La Dee-vina Comedia

If you've decided how many players you want to turnover, then I think it's better to have a discussion about who to delist or trade after a win rather than a loss. Then you eliminate a lot of the emotion but know that you still have to find x number of players to move on. It makes the seemingly easier decisions harder which is the rigour one should have with such a process.

Riley played so differently from his earlier games I'm wondering why. The only (admittedly poor) analogy I can come up with is that his earlier games were on partially flat batteries but Saturday's he was fully charged. There was much more zip and confidence in the way he played. He looked like a plodder previously.

6. Riley 5. Viney 4. Howe 3. McDonald 2. Frawley 1. Dawes Only really happy with the first three, though. The last three was a bit of a raffle with votes given more for effort than output.

It doesn't matter who drafts the letter. It's who signs it that matters. The person signing it is confirming the contents. It's always incumbent on the signatory to do so. And if he or she doesn't, they wear the consequences.

I'm really struggling with the visual imagery you've presented. As to the issue itself, don't forget the umpires are part timers. Personally, I think the umpires are not helped by the rules themselves and the expectation that the AFL seems to have (wrongly in my view) that one of the umpires jobs is to ensure the game is played in an entertaining way.

I had assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that if Hird had indeed drafted a letter for Dr Reid, the Doctor had still signed it himself. That sort of stuff happens all the time. But if you're saying Hird drafted the letter and then signed it himself forging the Doctor's signature, then that would be serious.

He'd be taken off the ground for a rest?

What for?

Is there really a Bendigo team? Surely a team with players called Stroobants, Heavyside and Aarts can't possibly exist except in the imagination of JK Rowling.

Wet weather = Bartel gets 3 Brownlow votes. But can we stop the other 21 Geelong players? Doubtful, even though the Geelong of this year is not as good as the last seven years. Nevertheless, I've always seen 2014 as a transformative year as the coach works out who plays where and who plays at all. This year is not about winning (as much as that would be enjoyable), it's about learning who's going to be in the team that does win more games than it loses some time in the (hopefully near) future.

It was reported that Neeld was surprised to find out how relatively unfit the squad was when he took over. Now after a further two years where fitness seemed to be a priority, Jetta says he wasn't fit enough. Just how unfit were we?

Presumably the wet MCG will quench our fire while Geelong will use some sort of oxy-acetylene flame that works underwater.

But what if you asked me to buy the Smarties knowing that all you were going to give me were the M&Ms you already had. You then give me the M&Ms, I'm none the wiser because I can't tell a Smartie from an M&M, and you give the Smarties I paid for to someone else. I can see reasons why Dank doesn't want to talk to ASADA which might have nothing to do with any illegality involving Essendon. It would be defamatory to go further, but let's just say it might involve clubs in other sports altogether.

I wish "coming back from Darwin" was our only concern. I'd be delighted if we could stay within 8 goals (6 if it's wet, which seems likely).

Yes there is. He got paid to do it. He wouldn't be the first person to be paid for doing nothing of any value to the client paying.

You're kidding. The auto-censor finds a descriptive word in common use that rhymes with Gai Waterhouse's first name worthy of replacing? That's insulting and completely inappropriate.

Off topic, but I'm waiting for an AFL player from any club to come out. I can't believe there aren't any gay AFL footballers and they shouldn't feel they have to hide.

Two years ago effectively the same comments about unhappy players in a no-hope team were being directed at the Gold Coast Suns. If I were a GWS player, I think I could see some blue sky just past the silver lining. Leaving now might not be the best career move. Leaving, however, might be desirable for anyone who finds living in that environment unbearable - but that comment could equally be made about country lads living in a big city like Melbourne, too.

Don't know whether Schwab was hesitant or not and in retrospect I was probably unfair to individualise. Some people do 'come back' with great success (Steve Jobs is an outstanding example) but I suspect for the vast majority the second attempt does not end satisfactorily.

If there's anything amusing about this whole Essendon issue it's hearing some media commentators complain that the issue is getting too much media attention...and then talking or writing about it some more.

It's always best not to return from whence you came just to do the same job. It's effectively "going backwards". I would expect PJ would realise this. (Unfortunately, though, Cameron Schwab did not.)

Not necessarily. There have been plenty of players who had their cards stamped after just two games. I'm not out to embarrass or criticise anyone, but Isaac Weetra and I think Cameron Hunter and maybe JoshTynan had two-game careers. I didn't see the Freo game so I'm not passing judgement on Barry - just pointing out that after two games some players' careers have been known to come to a halt.

With Tom McDonald, Dunn, Garland and Frawley all playing and Jetta to return, does one of Frawley, Dunn or Garland go to the forward line? That would leave no room for one of the other talls (most obviously Gawn) with Pedersen providing Jamar with backup. So, IN: Jetta and OUT: Gawn. I'm sure Salem could do with a rest, but I have no idea how those challenging for his position are going. And I wouldn't mind seeing how Tapscott, Blease and Michie might go under the Roos gameplan before the year is out.

Only 9 posters have voted in Demonland's Player of the Year and one gave Bail votes. Yet on this thread Bail is proposed for demotion. It suggests that either posters see things very differently or some people didn't see anything at all.

I expect Blease or Tapscott may replace Salem next week (unless Salem has a blinder). If Roos wants to see what Blease or Tapscott can offer, why would you play them in the atypical conditions of Darwin? You'd want to reduce the number of variables so you can see what they can actually do. If their first game under Roos was in Darwin, you'd be unable to know whether their performace - good or bad - was contributed to by the conditions.