La Dee-vina Comedia

There was a joke at the time: "What's green and stuffs cats?" Answer: the MCG in September. Apart from a few years in the late 2000s and early 2011s, not much has changed.

"Fact check on aisle 1"

Our coaches or coaches of the opposition? Or both?

I find it difficult to judge, particularly on TV, but I suspect Hunt has been given the role of lockdown defender on the opposition's most dangerous small forward. I'm certain he played on Shai Bolton and Jack Higgins and kept both out of their respective games. He was also on Liam Ryan for at least some of yesterday's game. Can anyone who's more observant than me confirm that this has become his permanent role?

Update: Now 16 Our winning streak of 16 puts us equal 9th on the ladder of consecutive wins. Way out in front is Geelong with 23 in 1952/53. Also, we're the only team to have started two consecutive seasons 9-0 twice. Previous seasons were 1955, 1956 and, of course, 2021. No pressure... but they were all Premiership years.

6. Brayshaw 5. Viney 4. Jordon 3. Langdon 2. Pickett 1. Petracca

I know English is a fluid language which changes regularly, but someone being described as "in the protocols" is surely some form of linguistic abuse.

Thanks. I'd completely forgotten about that most unfortunate tragedy.

A better solution might be to replace all the footy journalists with robots.

Fascinating data, but please don't tell the AFL. Quick question - why have Geelong and Adelaide played one fewer H&A game than every other team (other than GWS and GCS)? I can't recall what might have happened there.

With no Weideman or Daw picked in the squad we should safely assume that there is absolutely nothing wrong with Gawn's knee. If there had been any doubt, you would assume one of those two names would have appeared. Assuming no late changes, I suspect Melksham will be the medi-sub to get him one game closer to his 200. (I think it will be his 199th game).

The irony about the weekend work discussion and traditional football starting times is that football games didn't always start at 2.10pm on a Saturday. Up until the 1960s it was common for those who worked Monday to Friday to also work on Saturday morning. Because of this, Saturday games used to start at 2.30pm. They only shifted to 2.10pm when Saturday morning work for full-time Monday to Friday workers stopped. My recollection is that this was probably some time in the mid 1960s. It must have meant that some games in mid-winter would have finished in near darkness, given that there were no lights at most VFL grounds, including the MCG.

It's getting off-topic, but I think the bounce will be gone soon, too. That's because there appears to be a belief that the requirement to bounce the ball is stopping some otherwise capable people of becoming umpires. A shortage of quality umpires is a bigger problem than whether the bounce should be retained or not.

Mind you, I suspect that it will only be twilight for a year or two with the game eventually being played at night. I see twilight as a transitional step to soften the blow for traditionalists.

They've never done that before, so why start now? Indirectly, though, this is giving the fans what they want. Fans want the best possible game on Grand Final day, whenever it's played. That only comes about if there's enough money to pay the players what they deserve. And that, as we know, fundamentally means that the game needs TV money to be as high as possible.

I don't think we were unlucky, I think Watts, Scully and Trengove were. They were forced, via the draft, to join a dysfunctional club which didn't provide an environment for them to thrive within. Compare that with players drafted today who join aware that the club knows what it's doing.

Believe it or not, there are still some believers. (I vaguely recall the first conference was initially called the first "global meeting" until the organisers realised the ridiculousness of using such an expression.)

Thankfully our players' parents didn't 20-30 years ago.

If we're being pedantic, surely it's spelled Giontee?

In theory, the game would be in best shape if players who get the ball are more likely than not to receive a free kick (for a push in the back, high tackle, etc) than those who are second and do the tackling. However, because of the incorrect disposal/holding the ball rule, I'm not sure that that logic stacks up. If it did, though, good teams would be more likely to be rewarded.

I don't remember 12" singles. Were they common? Also, played at 45 or 33 rpm?

Thought you were going to say, "Doesn’t feel like that long ago that a trip to Perth meant producing some false documents and travelling via Darwin."

I think the AFL does try to equalise the fixture, but not by each team playing every other team the same number of times. It's done more by ladder position. That is if you finish in the top third you play most, but not all, of your double up games against teams that also fished in the top third. Same for mid-third and bottom third. What the AFL can't do is design a fixture based on where they think teams will be during the year ahead. In short, there are always anomalies and always clubs with seemingly easier games. However, in all my years of watching football, I don't think there has ever been a Premier who didn't deserve to win the Grand Final, so I'm not sure it matters.

Wouldn't be surprised if the Australian Federal Police and Border Force knock on your door and ask about the marijuana they may think that you've been importing and distributing.

Or stricken by hubris and complacency. No sign of that yet from the team. Supporters, on the other hand...