La Dee-vina Comedia

Based purely on the information in the Saxton bio, it appears he may not have had any AFL experience before joining the Bombers as CEO. Given he is generally accepted as having been a successful AFL club CEO, reinforces my view that our next permanent CEO doesn't necessarily have to have had AFL experience.

Let's stick to simpler goals. We're having enough trouble getting players born and bred to play AFL to meet the required standard.

in my view, the poor handling was in his early days. I remain convinced that Jack has only had two proper preseasons (ie, under Neeld/Craig/Misson) and is still undersized and probably still below required fitness. He needs another 5kg before he's got the weight needed to perform the role we all want. Until then, he'll always struggle as he'll get too easily pushed off the ball.

Played HBF against WCE. While he's been tried a few times on ball, I think he's better for the team playing in the backline. Reads the play well, doesn't lack courage, good mark, but still has problems with his disposal.

Yes, but only if the player agrees.

Is it correct that all players taken in the draft are automatically on a 2 year contract? If so, the debate about whether Neeld should have taken recycled players needs to take this into consideration. In other words, using Rodan as an example, the debate generally considers whether it would have been better to take an untried player in the draft at pick 80 (or whatever number would have been used) instead of Rodan. But this wouldn't take into account that a player chosen at 80 would be on the list for 2 years whereas Rodan might only be for one. The player who might otherwise be chosen at pick 80 needs, therefore, to be better than, not equal to Rodan to justify the longer contract. I'm yet to be convinced that the strategy to recruit Rodan, Gillies, Pedersen, etc is the right one. But we need to be careful when we consider alternatives that we appreciate it's really Rodan on a one year contract versus a kid drafted in the 80s on a two year contract.

Just to clarify, bookies odds are essentially set by the flow of money. You should really be questioning the sanity of the people who have been prepared to plonk their hard earned on Melbourne to win.

I'm a strong supporter of the principle of getting key position players first and adding mids later. Key position players take longer to develop and are harder to find. Mids are much easier to recruit. Hence, the concept of getting Clark, Hogan, Dawes (and Gillies) now and building a midfield later makes sense to me. Whether it's by design or just luck, it's what Essendon has done over the last few years.

Last week's effort was a great idea well executed. But it can be embarrassing when there's a call for support - whether it's a protest, a petition or a rally of support - and the numbers are low. I'd suggest quitting while you're ahead. By all means, though, anyone who can go to training should do so as the players seem to respond positively. But I'd suggest not trying to generate another "organised show of support" for fear of negative publicity if the turnout is low.

"Mental fitness" is important but it's not the only thing that counts. Otherwise we could play Stephen Hawking at CHF. I can understand that players pre-Neeld might have thought they were fit because the benchmarks being set might have been lower. Getting to that higher level will take time. I just wish that fitness was our only problem. I appreciate, though, that skills can diminish when legs are tired.

Sorry, I thought it was self-explanatory. Of the four teams which are yet to win a game, only Melbourne scored more in each quarter of Round 3's game than it did in the respective quarters of its Round 2 game. That is we scored 25 points in the first quarter of Round 3 compared with 13 points in the first quarter Round 2, etc). None of the other three teams on 0-3 did that. And we also had an increase in our percentage (which is in itself amazing for a team beaten by 94 points). Just like a joke, if you have to explain what you've written on social media, you probably shouldn't have attempted the initial post in the first place. My apologies for wasting your time.

I think Jamar would be a lot better with proper backup and a better midfield. So I'd play Gawn as well. They should be rested for significant periods up forward to allow the mids more opportunities to rotate through the bench and to stretch the GWS backline. Notwithstanding the above, I think we are too top heavy and therefore slow. So I'd send both Sellar and Pedersen back to Casey. While I think Jack Watts should have played with Casey on the weekend, the lack of a game does not rule him out for this week. If the issue with Jack is his mental toughness, that can be worked on during the other 166 hours in the week, not just the two hours of game time. So, I'd bring him back in. If McKenzie is fit he should come in. I suspect if Dunn is fit, he'll come in although I'd rather play Strauss. For the other outs, Toumpas clearly isn't ready. he plays like a deer in the headlights. There's no shame in that for a youngster and in time he'll pick up the pace of the game. Jetta did little on the weekend. While I appreciate he may lack confidence because of the revolving door of opportunities, he was tried, forward, back and middle and didn't seem to know what to do in any of those positions. If Neeld decides to send Frawley a message with a ticket to the twos, I won't object and Jetta stays. So, Ins: Gawn, Watts, McKenzie and Dunn (or preferably Strauss) Outs: Sellar, Pedersen, Toumpas and Jetta.

Of course we should be. We're the only one of the four teams yet to win a game which had an increase in percentage and scored more in each quarter than we had in each quarter the previous week. That's got to mean something.

Comparing the merits of two players after three games each is ridiculous. In the long run, Wines might be better than Toumpas, Toumpas might be better than Wines and pick 53* might be better than everyone. *Picked at random. I have no idea who was pick 53

Have always loved Bail's effort and persistence. Thought he was one of the best on Saturday. Disappointed for him that he had to be checked for concussion during the game, but really pleased (1) that the club took the cautious approach and (2) with the new substitute rule which gave the club time to check before having to activate a permanent substitution which would have been unnecessary in this instance. One small change is needed - the player being tested for concussion should be wearing a different colour bib on the bench (yellow, for example) so everyone can understand what's going on.

I need to say this carefully. I wonder whether Frawley is struggling to understand Mark Neeld's gameplan and instructions. I have no idea if Neeld has a complex plan or whether he speaks in a complicated way. But Frawley doesn't strike me as being the quickest to appreciate complexities.

I thought Sylvia was so far ahead of everyone else yet I see some didn't have him in their best. Amazing how we see things differently 6. Sylvia 5. N Jones 4. M Jones [big gap] 3. McDonald 2. Bail 1. Trengove Many errors from Terlich, but given it was only his second game, shows great potential. And Frawley played perhaps the worst game I've seen him play since his first year.

If he's not going to play at all, I'd like to see him sitting in the coach's box so he gets a better understanding of what's expected.

I must admit I was concerned about this. Imagine if after all this effort only a few people had showed up. It would have lead to more media ridicule about how after all that effort so few Demons turned up. Well, that the turn up was large is a great testament to the spirit of the supporters. Well done to all who went and to those who promoted it. Now it's the players' turn.

Now that shows character.

Assume for the moment that the players actually read the banner before they run through it. What would you like to see the banner say? I'd go with either "Fire Up!" or "100% effort for 100% of the game". I think the former is better because of its brevity. What would you like to see?

Beautifully written WJ. Essendon is probably helped by having top notch on-field leadership, particularly their captain. With more experience, hopefully we'll have top-notch leaders too.

John O'Neill is Chairman of Echo Entertainment, owners of The Star casino in Sydney. I think he'd be too busy fighting off James Packer at the moment.

Who thinks we can beat WCE? I do!* *Just not sure whether it will be this decade or next. But certain it won't be in Round 3, 2013

I stand corrected. Talking of which, I believe the first song they played at Festival Hall was "I Saw Her Standing There".