La Dee-vina Comedia

Has anyone checked they weren't playing a repeat of AFL 360 from the week before the last home and away round in 2012...or 2011 or...

I hope Taggert plays. Giving new players one or two games at the end of a season seems to be a good strategy*. Grimes, Rivers, Fitzpatrick and T McDonald and probably some others all got their starts this way. *'Strategy' probably overstates Melbourne's selection policies over the years.

I suspect it's all part of the Grand Compromise of 2013 (copyright). The history books will shown Essendon improved three places in 2013 compared with 2012. And i think the earlier suggestion that it avoids some argy-bargy on betting outcomes shouldn't be ignored. Personally, as much as I would always like to finish higher on the ladder than every other team, to have done so this year by virtue of Essendon being placed below us would have been an insult to the competition. How would it look if we, with our pathetic performances were shown in the history books to be the third worst team.

Rules need to be constantly changed because the coaches do not care about how the game looks. Their only motivation is to win, whether it's winning ugly or not. So, coaches will do whatever they can within the rules as they stand to gain an advantage. If that means the game gets uglier, coaches don't care. Which is why the holding the ball rule is what it is. Coaches used to train their players not to let the ball go free, even if they were on the ground, thereby inevitably causing a stoppage which was seen as a better percentage risk (ie, 50/50). So the rule was changed so that if the umpire believes the player dragged the ball in, a free will be paid against that player.

Are you basing that on data (such as possession differentials or GPS data), scores or your own observation?

Strongly disagree. Draft and pre-season provide entertainment without immediate disappointment.

You must have prayed to the God of Dyslexia

So, are you fit enough to slot into our midfield?

Is Misson also responsible for size and strength? Our players, with a few exceptions, look comparatively smaller than their opposition which means they have more difficulty sticking tackles and similarly breaking them. Interestingly, most of the players who appear to have better size have come from other clubs (Sellar, MacDonald, Rodan) although that doesn't necessarily make them better footballers.

I never did understand how those old crystal radios worked. But it was how I listened to the Brownlow Medal before it was a 'televisual feast' (with apologies to John Cleese and Connie Booth)

Shame on you Robbie. Surely you know that AFL rules stipulate that Melbourne players and 'tank' are not allowed to be used in the same sentence. You might have to be suspended.

And I see that the AFL is also investigating the numbers of non-playing personnel on the field (presumably runners, trainers and waterboys and girls). I'm all for a restriction on runners. The number I'd go with is zero.

Nice and optimistic as it at least suggests there is a future

Surely one look at our performance over the last two years should be enough to convince anyone that either we didn't take any performance enhancing drugs or supplements...or if we did, we should get our money back.

Uncontrolled interchange numbers benefits running players. However, it also penalises key position players like Nick Reiwoldt who find that they have to work harder because they can burn off one defender only to see him replaced with another. I don't know if I'm for or against the cap - but I sympathise with the hard running key position players under the current unrestricted system.

Marginally better than "First and worst"

Old dee, you're being too pessimistic. Look at how Port Adelaide have turned it around in the last 12 months both on and off the field. I understand the cause of the pessimism and if things don't change off field then you have ever right to be concerned about the future on field. To use a cliche, there is a lot of low hanging fruit which can be plucked readily to make significant and quick improvement.

Which day is that?

It's obvious to everyone that Dunn has poor judgement. Evidence his persistence with that horrible moustache.

Two words too many. Actually, I'd go with "We're Melbourne" and leave it at that. Links us to the city in which the game was invented.

Dunn is playing the best, most consistent footy of his career, perhaps due to the fact that he's essentially been left in one position. However, his best and most consistent are not enough to keep him in a better side. When we get better, he should start to struggle to get a regular game. If we could trade him for a midfielder of reasonable quality (eg, equivalent to a Matt Jones) I'd do so. But I wouldn't delist him yet - there are plenty ahead of him in that queue.

Mind you, part of the problem is that our players are still not strong enough to hold a tackle or strong enough to break them. Our players just don't have the size necessary to play this game.

Who would have thought that by the end of the year Jamar and Gawn would be rucking for Casey and Spencer for the seniors, rather than the other way around.

Who would have thought at the beginning of the season - or even halfway through it - that any poster would have talked about Fitzpatrick having "class" equivalent to Clark and Hogan. Personally, I think it's gilding the lily a bit, but I think we all agree that Fitzy has been a huge improver. Well done to the lad.

Or, the other perennial favourites: why isn't Magner in the team deck chairs on the Titanic