La Dee-vina Comedia

They've fed the hamster and it's back spinning the dynamo.

Mind you, it would be a bit surprising if the club wrote instead, "He's not noted for going at the ball hard, he's usually away from the contest and his follow-up at ground level is average". In other words, take all pre-game praise with a grain of salt and hope that he delivers on the main stage.

I like the way the company has referred to the tech person as the "Senior" Infrastructure technician to lend gravitas to how seriously they're taking this problem.

Not sure how big he is, but just on this single page alone the MFC says he's both 193cm and 194cm.

Mick Malthouse leads the pack for curmudgeonly commentary. But, DS, you're closing fast.

Also, people's expectations have changed. Most suburban grounds in the 60s and 70s had little seating, except for club members. The standing room allowed for bigger crowds, but it was far less comfortable overall.

I'm hoping it's reminiscent of John Coleman's.

I wonder whether GWS will eventually relocate to Canberra.

Of course he didn't. It's the beginning of his busy period given it will also be Palm Sunday.

If the AFL issues a 19th licence to Tassie, as seems likely, it would be strange to leave the competition with 19 teams. Surely there will either be a 20th licence issued or one of the current ones returned. So, if there is to be a 20th licence, is SA the best option? I would have thought Canberra would have been a more logical fit. I'm not expecting Darwin to get a licence because I can't see how they could hold a team together because of the distance from home for most players and the not particularly comfortable environment (meaning both the weather and lifestyle) for them to live in.

Apparently with a combined total of 2,844 games, we played our most experienced team ever last week in the game against the Lions. It's still a long way off the most experienced team ever, which was Geelong in last year's Grand Final, with a total of 3,855 games played. I'm surprised that it was our most experienced ever, given that there weren't that many "older" players in the team. Source: https://afltables.com/afl/stats/alltime/misc_players.html#12 (Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere. If so, feel free to delete.)

I thought this thread had been bumped by someone posting "and Steven May getting into trouble". Which I guess I've just done.

Bad idea. Too much Willie Nelson might encourage him to smoke illegal substances.

I'm more concerned with how Viney plays as captain. I fear that he may over-react to the responsibility to the detriment of his own game. He always strikes me as the sort of player who, in trying to give 100% in everything he does, sometimes goes too far. In other words, he becomes his own worst enemy. On the issue of VC, does it really matter? Gawn remains captain for all the non-on field responsibilities, of which I assume there are plenty. In fact, I've always believed the on-field role of Captain isn't that important compared with the off-field.

If you look at the injury report, I think you'll find WCW is already out with a foot injury.

Am I the only who who read this post and for a fleeting moment thought the poster was suggesting that Bowey or Spargo be Grundy's relief ruckman?

I haven't read this whole thread, so this question may have already been asked and answered, but if May and Petty both play is using Tomlinson as Grundy's relief a viable option? I'm not averse to van Rooyen playing, but we have to recognise that Grundy needs support for up to 6 weeks, not just one. Is it feasible for van Rooyen to be second ruck for 6 weeks?

Hawthorn's strategy is interesting. Mitchell wants to get a young team that grows up together so in about 3-4 years time, they are fully synchronised in the way they play. There is some sense to it and it's essentially what we have done with the drafting of players like Salem, Petracca, Brayshaw, Neal-Bullen, Harmes, etc all in the same few years. The two risks for Hawthorn on field are that they don't draft well or, if they do, they may struggle to keep all their talent together because of the salary cap. The off field risk is a major drop off in revenue from supporters and sponsors. That we have been able to accommodate all our key talent (except, arguably, Jackson) shows what an excellent job is being done by the club from the CEO down.

That's being repetitive.

I suspect Dustin Martin might be similar. I seem to recall he only missed something like 8 games out of his first 200.

I prefer the glass half full analysis. I support people who pay money for reserved seats and don't attend. At least they've paid up. Some may do so knowing full well that they won't be able to attend all or even any matches, but willingly part with the money to the benefit of the club.

Given the quality of match reporting in the 'real' media, I don't think anyone should be surprised at what AI might produce. To summarise with an old expression...garbage in, garbage out.

I thought Oliver was serviceable, but not much more. If I were handing out votes, I would have had both Brown and Lever ahead of Oliver, but still unlikely to get votes ahead of five Brisbane players in that game.

By my possibly dodgy mathematical calculations, by this weekend Oliver will have played 150 out of a possible 160 games since he joined the club. That's a fantastic achievement. And, I'm not having a go at you SWYL, but your opinion certainly wasn't shared by The Age newspaper which included Oliver as the only Demon in their votes for the game. (For those that don't know, The Age gives five player votes for each game, with each being out of 10).

Me too.