than the other way around. Whether that's Gawn plus Jamar or Gawn plus Spencer I'm not sure. Eventually it may turn out to be Gawn plus King.

Hopefully it's not a case of really slow processing of applications.

I'll assume "n jones" is a typo. If not, I'll have to make another assumption which you may not like.

One major difference between Dawes and Jamar is that Dawes can run. He chases and tackles and he leads for marks. Jamar is better at pack marking and, of course, at rucking. My preference is to play them both, and Gawn. Gawn should be better with proper back up; and Dawes should be better when he's not also forced to help Gawn out.

If I was Gawn's agent, not only would I be trying to get a much better deal for him from the MFC now that my client is showing what he can do, I'd also be sounding out other clubs, even if it's just to find out his market worth to take back to the MFC. Having said that, there are plenty of clubs who could do with a Max Gawn type of player so it wouldn't surprise at all if other clubs were speaking with Gawn's agent.

Sir WYL, with the greatest respect, you need a break. Watching the Demons is causing you so much stress you're now writing, well, rubbish. 1. Blaming the list instead of the coach. How many players who played on Sunday were at the club prior to Roos joining? Not that many. 2. Jones "not mentally tough". I don't even know how to argue this one. He plays week after week in the (long term) worst team in the competition and gives his all each time. I think that makes him mentally tough. I've always believed that a captain needs to be able to fulfil many roles, and a lot of them off-field. Is he good at them? I have no idea, but I'm not going to say he's not suitable to be captain because he's not mentally tough enough. 3. Trade a player in and make him captain. That should really help the egos and pride of the rest of the team. As I've said before, without followers, leaders cannot be successful. Admittedly amongst other reasons, it's why I believe Luke Hodge and Nick Reiwoldt make great captains, and why Chris Judd and Mark Murphy do not (which is not to denigrate other aspects of their on-field performances). How likely would it be that a traded in player would be followed by the rest of the team? Sir WYL, take a break form Demonland. You appear over-wrought.

No, no and no. And I don't know how you could get that "feeling" from watching that game. Disappointed with a poor performance? Sure, but "hate the club"? I don't think so.

Sorry, but I'm confused. Are you saying it was not Paul Roos's gameplan because the execution was so poor it didn't resemble what he wanted the players to do? If so, I now appreciate what your opening post was saying.

We really need to start winning more games to stop this sort of go-nowhere conversation among friends.

At the risk of asking a serious question, why do you say what we saw is not Roos' gameplan? (I'm not arguing about the quality of execution. I agree it was a shambles).

If you're talking about the kick for goal from the outer towards the Punt Road end, he went back 30 metres more than he needed to and ended up (surprise, surprise) kicking from about 30 metres further out than he needed to. Was that because he wanted to kick it to the top of the square? Just one of a number of bamboozling displays from all on the ground yesterday (including but definitely not limited to the umpires).

I think it's important that we make sure potential recruits and their managers (1) read the Jake Niall article and (2) are prevented from watching yesterday's game.

I don't agree with your first two lines, but I agree with your third. Which is why I want a second true ruckman in the team. It worked against Geelong, so perhaps it's worth trying again.

Watching the game yesterday and many others I had the distinct impression many of the midfield turnovers were caused by a lack of options up forward. Roos seems to prefer allowing the opposition to have a spare man in defence (what the football specialist commentators in the media infuriatingly insist on calling a +1). Whether that's caused by Roos wanting an extra in our own defence or by the opposition choosing to create the extra I can't discern, but the net effect is an inability for our players running through the midfield to find an open forward. Rather than take a chance, they then fiddle about waiting for an opening and eventually lose the ball due to poor skills and an inability to absorb pressure.

The Smith v Clarkson is more complicated than 6 v 4. Norm Smith didn't have to contend with "football socialism" via the draft and salary cap. Conversely, Clarkson has (probably) the best off field resources (equipment, staffing and a stable board) ever seen and which Smith could only dream about. Either way, let's just agree that they are two of the best coaches ever.

If we had two Lynden Dunn's, half of Demonland could erupt each week and the other half would be excited when once or twice a year he kicks a torp to the centre, takes a mark and kicks another torp through the goals.

I fell for it. I thought the second of these two posts was taking the mickey out of ENYAW.

Yesterday's game showed how a simple interpretation could improve the game. Players from both teams clearly punched the ball over the boundary line rather than trying to take a mark when they thought they were outnumbered at the contest. Sometimes they even did it when they were not outnumbered, or even on their own. Why not penalise the person who makes no effort to keep the ball in play much more rigorously?

Savage must have turned the ball over more than I realised.

Yes, Dawes butchered the ball. Yes, Dawes was no good in the ruck. But the answer is not dropping Dawes. The logical conclusion is that Tom McDonald plays in defence and Mark Jamar (or Spencer) come in to the team. Why McDonald was persisted with in the forward line while Reiwoldt was monstering Garland and Dunn and Howe (and sometimes Lumumba) had their hands full with Bruce and McCartin was beyond my comprehension. For mine, the changes should be to rest tired bodies. Stretch and vandenBurg seemed completely off the pace to me. If Salem is ready, I'd bring him in for Stretch. If vandenBurg has hit the wall he should be replaced with Jamar. So, IN: Jamar and Salem (if ready) OUT: vandenBurg and Stretch

6. Viney 5. Watts 4. Grimes 3. Jetta 2. Gawn 1. Jones Clearly we all see things differently. Five people have given Dunn votes yet I thought it was one of his worst games since he became full back.But what would I know.

If there's going to be fiddling with interchange caps and the sub, I'd like to think someone would also consider the alternative of a cap on interchanges per player per game instead of a team cap. For example, each player is allowed, say, six rotations per game. Of course, it wouldn't take long for coaches to work out that the blood rule would give players an extra break so players would come off for the tiniest of scratches, so you'd also need a rule that required players sent off for the blood rule to stay off for a minimum time (say 15 minutes).

Wow. Sigmund Freud and Bertrand Russell both get a mention in the one thread. Maybe this is what's wrong with football. Too many thinkers.

You're being generous. Wasn't the club in the red?