La Dee-vina Comedia

Am I the only one that would prefer that there were no pre-season practice matches against other AFL sides? I like the idea of going into Round 1 with every team's supporters having their hopes sky high because none have been disappointed by practice match results. I'm happy for AFL teams to play practice matches against VFL (or SANFL, etc) teams. I expect that teams might be a bit rustier come Round 1, but everyone is in the same boat so I don't see that particular issue being a problem. And I'm not sure one formal practice match does much to condition players anyway.

We need a button that allows us to recognise humour in a situation that is otherwise not at all funny.

I'm not sure why Daisy joining Geelong is in any way a sign of problems at Melbourne. Most ex-players who choose coaching start at a different club to the one from which they've just retired. I would consider that to be best practice as it automatically doubles the exposure of the individual to methods and IP. Would it have been good for Goodwin and Gawn to be present? Possibly, but that could also have been seen as a distraction by some, WOKE-ness by others and some could see it as an insult to the credibility of the women's competition. On balance, I'm glad that Goodwin and Gawn didn't attend because the end result was that Daisy gained the maximum media coverage that she deserved for her farewell.

That would be the end of her popularity.

Ron Barrasi and Ted Whitten, particularly through the 1960s and 1970s. Both were called "Mr Football" (which was a bit confusing!). I think Lou Richards can join this category, although I'm not old enough to remember him as a player. I am struggling to think of anyone in the 21st century. Perhaps Nathan Buckley?

Can someone please remind me. Is Kye Turner a listed player, a rookie or a train-on player (or something else)?

I hope not. If Goodwin has gone after another 5 years it could only mean (1) we haven't won another men's Premiership in that time or (2) even though we've won one or more additional Premierships, the club is in some sort of off-field turmoil.

Can't work out if I'm reading a training report or a restaurant review.

I wonder whether AI would help with score reviews? (This is not a joke. I suspect AI can identify trajectory changes in ball movement better than the human eye.)

Great report, thanks stinga. The highlight for me was the use of the word "tabbard". I had to look it up. (Though, I think it might only have a single b.)

You've got a Collingwood supporting mate? Surely that's grounds for suspension from Demonland.

I found it hard. I'm from the era where liking anything to do with Collingwood was grounds for dismissal. Not just from work, but from my own family. It says a lot about how much I admire what he's achieved that I included him in that list. At least the Irishmen all had some experience with Gaelic Football. Cox started a lot further behind than any of them. In my opinion, that means he's arguably a greater success story. It would have been so much easier to like him if he played for any other club. Except Richmond.

Category B rookies face enormous challenges if they are ever to make it. I've always believed a person with Australian footballing skills but who is not fully fit has a much better chance of having a successful football career than an athlete who has to learn the skills. There are exceptions and I admire everyone that has a go, whether they make it or not. It makes the stories of success for players not bought up with Aussie Rules, most obviously Jim Stynes, but also Sean Wight, Zac Touhy, Tadgh Kennelly, and even Mason Cox, something we should all admire. However, I suspect Oliver Sestan might have a better chance of success than any recruit initially chosen because of their success as athletes but without any Australian football experience.

I assume with five interchange (or, rather, 4 interchange plus a "tactical sub") we should expect the annual 22 players under the age of 22 will become the 23 players under the age of 23. It seemed that Oliver was in the "22 under 22" list every year for about 8 years!

I hadn't realised that the Casey ground was also used for soccer. (I assume that's what the painted markings on the ground are for). Do soccer teams just train there or is it used for games as well?

Noble, and I believe you mean it. But I suspect if you really had to make that decision you might come to a different conclusion. After all, those contacts will still be there after you've retired. And your earnings capacity in any other line of work might not match what you were due to be paid in your last year. (Please note, I'm not insulting your current capabilities and earnings capacity. But if you had been in the AFL system all your working life to date, it might be hard to move to another job that pays that well.)

Apart from anything else, we don't know the details of his contract. He might have agreed to do something for the "good of the club" when he originally signed on, such as back-ending his contract. Conversely, there might be an agreement for him to transition into a formal coaching role whenever he retires to enable him to maintain the equivalent income.

I hope Pickett isn't asked to play too much on-ball. Although Davey won a B&F as a midfielder, I thought it might have shortened his career because of all the crunching bumps and tackles he received in the role. Pickett will receive similar attention when he's in the midfield.

For some time Melksham has looked to me like a coach-in-waiting.

I think it's fair to say we were keen to keep him...but not at the price WCE was prepared to pay. I'm sorry to see him go, but also understand that we have a salary cap to maintain. We don't want to be in the positions that Collingwood, Gold Coast and others have been in where good players have been lost because of salary cap/list mismanagement. In fact, I'd go as far as saying it's closer to a win-win than any other combination. Hunt gets a better deal and we aren't forced to overpay for a player.

I was under the impression we didn't move Hunt on. Rather, he was offered a contract on better terms (either a longer contract or more money or both) by West Coast which we were not prepared to match. The effect is that Hunt has left us, but I believe he had an offer from the club to stay. Therefore, to say he was "moved on" is probably unfair on both Hunt and the club, even though the end result is the same.

I wonder how much better it is for a premium ruckman to be training with (or against) another premium ruckman rather than a second stringer? We see it all the time with the best forwards having to battle the best defenders. But most clubs don't have a quality second ruckman to put up against their first choice big man.

I wanted to join in the fun but the choice cuts have all been taken.

I love that we like to make jokes about things like this. I like it even more that players from different teams can train together.

Who am I? I got into trouble in 2022 for being too Franz Lizst at a restaurant in Prahran.