La Dee-vina Comedia

Good on you, Kev. I've just read the team selection thread which raises the possibility that Pickett may miss due to a knee concern. You know what we need you to look for...

If we stick by the mantra that players do not play their first ever game as the sub, there are only two legit choices for the sub this week. Of course, if an emergency does get a call-up, that could change. For example, if Pickett doesn't get up (see above, re a suggestion of a knee issue), perhaps Laurie will get to play his first game.

Having watched the last few games, I suspect our opponents have worked out that a significant key to stopping us is to stop ANB. He seems to be the one who is tagged more often than any other player. He's fumbling because he's under immense pressure even before he's got the ball. And then when he gets it, he has no time to dispose of it. (To his credit, he's absorbing an enormous physical punishing every game.) I don't know whether the solution is to move him, drop him or give him time to work through it.

I'm hoping it's a mental thing and when it really matters - that is, in September - the team will get back to playing at its best. It's not great, though, to be looking for "reasons" like this in an effort to justify our sub-standard performances.

Same. But unlike the past, the memories of that era no longer require me to pass through the five stages of grief before I can move on with the rest of my day.

I'd be happy with the headline tomorrow re-introducing another word from that era as in "Colliwobbles strike the Pies"

With respect to player movement stories during the season, where there's smoke there is usually the burning end of a player manager's cigarette.

Ponies? Is that meant to be Pies or am I unaware of what this might otherwise mean?

You can argue about the quality of their wins and who they have played, but one metric where they are ahead is winning form. Ten on the trot is better than what we've achieved in the same period.

New rule for this thread: Anyone who says Harmes should have been picked also has to say who should have been omitted to allow that to happen.

On the radio this morning I heard a replay of a journo saying "Tom Hawkins has run out of super-laxatives for his mate Joel Selwood". I assume, and I hope, she meant to say "superlatives". Mind you, this effort from one of our Members of Parliament might be the gold medallist of incorrect word use.

Sorry for your loss.

Essedon and Wimbleton

Do we have a view about whether it is correct to always avoid splitting infinitives? And what about the rule which says do not start sentences with conjunctions?

The link asks more questions than it answers. For example, who knew that "than" could be either a conjunction or a preposition?

Which is the most courageous decision? Picking one KPF or two? If one, is it more courageous to pick B Brown, Weideman or van Rooyen? If two, which combination?

What's the correct use here: "I am tall, but my brother is taller than..." Is it "I am" or "me"? I'm not being tricky - I don't know the answer. That's why I'm asking Demonland. It seems to better at grammar and spelling than any other available resource. And what about Viney? (Added solely to include a football reference to ensure the thread remains allowed on this board.)

This gif should be in the lookalikes thread beside a picture of Petracca

Does it say words for numbers "less than 10" or "lower than 10" or "fewer than 10" (or "less than ten" or "lower than ten" or "fewer than ten")?🙂

It's time for Werridee to put together his team of average footballers who seem to play exceptional games against us. Or Demonstone could make it one of his brainteasers.

What's the Demonland consensus view on the past tense of the verb dive as in "Clayton Oliver dived into the pack" or "Clayton Oliver dove into the pack"?. I prefer "dived" but I'm just biased against the use of American English. Note: Not to be confused with the noun, as in "Matthew Lloyd took a dive".

I wonder if B Brown comes back in for someone other than Weideman? We won a Premiership with two KPFs plus two ruckmen and it may be that the Match Committee wants to get back to that structure again. For that to happen, though, a smaller forward needs to miss out and that might mean Melksham is omitted after having probably played his best game in a couple of seasons.

The closest thread I could find on the Collingwood fan forum was one which discussed the benefits of false teeth. On the Richmond one, they have a thread on the attributes of various knives. There's an old thread on the Geelong site which refers to handbags, but it's been superseded by one about aged care facilities.

I suspect there's another joke embedded here about sodium and hydrogen both being cations.

Yes, this thread is full of learnings.