La Dee-vina Comedia

Me neither. Nevertheless, while I prefer Chairman to President simply because the verbs from which they derive better suit the way I would like my club to be led, I recognise the inherent sexism in the former and detest the artificially created option of Chairperson. (I also recognise there is a view that the "man" in Chairman derives from the Latin word "manus" which means "hand", signifying who's hand is on the chair at the head of the table...but I digress.) As to the nomination committee, can someone explain what its role is? Is it to identify new potential Board directors or key club personnel such as the CEO, CFO and Senior Coach? Or both?

I think State of Origin is based on where players first played their junior footy, not where they were born. But if teams were being selected on basis of place of birth, I'm curious as to whether a team could be constructed of players born overseas. Who in the current competition was born outside Australia? Obviously Mason Cox, some or all of the South Sudanese players, the Irish guys and who else? I have a feeling Andrew McGrath might have been born in Canada. Anyone else? Anyone at our club?

Technically it's five players coming in, but practically it's six given Petracca was on the field in name only last week.

On Footy Classified last night, Eddie McGuire made the point that both of Essendon's choices were less than 6 feet tall. Said clearly as implied criticism of Essendon's strategy (for want of a better word).

Hope you're OK and recover soon.

I assume June 4 in this year was the Queen's Birthday public holiday. When did it change from the first to the second Monday in June?

Cool your jets, Werridee. That last sentence is completely out of line and unnecessary. We're all on the same side here.

Maybe not. Depends on what the Government chooses to do with anti-siphoning laws and streaming services. From today's The Age: https://www.theage.com.au/business/companies/seven-boss-wants-streaming-loophole-closed-as-us-giants-vie-for-afl-rights-20220601-p5aq6w.html

Sparrow and...

It may boil down to whether Jordon or Rivers keeps their spot. At the moment, I'd say Jordon is well ahead, so the team would be better balanced with Jordon on a wing and Brayshaw as a defender rather than last year's structure of Brayshaw on a wing and Rivers as a defender. Of course, injuries have a way of interfering with the best laid plans.

Why Hunt? Until the Freo game has played on small forwards and kept them quiet all year. By necessity, was required to play on Freo's tall forwards (because he's stronger and taller than Bowey, and Rivers is struggling) until Weideman was transferred back. Yes, he was outpointed by Darcy but at 187cm and 88kg, Hunt is still 16cm shorter and 24kg lighter than Darcy. If a defender has to make way for Salem, I suspect it will be Rivers. Of course, if Langdon doesn't play, Brayshaw could return to the wing instead.

I can see what happened here. Clearly someone at the AFL confused the company name with Stuart Spencer and then remembered that Stuart Spencer was inducted into the Tasmanian Hall of Fame. Given the new CEO will have to make significant decisions about Tasmania, it seemed like an obvious choice.

That's troubling. I always thought it was just Richmond supporters who were like this.

I'll boldly predict that the AFL will from 2023 or perhaps 2024 onwards allow teams to have two medi-subs from which to choose. Initially only one will be allowed to play in any game and then this will be changed in a subsequent year to both being allowed. The AFL will do this to allow clubs to have a tall/key position sub and a small/on-ball sub to choose from. Let's see how well this post ages.

I assume there's something about Mitch Brown's game that both Essendon and Melbourne have observed that stops him from getting regular game time. We know he's an excellent kick and that he regularly scores goals when given the chance. I assume, therefore, that there's something else that negates those positives. I don't wish to disparage him unnecessarily, but surely there's an aspect that we can't see?

Ross Lyon was just recently bemoaning the fact that clubs could not make their players do anything substantive when not training or playing football. He claims when he was coach, he wanted every player to either be studying or working part-time. I can recall when Peter Rohde was coach of the Bulldogs he also required it of every player. Do we know whether all our players are working or studying part-time? Langdon has his coffee business (and, I think, is studying Commerce), Brayshaw and Tomlinson are studying. Who else? And what are they doing?

Has it ever been confirmed whether any or all of the players who missed a week due to "Health and Safety Protocols" actually had Covid? If they did, some might still have lingering symptoms. By the way they've been playing, I'd say ANB is fully recovered, but I wonder about Jackson and Brown. Of course, if none of them had Covid, then we need to look elsewhere for their poorer than usual form.

Maybe the chanting has disappeared because of the inane music clip played after we score a goal. Why is the music even thought to be a good idea? It's a complete emotion killer.

A bit of symmetry for Tomlinson given the first game he missed following his knee injury was against Sydney.

Make up your mind! 🙂

The club needs to talk to the MCC about gameday. It would be great if the music being played before the game and during the breaks was being performed by indigenous artists. (It's a different issue, but music after goals being scored should be abolished, though.)

This isn't being flippant, but didn't they play well together for Casey? If so, did they understand each other's game better or was it just weaker opposition?

With names like that, no wonder the midfield looked bland. Having Brown in the side doesn't help much, either.

Is it time to sack our forward line coach? 🙂 (Emoji added as there's no sarcasm font).

I'm not convinced that the 4.35pm timeslot is any better or worse than any other. I suspect for every person that doesn't like 4.35pm, there's another who does. After all, as a community we all lead complex lives. Someone who can't make a 2.10pm timeslot (perhaps attending children's sport or working) may be able to make it at 4.35pm. Conversely, a 4.35pm start might interfere with dinner plans - but for that person, a night match would be no good, anyway. People with young children have different timing needs than young, single adults, and so it goes on. It is clear on Demonland that every timeslot and day of the week has supporters and detractors. I suspect the best thing for the AFL to do for all clubs, is to have a big a mix as possible to provide opportunities for all. On topic, I thought the 29,000+ crowd was decent. I doubt the 4.35pm timeslot was the reason for there being fewer than 30,000. It's more that a Freo game, like most games against interstate teams, is lacking significant numbers of opposition fans.