La Dee-vina Comedia

Let's hope the unreality continues and we beat the Eagles

The frustration of having our game on 3UZ or 3DB only to get a sentence of commentary before they crossed to the races at Manangatang or wherever. And while on radio, Jack Dyer's mangled English ("Mark Lee's arms go up like giant testicles', or something like that)

On a practical implementation point, I wonder whether we'll be playing in jumpers without the former sponsor's name this weekend. I would have thought it would be hard to do, particularly with tomorrow being a public holiday.

players lying down on a tarpaulin in dressing gowns at three-quarter time picket fence at the MCG without sponsorship but with team support banners tied on instead hand knitted footy socks and jumpers (I only had the socks, thanks to my paternal grandmother. Would have been better from my maternal grandfather - he ran a knitting business!)

On a completely different point, I'm not on Facebook and have never used it (in other words, I'm over 50). But does Facebook have any responsibilities for having allowed this type of information to be published? I know this is likely to lead to the freedom of speech argument, so before that's raised, let's remember that (i) we don't operate in this country under the American constitution and (ii) the right to freedom of speech is already qualified with restrictions associated with safety (you can't yell "fire" in a theatre when there isn't a fire), you can't defame people and you can't incite violence or racial hatred.

I think I've worked out who you are. You're the ghost of Neville "Peace in our time" Chamberlain.

Actually, Bailey played him as a mid, as a defensive forward, as an attacking forward, in defence and in the ruck. Dunn has been unable to find a spot to claim as his own so will more than likely end his own career.

A couple of points: I'm impressed with most Demonlanders and their moral compass. Anyone who believes "the sponsor who must not be named" should be kept on for the money presumably doesn't belong to a minority group. I'd suggest anyone who thinks keeping the money is more important than taking an ethical stand might have thought living in Germany in 1933-45 was really great because their economy improved. Now is the very best time for a new sponsor to sign up. The massive publicity from stepping in and "taking over" the sponsorship would be gold for any company. If it hasn't already done so, the MFC should engage a company which specialises in corporate reputation to help them with these various problems. It doesn't matter whether the ills are self-inflicted or not. Managing the club's reputation takes effort and careful management.

I'm optimistic. In Bailey's first year after Round 1 we were required to play teams above us on the ladder every single week for the rest of the year. I am confident this year that we'll play at least one team and possibly more below us on the ladder.

Wow! You've got through the five stages of grief already. Most Demonlanders appear to be stuck at level 2. My five things? 1. Blease, Bail and Davey all playing forward signifies Neeld's plan to use pacy players to put pressure on defenders. But it doesn't work if they don't all run hard. (I'm excusing Bail here) 2. Bombing long into the forward line can work if your centre half forward is called Carey, Brown or Reiwoldt. It won't work when you structure up with Bail in the nominal CHF location (although not playing that role) 3. A first-game coach should be given the same leeway as a first-game player (or umpire, for that matter) 4. Demonlanders are becoming more and more like Tiger supporters. Hopefully we'll still play finals more regularly than Richmond or we'll have posters threatening stupid stunts like dropping chook manure at Demons HQ 5. It's still too hard to work out whether Melbourne has recruited poorly, whether we've had over a decade of poor player development or whether there is a culture of acceptance of mediocrity amongst the playing group (or all of the above).

The smartest Melbourne footballer on the ground on Saturday was Robert Flower. Pity all he got to do was hand the match ball to the umpire.

It's often said that the game is "played between the ears" which is usually nonsense, otherwise Stephen Hawking would be playing at CHF. However, I don't think we can assume that the passing of Jim Stynes has not had a significant affect on the players, particularly the older players who had more time - purely because they've been on the list longer - to be associated with him. I was at the ground on Saturday and was moved by the minute applause. How would it have felt for the players down on the ground, particularly following on from all that had occurred in the previous 11 days? Imagine what it must have been like at the club during that time. And every time someone you know wanted to talk to you about what the impact had been. It must have been extraordinarily psychologically tiring. So, just maybe the first game of the year will be an abberation. How we respond this week will be far more interesting than how we played in the weekend just passed.

Maric played for Coburg? Is that a third Maric on the Tiger's list? It's a bit like the Riolis in the Top End but perhaps without the same talent and flair..

I would have thought the two players with the biggest "heart for the contest" would be Bartram and McKenzie. Their problems are with skill, not endeavour. In my view, the outs should be Joel MacDonald (I thought he fumbled too much and took some poor options), Blease (has pace which he'll use when he has the ball, but not when it's his turn to chase), Tynan (because he's not ready, but I like what I saw) and McKenzie (too slow). Bring in Petterd as a straight swap for Blease; Gysberts for McKenzie; Tapscott for Joel MacDonald and Bennell/Morton for Tynan. Also, put Bartram into McKenzie's run with role; and move Bail to take on Bartram's small defender role. I don't see a need to fiddle with the tall players, the problem was with the runners exacerbated by having a slow backline (another reason for Joel Mac to go - it's unbalanced having him plus Rivers, Frawley and Garland).

We're looking here for 'benchmark', not 'best players' although they could be the same. Because it's 'benchmark' it may vary for each player depending on the coach's expectations. So what would likely benchmarks be? For Magner it might be contested possession; for Watts it might be metres covered; for Bate it might be possessions gained in one quarter; for Tynan it might be minutes on the ground. And if they are their benchmarks, they might each have met theirs. But I wonder what the benchmarks were for the other 18 players Neeld didn't like and where they failed. Now that would be interesting. .

While I only saw about half the Richmond v Carlton game last night, I thought Maric was just OK. Did a few nice things and then a couple of poor decisions. More relevantly, though, if Richmond is going to better than Melbourne this year...we'll be having a shocker. Richmond has a few terrific players (Cotchin, Martin, Deledio) but still a lot of gaps currently being filled by battlers (Miller, A. Maric, Edwards, Nahas, and most of the backline).

I agree. I have no doubt some players decide not to go for the ball but would rather the opportunity to tackle. I don't particularly like the way the player who gets the ball gets pinged for holding it when he hasn't really had an opportunity to get rid of it. But I understand the bigger picture, which is to stop scrums forming. Perhaps it might be better to trial a rule which says a player cannot take possession of the ball if their knees are on the ground.

Or McKenzie who may not have enough match fitness...

Which might explain why Tom Couch was promoted from the rookie list. Why else promote a player if you are not going to play him? In for Magner, perhaps, if Magner's hand is still not right.

So you think we'll have a percentage over 270% (which is what Sydney has right now)? I'm not that bullish. But I'm never too shy to make a bold yet uneducated prediction. Melbourne 82 d Brisbane 65, which would be a percentage of 126%.

Surely he means overrated. Or maybe that's just my opinion.

Do demerit points carry over when a player moves to a new club?

Although, do we know what happens in May? If I have read correctly, he will be 'attending' the court by video link which suggests to me that it may just be a mention or a plea hearing, not an actual full-blown hearing. So, May might just be a mechanical, albeit important, part of the process and not the hearing itself. Mind you, I'm just guessing. if someone can provide facts (with respect to process, of course) that would be good.

Thanks for the answer. Which raises the question...why now? Unlikely to be frustration caused by the game having "passed him by" as I understand he played quite well. Unlikely to be a lack of knowledge of the rules, given his experience on the MRP last year. So maybe it was just "one of those things" that happens (otherwise known as "being in the wrong place at the wrong time"), which shows that it could happen to anyone.

Please, please, please, NOT the green jumper. I can't imagine anything more respectful than wearing the red and blue he played all his games in. In fact, I would support a red and blue jumper in the exact shades of colour and style worn by Jim.