La Dee-vina Comedia

So, we are about to become involved in the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" father-son business. What would be worse, paying a high price for a father-son who subsequently doesn't make it or not being prepared to do so and missing out on a gem? Other teams have faced this dilemma with mixed results. St Kilda appears to have got it right by not taking Sam Sheldon while (arguably) Collingwood might have got it wrong by not selecting Liam Picken. On the other side of the coin, Collingwood selected Brayden Shaw and we selected Chris Johnson, neither of which produced much value. On balance, I'd go with what I think is the riskier strategy of paying the high price and keeping Viney. If it has to be pick 3, so be it.

I think both teams have improved since Round 1, but I don't think we've improved enough to close the gap. Nevertheless, I expect a better contest this week with Melbourne showing it's capable of playing adult standard football. Round 1 (and for many weeks after) we played under-12's standard. You know the type, where the kids all hover around the ball leaving no-one outside to receive the kick or handball.

I would have guessed Rupertswood, not RIngwood. Seems to me more likely that rpfc would somehow be connected to the aristocracy associated with Sir Rupert Clarke than the might folk of Ringwood.

When considering whether Watts should go forward we should keep in mind that one of the problems he had when he was there was that the ball didn't come down to the forwards that often and when it did it was in a rather haphazard manner. If Watts could play forward and have someone like him delivering the ball to him, that might work. But I believe our forwards are playing better not just because Garland, Rivers and Moloney (and on Sunday, Sylvia) are there but because Watts is providing the drive that gets the ball down there in the first place. So if he goes there now, I think we lose the drive that gets the ball into the forward line...so he won't have the opportunities that Garland, Rivers and others have had...so he'll be portrayed once again as a failure. So leave him where he is.

Matthew Lloyd said at least 6 weeks ago that Travis Cloke and his management were making a mistake not coming to terms with Collingwood sooner rather than later because by the time he signs there won't be enough room under the cap to give him what he wants. Which means with Dayne Beam's rapid improvement there will be pressure not only on Collingwood's list management team but also on all the unsigned players. Will this lead to a breakdown in the club's otherwise solid 'side by side' mentality? If so, it will be interesting to watch all clubs, not just ours, acting like vultures.

Martin must come in for Clark. Sellar can't be used this week as back up ruck as someone has to play on Merrett and must be physically big enough to do so. (If Merrett and Sellar collide, Brisbane might experience its own 5.3 earthquake.) And someone big and strong has to play on J Brown, too. Will be interesting to see if Tom McDonald gets that job or whether Rivers gets sent back. While I'm a fan of Bail, after his longer than anticipated absence and because of the good performances of most players against GWS, he may be better suited to a full game with Casey. But if the match committee want him in the side, I suspect it will be Sam Blease that goes out. I'm generally no fan of Dunn, but credit where it is due. I thought he did well on Sunday and he looks to me to be best suited to a HBF role and should be given another chance. And Bate was my choice for 2nd BOG (Jones being BOG) so I can't see him being demoted. I'm confident Tapscott has a future but he may have to wait another week until a vacancy arises. So, in short, In: Martin Out: Clark (inj) with Moloney to start as the sub.

There is on significant difference between the two papers. I know from personal experience that both papers might write a story that criticises you, but The Age journos will tell you in advance what they are writing and give you a chance to respond; the Herald Sun journos do not. Both can be inaccurate, but The Age tries to get it right.

According to official AFL stats, Morton had 19 disposals with 68% efficiency. This translates to 13 disposals which were efficient and 6 which weren't. Our co-captains had 17 at 53% efficiency (9 efficient; 8 inefficient) and 25 at 64% (16 efficient; 9 inefficient). So, he had fewer "inefficient" disposals than either Trengove or Grimes. Yes, he's frustrating, but let's keep this in perspective. And to the person who said he'd have poor trade value because of the history of his brothers, surely you jest. So Travis Cloke would have no value because neither of his brothers were much good? Or Gary Ablett Sr because when Geelong took him they should have known Kelvin Ablett was a dud? Or maybe Hawthorn should have delisted Leigh Matthews earlier because his brother wasn't much good. Or Robert Flower and Jim Stynes...

