La Dee-vina Comedia

6. Moloney 5. Trengove 4. Sylvia 3. Bail 2. Jamar 1. Rivers I found it quite easy to nominate the first four, but much harder for the last two. And what was it with all the fumbling from Gysberts, Garland and at times Moloney?

I'm old enough to remember Robert Flower (and even earlier still). He had exactly the same problem - so when he played in the Victoria State of Origin team he was invariably in the best players because when he disposed of it those players were good enough to be in the right place at the right time. He was undoubtedly the best MFC player I have seen. If Scully comes close, we'll be very, very happy.

Stefan Martin (in his first year)?

Superstar > Champion > Elite > Star > A-Grade > most footballers > hack > spud > anyone who walked out on MFC (Bruce, McLean, etc) How's that order? And what's missing?

If I recall correctly history shows that on average seven of the teams in the eight after round 7 will still be in the eight after round 22. So, let's wait four more rounds before we get ahead of ahead of ahead of ourselves. (The first 'ahead' because we haven't played GCS yet; the second because it's not round 7; and the third because it's not round 22).

Perhaps he's outstanding in his field

I was surprised that after his clearance work got us Jurrah's first goal (and I think also Jurrah's first point - which should have been a goal) that Gys was removed from the centre square for the next few centre bounces. I appreciate rotations may in theory make it harder for the opposition to match up, but I've always felt that [cliche alert] when you are on a good thing you should stick to it.

Actually , I think it would be more effective to run a campaign not to buy products advertised on Channel 7 during delayed broadcasts. I have a suspicion similar campaigns have worked elsewhere - but can anyone help with evidence to support that statement?

While I think he's a good tagger, he also reminds me of James McDonald - runs all day, and while not an elite kick can kick with either foot, can tag but could also be a running midfielder. Perhaps not as much in and under as Junior, but a lot to like. Perhaps we should call him "Junior Jr". When McKenzie comes back I suspect Bail will become the "second" tagger - that is help McKenzie when he needs a rest and otherwise be given more opportunity to run free. I like him a lot. Amazing what is still there in the draft at, what, pick 64 or thereabouts.

I'm not sure the answers are really adding to the debate. The real question is: Should Morton play in the starting 21 or at Casey? He shouldn't be the sub which means if he's in the starting 21, who becomes the sub? Although Dunn picked up his game toward the end, I thought he struggled overall today. Not enough to be dropped, but perhaps to be the sub to allow Morton to play a full game.

er...I wouldn't have thought so. Bartram plays tight; Jones doesn't know how to. Both are flawed but both absolutely try their hardest. I've been troubled by Jones in the past, but had him in our best today.

6. Jamar 5. Moloney 4. Rivers 3. Jones 2. Bail (I know Black got a lot of it early, but in the end, Bail outlasted him and became an important cog) 1. Gysberts Tempted to put Martin in...but just missed out.

Given Frawley will lack match fitness (and assuming he plays, of course) I expect MacDonald to be on the bench with Petterd, Martin and Jetta (sub). Maric misses out. This adds a defender, when compared with last week's team, meaning Grimes or Tapscott or both can be given a chance up the field as part of the shifts which occur with rotations.

Am I imagining it or was one of the reasons given for introducing the new substitute rule a concern expressed by the AFL that the speed of the game could lead to greater impact injuries? If so, and if the substitute rule leads to a reduction in the number or consequences of impact injuries, then the substitute rule should continue to be supported. And, if the evidence shows an interchange bench of two plus two (meaning two substitutes) is better for players' long term health perhaps that should be supported, too. Having said that, though, I'd want to see hard evidence that the substitution rule is working in this way rather than making an unsubstantiated guess. With respect to Bell, I wonder whether the persistent concussions he talked about led to the lack of awareness or vice versa.

I'm not sure about Roost It's comment favouring 20 + 2 subs instead of the 21 + 1 (but it's by no means an outlandish suggestion) but I agree 100% that it's time to ban runners from the field. With the interchange rule allowing players to come on and off they can receive messages directly that way or the interchanging player running on can carry a message to players on the field. Too often the runners get in the way. At one stage on Sunday the Melbourne runner nearly gave away a free kick (or was it a 50m penalty?) because he was too close to the action. Note: I realise this is a footy forum so I should say "I agree 110%" but I just can't...

I was looking for a boundary umpire with a fluoro green vest to sub in.

Putting him to the backline might be an option, but he can only kick on the left. Mind you, Scott Lucas played OK when sent to CHB. I certainly think trialling him in the backline at Casey is a worthwhile development.

6. Moloney 5. Trengove quite a gap, then 4. Jamar 3. Davey 2. Tapscott 1. Martin And I liked Bennell's game, too.

I thought Thomo was suggesting Lewis Jetta would play on Jack Watts... It would be a fascinating duel, though in a bizarre sort of way.

Unfortunately, the Ox also admits to having had a big problem with the pokies, too.

Gulp. is it possible that Jamar, Spencer and Martin will all play? Jamar, 1st ruck; Spencer to assist Jamar and Martin as part of the rotating tall defenders, particularly if Goodes and White both play forward? Personally, I think that would be unbalanced (having Martin and Spencer on the bench at the same time makes it tough for the runners). I'd rather play Jamar and one of the other two, preferably Martin. I'm suspicious about Trengrove's fitness, though, so I think he's a doubtful starter.

Hey, come on, let's help Dazzler out. In no particular order: Davey = Flash Jamar = The Russian Green = Greeny (how inspiring) Jones = Jonesy (ditto) Jurrah = LJ Moloney = Beamer Watts = Killer or Mega and surely Strauss is Levi What else?

I'm using IE and it's the SOE where I work, so I can't change it. And what's been happening for a week or so is that some Demonland threads (including this one) keep automatically attempting to refresh and eventually close and reload, then attempt to refresh, close and reload, etc. Annoying.

When I read "Stauss (sic) is looking like another Chris Johnson" I got excited. Then I realised you meant Melbourne's, not Brisbane's. How deflating.

I think there might be another job for Martin. I keep reading on this site about who might be the second ruckman playing forward for us because of the substitute rule. But where is the commentary about who will play on the opposition's second ruckman if he plays forward? If it's Mumford or Pyke, Martin is the only one I can see with the height to play on that player. So, I reckon Martin might play defender whenever Sydney rests a ruckman forward. If they don't, I suspect Martin will go forward to stretch Sydney's defence. That doesn't answer the question about who plays on Goodes, but perhaps takes Martin out of the equation. (And it won't be Bartram, Jones or Bail who plays on Goodes. They're all too short. And I can't see it being Dunn, either. He's the right size but has successfully been turned into a defensive forward. My guess - and it's only an uneducated punt - is Garland. He has been successful on at least one other tall, fast forward in Franklin.)