La Dee-vina Comedia

That's just your way of saying, under the parson's nose, right?

I grew up with the understanding like so may others that I supported Melbourne first and then any team playing Collingwood. And that's still the case. However, one change is that whereas I also used to despise Collingwood supporters the most, I now have Richmond supporters on top of that particular table. (For the avoidance of doubt, I chose Collingwood in the poll. And it is certainly a lot easier to detest them when they're actually a good football team.)

Having seen the replay, I suspect the damage to May's ribs was caused by Chol landing on top of May who was partially lying sideways on the ground. I doubt it was the collision itself (and even if it was, Chol did nothing wrong).

I'm old enough to remember the pictures of Oliver before he was drafted and we all thought he overate.

My biggest concern about this team selection is Hawthorn's forward line. It's very small and with May, Lever, McDonald and to a lesser extent Hore and Howes, we seem to be going in too tall. Adding Petty in place of Woewodin limits our ability to add a pacy, small defender should it be needed. I should add that I'm not questioning Petty's selection from a form or fitness point of view. It's purely a question of team structure.

There are a number of interesting political nuances which I've heard over the years, but I'm not sure what's true and what isn't: Sir Kenneth Luke, who was the Chairman of the then VFL (and before that, President of Carlton), had a feud with the Melbourne Cricket Club which controlled the MCG and decided to build Waverley Park to spite the MCC once he couldn't get whatever it is he wanted for the VFL at the MCG; The Waverley location was "justified" by the VFL because most of the new housing developments were extending Melbourne eastwards and the suburb of Waverley was expected to be in the demographic centre of Melbourne by the time it opened; Before the decision to develop Waverley Park was made, Luke had advice that the government, with Henry Bolte as Premier, had decided to build a railway line that would pass by Monash Uni and then Waverley Park; For whatever reason (budgetary, maybe?) the government had to make a decision between extending the railway line past Waverley Park or extending a different line which subsequently became the train line to Dandenong; The decision to build the train line to Dandenong was made because Bolte thought a racetrack which went via Sandown Racecourse was a better option than one that would go via a new football stadium. If anyone can confirm or reject any of the above, feel free to do so. I'm not in a position to confirm any of them.

Would need some bold personality, I would have thought.

One fond memory was attending the Night Grand Final we won in the 1980s. Our first piece of silverware since 1964.

My mistake. If the name ends in 's', just add a 'y'. Apologies for any confusion. I've always been amused that our Viney becomes "Vines" and Port Adelaide's Wines becomes "Winesy"

It's not that hard. The rule is simple: If the name ends in an 's' sound, you drop the 's' and add a 'y'; if it ends in a 'y' sound, you drop the 'y' and add an 's'. For all other names, add a 'y'.

I refuse to accept that Oliver Sestan's nickname is Ollie. That's just his name, surely.

Only if he goes to the end of the line

Come to Demonland for footy news. Stay for the lessons in history, literature and grammar.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary numbers and those who don't.

I agree with this. But the AFL has difficulty with the concept of "intent" preferring to judge on "outcome"*. For example, "kicking in danger" appears to be paid only if a player is actually kicked. It ought to be paid whether a player is physically kicked or not. Too many players are putting their hands and heads at serious risk because their opponents are allowed to kick the ball off the ground as long as they don't actually connect with the player. And we all know what will happen...the AFL will consider changing the rule only after someone is concussed after receiving a kick to the head or has badly broken bones in their hand. *The exception is the "insufficient intent" rule.

Love your work WCW, but there are a couple of nicknames you've used who I can't identify. It may be obvious to others, but who are Jibba and Knuckles (sounds like the name of a kid's TV program).

I find the Sicily decision to be quite strange. Kicking a player deliberately is horrendous behaviour and should be penalised strongly. I would have thought if he's guilty, it should be a three week penalty, irrespective of any harm to the recipient. Alternatively, if he didn't connect, I can see an argument that he should get off altogether. Irrespective of my view, I expect Sicily to play next week.

6. Oliver 5. Gawn 4. May 3. Billings 2. Petracca 1. Chandler

I'm not sure about the argument that Salem doesn't have leg speed. See this article from 2021. I appreciate it's now 2024, but at least it's fact-based, rather than a subjective assessment.

When did the expression "speed on the ball" first get used? It seems to me to be a recent addition to the AFL commentary lexicon. And is it an expression derived from another sport?

The AFL Coaches Award is mostly won by midfielders, too. Maybe we need to accept that the midfielders are the most important players in the way the game is played today. Here's the list of winners. Interestingly, some non-midfielders won in its early years (Warren Treadrea and Barry Hall in 2004 and 2005).

That "nice guy" finished first in 2021. I don't think he needs to change his game. However, some others could come to Gawn's assistance.

Spelling mistakes don't just happen on Demonland. The article says Gutnick's companies "owned a combined total of $43,209,965..." when the meaning clearly means they "owed a combined total of $43,209,965..." Makes quite a bit of difference!

The best thing about the loss is that we end Round Zero inside the eight. Win next weekend and we could still be in the eight. Ergo, we could remain in the eight all year.

MRO report is out and much to my surprise, Spargo was not cited. Nor was any other Melbourne player. Apparently Spargo's actions didn't even warrant a comment from the MRO.