La Dee-vina Comedia

Is it? I thought One HD had dropped the footy and it's now just on Ten, which is standard definition.

Can't help myself...surely you mean longtermgevity? (apologies to those who haven't heard the Ox use this made-up word).

It's not just a choice between Davey and Tapscott. I would have thought Davey might come in for Bennell and Tapscott for, say, Morton or Nicholson (although I'd keep Nicholson in if it were up to me).

Actually not new this year but my cringe expressions are: "Ordinary" or "Average" when meaning to say "really, really bad" and any meaningless number above 100%, ie, "I'm going to give it 110%"

Given Jared Rivers always comes out last when the team runs out on the ground, it suggests he might be superstitious. Let's hope coming out first doesn't mess with his mind.

As a matter of interest, anyone know how many goals Lance Franklin had kicked after his first 31 games?

Or around 11.15pm if watching on TV in Melbourne (insert teeth nashing sound here)

Are you serious? Do you think he had a choice? The drafting process did somewhat limit his options.

Three quick Robert Flower stories: 1. He turned up for his first try-out with Melbourne FC under 19s and only lasted a few minutes...because they decided he was too good and took him off the ground to wait for the seniors group to train later that day. I know this because my cousin did the same on the same day...except for the bit about being too good. (In fact, my cousin didn't make it in the then VFL at all - but played about 250 games in the ammos). 2. In one game against Richmond, the Melbourne strategy each time Richmond kicked a behind was to put all players on one side of the ground bar Robbie. He was left one-on-one with his opponent on the other wing. All but one of the kick-ins was sent his way and he won just about all of them. I don't now why the Richmond coach (was it Francis Bourke?) didn't do anything about it, but I seem to recall it might have been the coach's last match because of it. 3. Robbie showed his true class by almost always being in the best players in State of Origin clashes. He relished playing with the quality which surrounded him in those games, unlike most of his games for Melbourne where the standard was, err, disappointing.

Intuitively this doesn't seem right. Jack W's been really good the last two weeks, but I don't believe he's been our best for the year to date. I'd have Moloney and Martin ahead of him for starters. Probably also Sylvia, Trengove, Rivers and Jones.

My only concern with these seven names is the lack of a true crumbing forward to snap up the inevitable dropped and spoiled marks. Davey and/or Wonna added to the mix would complement it beautifully.

6. Moloney 5. Watts 4. McKenzie 3. Martin 2. Jones 1. Rivers Garland doesn't get votes from me (although he was good), but when I saw him on D. Martin, I thought it was the wrong match-up. So credit where it is due. Dean Bailey, take a bow.

Then, in my view, Newton is the first to go. Not his fault - he's just not quite good enough.

It's always a more reliable indicator for a game (and who is more likely to win an election) to see what people think when there is money riding on their choice. Right now Betfair has Richmond at $1.99 and Melbourne at $1.98. The punters have spoken...but I think they are whispering rather than shouting out loud. [Note: I am not recommending anyone should bet].

It was reported on this site at the time that Chris Connolly had told a Demons function that we were going to use pick 18 on Gawn but because Tapscott was unexpectedly still available then we took him (Tapscott) instead. That Gawn survived until the next round might have been dumb luck - but what we know is that MFC thought he was worth pick 18, even though we ended up getting him in the mid-30s. Reason for edit: Correct typo

100% with you Roost It. It can't be that difficult to grab a player, hold him tight and not sling him to the ground. And my concern is not just about the effects of concussion for professional footballers. In local footy the size differences between players means this sort of tackling is even more dangerous. My only concern about the rule is contrary to most opinions here. I don't think it should matter what the extent of the injury is. It should only matter that the tackle might have been able to cause an injury because of its type - not whether it did or not.

Really? What about any of Dunn, Bate, Maric, Spencer, Warnock, Newton, McNamara (although I appreciate the departure of the latter two may not "count" given their rookie listing). There may be others...and some of the above-named may be worth keeping. But I don't think it'll be too hard.

I admit I don't understand how things are recorded. But can it be a "loose ball" if he's being pushed off it? Doesn't that make it a contested ball? On the point in question, a quick read of this and other threads makes it clear...Morton is hard and soft, skilful and full of flaws, admired and despised. Is there anyone else who polarises Demon supporters more?

6. McKenzie 5. Nicholson 4. Watts 3. Martin 2. Green (should have kicked straighter - could easily have kicked 8) 1. Scully (nearly put Howe in here - but Scully was better when it was needed)

We need to know more about injuries first. Not only Garland, but also Bartram who had a huge ice pack on his knee after the game. And why was Gysberts a late withdrawal? I haven't heard anything (apologies if it's covered elsewhere on this site). Nevertheless, I'm going to take a punt that all are fit for next week and that Petterd's cleared. On which basis, I would say In: Jamar, Gysberts Out: Gawn, Bennell. Tapscott to play at Casey. If either of Garland or Bartram don't come up or Petterd is suspended (unlikely. I would have thought), then Tapscott comes in.

I'd rather see Bennell as sub and Dunn not play. Otherwise your guess is my preference. Dunn's had plenty of chances before and not taken them.

And Ed Curnow is, ironically, Un-crowed

And I thought you were staring at your grandfather (which, I must admit, I thought was pretty weird).

I think Beamer is more consistent than Sylvia. And I'm not sure either is necessarily captain material. They might be, but I suspect it's at least as important what happens off the field as on (eg, attitude to training, sponsor glad-handling, media work, younger player mentoring, etc) and I've got no idea what any of them are like in that regard.

I know I'm late again, but I can't quite understand why I'm out of step with everyone else. I thought Sylvia was just OK (still good enough to get votes) but not our best. Four goals is good, but I didn't really notice much else from him. So, here's my view: 6. Moloney 5. Morton 4. McKenzie 3. Sylvia 2. Watts 1. Scully But the best point made by an earlier poster is that Collingwood players probably made up the ten best players on the ground.