La Dee-vina Comedia

If I were an Essendon supporter I think after that Hawthorn game I'd completely understand the term "comfortable satisfaction". Is it too much for us to hope for a similar feeling some time soon?

Hear, hear

Let me clarify what I meant. I didn't mean earned solely by on-field performance, although that's a contributor. The "earning" comes from the number of eyeballs likely to watch a game on Channel 7. That's determined by a mix of matters including on-field performance, numbers of supporters of that team as well as more ephemeral matters such as Channel 7 wanting Mick Malthouse media conferences for the "car crash TV factor". In my view, one of the AFL's responsibilities is to manage Channel 7's expectations to ensure the smaller and poorer teams get some decent free-to-air timeslots, but the AFL can't expect big dollars for TV rights if it doesn't give Channel 7 a fair bit of what it wants in return. On balance, I think Channel 7 gets too much in return for its dollars which is why I would love Channel 10 to get back into the game. Pity it doesn't have any money to do so, though.

CBDees, the scheduling provided has to be earned. It isn't gifted.

So, if I don't believe everything I read, the logical conclusion is not to believe your post. Which then leads to the conclusion that if I don't believe everything you've written, I should therefore believe everything I read. Which then leads to the conclusion that I should believe what you've written, which...oh, bugger it.

Nutbean, I think you need to get your eyes checked. You've got your men in tights mistaken. I doubt Robin Hood ever wore purple.

Don't worry about it. The Police will still be able to identify them using biometric scanners.

Really? Nevertheless, I'm with you that Dunn might be the better option to play on Cameron as he's likely to play tighter on him than McDonald. In reality, it's probably a moot point, though. I expect they'll both play on him at different times during the day.

BBO, you're now selling tickets to spoon with you? This forum's just getting creepier and creepier.

Why do you say that? Why wouldn't it be Dunn's job? or Garland? (I'm not prosecuting the case for Dunn or Garland. I'm just interested in why you think McDonald will be given the role.)

Today at Gosch's paddock. Picture courtesy Melbourne FC tweet

I agree it would be tough. But it's going to be tough on two players this weekend. Those two could, of course, include Dawes and/or Vince who may have to wait their turn. Or it could be any of a handful of which vanDemonland is just one.

DC, not everything that comes out of Canberra is a disappointment. The road to Yass is a good example.

Some interesting discussion here. And some that just confuses me. I would have thought the first question to be asked is not whether Dawes comes in or not but whether Jamar can ruck all day on his own against Mumford. I'd say he can't. And I wouldn't like to go into any game with just one ruckman. So does Frost stay, or is he replaced? If so, by whom? Cutting to the chase, I'd say Frost has to stay as he provides more pace than Gawn, Spencer or any of the other makeshift options. So, if Frost stays, can he play in the backline and share ruck duties? No. When he's not rucking he's either going to be forward or off the ground. Which means, without any changes, the forward kline holds Hogan, Watts, Frost/Jamar, vandenBerg and the smaller players (Kent, JKH and Garlett). Now we can discuss Dawes. The most physically similar players left in the forward line who Dawes could theoretically replace are Hogan, Watts and vandenBerg. Do I think Dawes is a better prospect for the game this week than vandenBerg? Yes, I do. If vandenBerg loses his spot in the forward line, can he fit in elsewhere? Maybe. He'll be fighting for a spot with Brayshaw, Toumpas, JKH, Kent and Vince as a mid/forward. If he has the tank to spend more time in the midfield, vandenBerg may still get selected. If, however, his tank won't allow him to run through the midfield all day, then I think he may be omitted. As for Vince, for mine it's a question of whether Brayshaw or Toumpas loses their spot. Brayshaw looks the more likely longterm prospect but doesn't yet have the tank. I'd be happy for him to return to Casey until he's needed and for Toumpas to get another game (but not as the sub). So, assuming no injuries, IN: Dawes, Vince OUT: vandenBerg, Brayshaw

You're assuming we won't meet in the finals.

I wouldn't mind us having a player kick 100 goals in a season. Consigns another negative to the waste bin plus it would mean we will have had a helluva year.

I must admit, I'm not comfortable with a person coming back from a hamstring strain being the sub. Seems like a recipe for a recurrence given the inability to be properly warmed up when called upon. Of course, I'm not a medical or sports science professional so my concerns may be completely unfounded.

When did Peter Gordon say this? Just recently? Both Peter Gordon and Ross Stevenson (a former lawyer) would have some similar contacts. I wonder whether there has been a genuine leak. I had assumed the Tribunal made its decision about a fortnight ago and was using the last couple of weeks to write what they hope will be a watertight set of reasons for their decision. If so, a leak is quite possible. For what it's worth, in my own mind I had always thought there was a 20% chance of a "not guilty" finding on the basis of that there was a lack of sufficient proof, primarily due to the chain of custody evidence.

50 years ago this week Melbourne was the undisputed best team in the competition. The then VFL competition would commence on 17 April and until then, Melbourne supporters basked in the glory of being champions. However, this particular week - the week of 20 - 28 March 1965 (OK, that's eight days...but eight days for a reason) is one of the most famous weeks in history. Here's why. Let's hope that 2015 is a great year for the Melbourne Football Club. And let's hope it all starts with a great first week in April.

Actually, some research conducted by Motorola back in the 1970s or 1980s (sorry, but I can't find it) found that customer retention is higher among people with an initial negative experience who are subsequently satisfied by the efforts of the provider of the product to fix the problem. It's why many companies provide extended warranties and great customer service centres. I'm not saying the MFC is that strategic and stuffed up the Labour Day training session deliberately, but the good news is that those who receive the apology may become more dedicated supporters than if they had gone to a training session which had proceeded as it should have.

And the other 75% don't.

OD, I mis-read this and thought you were writing about Demonland posters. Not that I'm going to accuse any poster of "being very ordinary forever"...although this would be as good as thread as any to do so.

To be fair to Schwab, it should not have been just "his" vision. The Board needed to fully endorse it so it became the club's vision. If the Board endorsed it, they should be just as accountable for the vision itself and its failed implementation; if they didn't endorse it, that's a failure of governance.

I appreciate what you're saying, but if the AFL had moved to do so, it may have been accused of forming a view that the players both should and would be suspended for part of the 2015 season. In effect, a no-win situation for the AFL.

If they didn't do it in 2012-13 for teams playing Melbourne I can't see why they would do it this year for teams playing Essendon.