La Dee-vina Comedia

Apologies if this is in another thread somewhere, but Sam Edmond today claims that Josh Frydenberg was encouraged by the AFL Commission to throw his hat into the ring for the CEO's job. I can't see it happening. I would have thought there were better opportunities for the former Treasurer than this job.

Didn't the graphic put up show that Richmond lost 4 in a row in 2017 before going on to win the flag? If so, it's not all doom and gloom should we lose Thursday...although it won't be a great feeling.

I have often wondered why the AFL doesn't copy other sports such as hockey and soccer, where a free kick is only awarded if an infringement restricts play. In these other games, the referee signals that an infringement has occurred but only stops play if it is needed to assist the team infringed against. It would effectively replace the current situation where it's very confusing, and often unfair, when teams take advantage.

You're probably right. However, for what it's worth, while the prices of food and drinks might deter some people, I suspect that issue isn't in the top 5 reasons why people aren't attending. I'd have all of scheduling (eg, Thursday nights, times of games, floating fixture, etc), availability on TV (especially now people have become used to paying for content on other services, such as Netflix), transport issues (cost, time, availability), ticketing issues, and health concerns associated with Covid all ahead of it.

I think you'll find it was club CEOs. The Age has been drip feeding results of its survey with club CEOs over the last few days. I'm curious as to why a club CEO would want to add Dustin Martin. Five years ago I suspect he would have been the dominant choice, but now he's too close to the end of what has been a wonderful career.

My basic school economics suggests to me that the link between food and beverage prices and crowds is a two-way issue. It's not just that expensive food and drinks may be deterring people from attending. It may also be that smaller crowds are increasing the prices. If more people attend, the fixed costs component of the food and beverage suppliers reduces thereby enabling prices to be lower. If that is correct, the AFL need to do more to get crowds back which should help reduce the pressure on prices.

The problem I have with this story is that there are 21 responses. That seems to suggest that the CEOs were given the opportunity to provide more than one reason...yet between them only came up with 21 responses.

Explains your name...

All teams in good form? I can think of one that's not right now...

I often wonder who's decision it is to play music. Is it the ground manager (ie, the MCC for MCG games), the home team or the AFL? We might be blaming the wrong person.

Time to resuscitate the Embarrassing Records thread?

While the head honchos at the 7 Network might be pleased with Thursday night football, I suspect the CEO of the Melbourne Cricket Club is not. Smaller crowds must be costing the MCG quite a bit in revenue foregone.

Winner, winner, Pickett's dinner.

The AFL has apparently determined to increase the soft cap by half a mil per annum. Because we're not on the inside, it's impossible for any of us to know where we should really spend the extra. I'll assume, though, that half will be consumed in pay rises for the staff already there. That leaves $250,000. Where would you spend the extra? Be as serious or amusing as you like. Do you want to see more skills coaches in specific areas (eg, goal kicking)? How about someone specialising in conflict management? Do we want to beef up recruitment? Or fitness? How about we buy Simon a thesaurus so he can find alternative words for "connection" and "learnings"? Any and all ideas welcome.

I never knew that. Good learnings here on Demonland.

I can live with a 1965 style result this year. But not the subsequent 55 years.

One could say it's a sliding Daw moment.

You've mixed up your African animals.

Is he slow because of his own decision making or is he slow because the next link in the chain just isn't there? (That's a genuine question - I'm not trying to defend Jordon, just to understand why.)

OK, but because you've just made a scurrilous comment about WJ, I believe I now have to suggest we take it outside where I'll have to take a swing at you. Then I'll have to go to the doctors to get my hand fixed.

The interesting thing about this thread is the number of posters seeking significant change either to personnel or where players are positioned. For example, suggestions that Salem play wing, ANB half-back, promote van Rooyen, play Tomlinson forward, etc. it raises a practical question: Is the team best served by sticking with last year's plan and personnel, where possible, and just making minor changes? Or do we make significant changes which moves us away from the 2021 model? Is the 2021 gameplan out of date? Or do we stick with it and trust the players to pick up their game?

Who's Mitch Hibberd? 🙂

The interesting discussion for mine is the move of Brayshaw from HBF. I can't see why we would move him to the wing, given that Langdon and Jordon are playing those positions well (most of the time), so I'm attracted to the idea of putting Brayshaw on-ball in place of Sparrow or Harmes. Sparrow or Harmes could go to the sub position and Brayshaw's spot on the HBF taken up again by Rivers. So, I would bring in May for Turner, Rivers for Sparrow (or Harmes) and Weideman for M Brown. Chandler as medi-sub would also be omitted. (I'm not a fan of Chandler at the best of times and I'm definitely not comfortable with a small forward being the sub. And that includes Bedford. Not enough versatility if the medi-sub is a small forward or a tall forward, for that matter)

First four are easy (although not necessarily the order). The final two are more difficult and don't really deserve to be there: 6. Oliver 5. Jordon 4. Viney 3. Brayshaw 2. Petracca 1. Neal-Bullen

Has the pig industry adopted Willy Wonka promotional ideas? What do the players win?