La Dee-vina Comedia

I can. Robert Flower.

And who wants to admit to being at the game on Sunday and leaving at three-quarter time? (Serves you right).

I can't believe what I'm reading on this thread. The term 'cheap seats' is a standard reference used to mean any person who is not actually in a position accountable for the decisions someone else has to make. It's regularly used when people want to explain why it's harder to play or umpire any game and it's also used when companies explain to shareholders and politicians explain to voters that the decisions that they (the company directors and politicians) have to make are more difficult than they may appear to be to outsiders (those in the cheap seats) who don't have all the facts. Don is 100% correct that the greater the scrutiny the harder it will be to get people prepared to give up their time to volunteer to be on the Board of any AFL club. Where he was wrong was in his timing. He needed to have read 'Team of Rivals' first and learned from Abraham Lincoln that the time to make this sort of move (in Lincoln's case his Emancipation Proclamation) was after a win, not beforehand, so it doesn't look like whinging.

Should be upbeat at training this week with both Melbourne and Casey winning. Hope that puts a buzz through the whole playing group.

Apart from injury, I can't see Sellar playing another game. Jamar, while not dominant, was much better than last week and I have a suspicion based on no evidence at all that he played better because he knew he had proper support. In previous weeks, Jamar has virtually rucked solo given the lack of competitiveness Sellar and Pedersen provide in the ruck. I think Jamar's career is coming to an end, but I hope we (both MFC and Demonland) pay him the respect he deserves as he nears the end. Hopefully Gawn and Spencer will provide years of torment for the opposition.

And one other thing I noticed. Players seemed to trust their teammates more, so we had fewer instances of multiple defenders trying to spoil so that we had players on the ground to tidy up.

Seemed to be less switching to the fat side. Although there are faults in his game (see 357 other threads on the topic), kick outs after behinds are so much better when Jack Watts takes them. My main criticism was the very wide leading from full forward by Clark and Howe. Shots on goal from the boundary line are exciting when they go through but generally a low percentage option.

6. N Jones 5. S Byrnes 4. C Sylvia 3. C Garland 2. J Grimes (would have been higher but still butchered the ball by foot too often) 1. M Evans And the best game I've seen to date from Jetta. Pity he may miss next week (or more) courtesy MRP.

The Geoff Freeman appointment industry has had a big week.

Might depend on the specific wording of the query from the AFL. Did they ask "Was Stephen Dank ever employed by the club?" or "Has anyone at the club ever been in contact with Stephen Dank?". Those questions can have completely opposite answers and both be correct.

May yet become a highlight.

Unless it was Cameron Schwab who misled both the Board and the AFL. If it was Schwab (and I have no evidence* to support or disabuse this notion), then the decision to part ways with him was the right one, even if other reasons were given. *Proof that I am not Caroline Wilson or Damian Barrett

I know they (probably) won't line up as selected, but is that the smallest CHB and CHF combination you've ever seen?

We're so incompetent we try to tank again...and win.

I expect Jamar to play better this week now that he has some genuine support instead of part-timers who don't really know how to ruck (or even jump off the ground). With respect to Watts, I'm very much in the minority, but I could see that he might benefit more from being forced to watch the WCE game, hopefully in the company of a coach to point out specific issues during the game, than run around in an inferior team. I don't see much benefit for him playing at Casey other than making up the numbers for that team. The idea that he "needed" a game doesn't make sense when clubs monitor loads and he can do more during the week with respect to fitness, skills, gameplan and education than the two and a bit hours spent in the 2s. And I'm bemused that we'd pick a squad with Jamar, Spencer , Gawn, Sellar and Pedersen. Surely we'd never play all five, let alone four. So, is there a chance that one of Jamar or Gawn won't play?

I'm glad we've appointed a full-time, experienced, albeit interim CEO. He's got his work cut out. Two of his first tasks should be to review the relationships between (1) board and admin and (2) club and AFL. reason for edit: typo

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.