La Dee-vina Comedia

At least most of our players could kick the distance when taking shots at goal. Although I don't know what the impact of less gravity is on banana kicks.

For what it's worth, if I could play football and had to be coached by Malthouse, I doubt I'd respond well to what appears to be his coaching style. Perhaps he's different to the view he exposes to the outside world, but I find him terse, grumpy and unforgiving. Wouldn't get the best out of me.

MFC better check on the spelling of his name. It's Glen in the text of the website and Glenn under the photo. I note he's ex-WCE. As a matter of interest (and this is definitely not be interpreted as any criticism of our new Director) but I couldn't swap allegiances just because I move interstate. Could any of you?

From a batting point of view, I wish our embarrassment of riches was numbers 1 to 7 rather than 8 to 11. It's sort of like Melbourne's forward line at the moment with our midfield being equivalent to Australia's batting top 6.

A player who has been unable to settle in one position hasn't shown his coach enough in any of the positions in which he's been tried. I think apportioning blame to coaches is a cop-out.

I prefer "Corporal"...for all the F-Troop nerds out there. Mind you, if you can find some link between him and Drew Petrie, I'll swing back to "The Microbiologist".

How so?

I won't howl GNF down, but I don't agree that Dunn is particularly good or much value as a depth player (in my view the term "depth player" is just a synonym for "not very good player") - but if he were better than I believe him to be, perhaps that would make him excellent trade bait. If we want to trade for someone good, we will have to part with a good player or two or well-placed draft picks.

Midfielders are generally pretty easy to find in the draft. So we should be able to add to Viney, Toumpas, M Jones, Kent (and maybe Taggert) in the upcoming draft. If we want to recruit a ready made midfielder from another club and we can't get him via free agency we need to accept that we will have to trade away one or more "good players"* or those with potential. I hate losing home grown talent. But in this instance it may be worth it. *I just hope that another club sees Dunn, Sellar or Pedersen as "good players".

Perhaps I've read this excellent piece differently, but I don't think WJ is suggesting Smith would be gifted to Melbourne to add to our list. Rather WJ is thinking outside the square and suggesting that the AFL Commission may give Melbourne some assistance by allowing (in fact, requiring) us to "sell" the rights to an underage player to the best bidder as GWS did last year with Jesse Hogan and Jack Martin. In that way, Melbourne has an opportunity to get a player (or draft pick) surplus to requirements at a club willing to part with that player (or draft pick) in turn for the rights to the underage player. It's a very clever way for the AFL to give Melbourne some assistance without tampering with this year's draft. So instead of discussing whether Smith would fit in with our team, we should be discussing which player (or draft pick) would another team be prepared to put on the table in return for us providing them with the rights to an underage player. And if I've completely misunderstood WJ's piece and that's not what he said, I'll claim copyright over this idea and send it on to the AFL as an idea to help Melbourne.

Probably when Jeff White was in his prime...and rucking on his own.

I suspect Grimes would be better suited to the running back role once we get a half-decent midfield. Both he and Howe are being used in the midfield when both, to me, look better suited to other positions. I don't blame the coaches for playing Grimes and Howe on ball - that's just our current reality. And I think Kent looks like a natural on baller with his driving left foot. He just needs the chance to get fit.

I think the inconsistency argument can be found in a number of threads. I suspect there are just as many who claim former 'spuds' have become 'elite' as there are those who bemoan any rule changes and then call for an immediate redrafting of some rule or other.

I had automatically assumed Frawley would be replaced by Pedersen or Sellar. I much prefer the idea of playing Davis. I've seen what Pedersen and Seller bring and it's nothing special (I"m being overly complimentary there). And while Nicholson's disposal was poor against the Swans, I'd still keep him in the side to run with Selwood.

For those who didn't see it, on Footy Classified last night, there was brief reference to Gawn/Fitzy and comparing their output in the last 2 games to Jamar's using statistics (disposals, goals, etc) as a measure. It was very brief, but the conclusion was obvious. Gawn and Fitzy are not just the future but possibly the here and now.

One of the interesting dilemmas for the competition is whether it should be OK for people involved officially (such as coaches, players, etc) to criticise the umpires. On the one hand, the AFL correctly is concerned that too much criticism will undermine recruitment campaigns to get umpires involved at all levels of the competition. On the other, the best way to get improvement at the top level is to have criticism to which the umpiring department should respond. I'm in favour of a compromise - some form of official channel to complain but with transparency of the process. Perhaps clubs could be given the opportunity to put their complaints in writing to the umpires department and for those complaints and the umpiring department's response to be published on the AFL website. By making it a written process, it takes the emotive component away but by making it transparent, it would make the clubs and the umpiring department think about what they wish to say and how they wish to state it.

My concern is that the ball was in the Swans forward half a gazillion times and he only had 17 possessions. Shouldn't we be expecting more?

Well, now I have no idea! I'm sort of like the man with two watches telling different times and not knowing which to choose.

Would have thought that if he were to leave Collingwood he'd want to re-join Malthouse at Carlton. I could see a Warnock/Hampson swap for Harry O being acceptable to both parties, perhaps with Carlton also throwing in a set of steak knives.

Actually, I think the gold medal this week should go to that Schmitt decision in the Geelong v Hawthorn game when Kelly's kick was adjudged to have been deliberately kicked out. Truly a Schmitt decision.

Or was it because the rules say the player returning the ball to play after a behind must kick it in? He hand balled it instead. Which makes me wonder what would have happened if he'd just stepped back over the line without hand passing or kicking. I can recall another game this year where a player who I vaguely recall might have been Jason Blake at St Kilda forgot to kick the ball and handpassed it to a player instead. If I recall correctly, that resulted in a free kick to whoever the opponent was that day.

A few games under Neil Craig and one thing has become obvious to me which wasn't before. Our players are actually quite good at following coach's instructions. How else to explain the dramatic change in playing style over the last few weeks. The question is - were they that good at following instructions pre-Neeld or is this a longer-term benefit from Neeld's tenure?

It was just nice to go to the football and believe we actually belong in this competition. Pre-Craig we were an embarrassment. Now we are bunch of strugglers with some potential trying hard - and it's much better to watch because of it.

I'll need to look at it again. I thought at the time he'd bounced the ball, it had come back to him and he'd disposed of it before he was tackled. Edit: Just had a look at the replay (last free kick paid to Sydney if anyone else is interested. He was tackled after he bounced the ball but the ball came back to him and as soon as it came back to him he hand passed it).

Why don't you ask him - you're a regular at training? I'd love to know the answer.