Two good knees would be better.

Of course, if we got any three out of D Martin, Hurley, Naitanui and Darling this website would go into meltdown complaining that we should have got the other one.

Maths is OK. I struggle with English.

Didn't we get rid of royal blue as a colour years ago?

Hmm. A few selections here are going to be over the hill big time by the end of their four years (eg, Black, Goodes, Bartel). I agree they are all absolute champions, but not good value on four year contracts. My four: Cotchin, Murphy and Hawkins

I think this year is an extended pre-season for 2013. Nevertheless, unlike other years, I really do care about this particular pre-season competition. Nevertheless, I doubt we'll win more than another 4 - and even that might be a stretch.

I hope he stays. But don't read too much into quotes which may well have been written for him by Matt Burgan. It's a puff piece, after all.

Just to add one extra name, even though he doesn't call AFL, I think Peter Donegan is one of the best and most versatile sports callers going around. Wouldn't mind having him call AFL rather than VFL (but please don't bring David Rhys-Jones or Phil Cleary with him). For our non-Victorian friends, Peter Donegan calls VFL games on ABC1 each Saturday with David Rhys-Jones and Phil Cleary adding not very special comments.

Are you suggesting that the AFL is complicit in Melbourne's alleged 'tanking'? No wonder they deny that tanking exists.

Do we have any doctors or physios on Demonland? If so, is there any evidence that being fitter and stronger will also protect players not just from soft tissue injuries but also from other injuries such as strained ligaments, bulging discs and even broken bones? I have no idea.

Watts' future may depend on whether Cook takes on the CHF position. Nevertheless, my gut feel is that he'll now play predominantly back in the same role that Hodge, Goddard and Gibbs have been playing for years. Like them, he'll occasionally go on ball or forward. And what's the common link? All No 1 draft picks - and no-one seems to think that each of them has been a wasted pick.

I don't like Eddie McGuire as a commentator. But he's achieved something I never thought anyone would be able to do and I'm not sure how he did it. For all my life up until a few years ago there was only one team everybody (other than their own supporters) detested and that was Collingwood. I now believe Collingwood is less disliked than Carlton and possibly Richmond and Essendon. It's a clear cultural shift and probably the most significant thing Eddie has achieved for Collingwood, even though he has tried to mask it by promoting the "us v them" (aka "side by side we stick together") line whenever possible. I thought I'd never see an AFL competition without Collingwood as the 'go to' team to deride. But it's happened.

There have been calls for Tom McDonald to play forward but I'm not sure he's a good enough kick. Garland missed some very gettable shots on Saturday. Howe can bag a beauty from the boundary on the run but regularly misses set shots from in front. Nicholson butchers the ball too much. Do we have a specialist kicking coach? if so, who is he? If not, should we? If we don't, I suggest we should and that person should be Brad Green. Green is no longer as good a kick as he once was. But his kicking style in his early days was as fluid and as true as anyone's.

I'm sorry to have to disagree. But Watts was not a loose man in defence irrespective of what anyone in the media might have said. He played on Monfries, Jetta and Davey. He just made space when necessary. In fact, the most obvious change to me in the way we played compared with previous games was the ability for players NOT to all go to the ball or to the player with the ball at once. This allowed players to be free for the so-called uncontested possession, which was why our disposal count was up. I don't know if there was a change in instructions or whether players now just 'get it' and have more faith in the teammates. But we look a much better team when we play like adults instead of under 12s all hovering around the ball.

GOOD: Watts ability to play on various small forwards. At various stages he was on Monfries, Jetta and Davey. And beat them all. (And as said above, he was not a loose man in defence). BAD: Both Melbourne Sunday daily papers saying Garland was moved forward during the game when, in fact, he started there and stayed there all night. UGLY: Melbourne selection this week when someone who doesn't deserve it might have to make way for Frawley (or Bartram or Bail). But what a nice 'UGLY' to have.

And he did it better than them. 11 marks including 4 inside 50. Plus ran down deep into the back 50 a number of times to create opportunities. Now, if only we can fix his kicking for goal...

That quote reminds me of Travis Johsntone. Hopefully Blease will turn out to be more consistent than TJ.