La Dee-vina Comedia

No need. Darwinian theory should come to the fore.

Is Pickett's surname actually Kropinyeri-Pickett as described in Luci's List? And if so, would that mean he has the longest surname of all players who have won a Premiership in VFL/AFL history?

The maths might be right, but I don't think the English is. Does the expression "more than 236 times lower than..." actually make any sense? Do they mean, perhaps, the the lower number is 1/236th of the higher number?

I like the Singapore model. In that country, if you've chosen to remain unvaccinated, you have to pay for all your health care costs associated with catching Covid. However, I can't see that happening here. Instead, I would support an additional Medicare levy being imposed on those who remain unvaccinated by choice. That levy would help defray - but probably not fully cover - the health cover costs for the unvaccinated who we know will be more likely to contract Covid and if they do, be more likely to require hospital treatment. I realise that the above is a stick, not a carrot. I'm not sure we need any further rewards to encourage the late adopters. I think the model whereby exclusion from things such as entertainment, non-essential retail and events should be sufficient.

i hope you decide to add a gold "(1)" after relevant players' names to indicate how many premierships they've won.

Keep in mind the context. BT was describing the difference between Petracca's two goals quite rightly pointing out that the first was like something Dusty would do and the second was using a style that no-one had seen until Daicos came along. And for what it's worth, on their complete body of work I think Daicos and Dusty still have Petracca covered. Petracca does have time to overtake them, though, but to do so he's going to have to maintain his 2020 and 2021 form for the rest of his career.

As a matter of interest, do you think requiring people to be double vaccinated to be able to particiapte in everyday events such as going to the football is a positive incentive or a threat? I see it as the former.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. One way is that any team that loses in the Grand Final is clearly closer than 16 other teams in the competition. The other way is that with about 5-10 minutes left in the third quarter, they were within a kick of the lead. It might have ended up being a 74 point loss, but with about 40 minutes to go, it was anybody's game.

And back to the real purpose of this thread. As of tomorrow, no caps on any venues, so we should have a bumper crowd for our first home game.

I know your comment might be tongue-in-cheek, but look at Melbourne circa 2013 and now. Or even 2019 and now. As I've posted before, I think any team that has everything go its way (recruiting, trading, development, list management, injuries, off-field stability) is no more than 4 years away from a Premiership. The question for GC is whether they can get all those matters working together. So far, they haven't. but then, neither has St Kilda for most of its existence or Carlton for the last 20 years or so. There's no reason GC can't get its act together quicker than any other team.

Thanks for including that link. And for the record I am not Elise Thomas although obviously we share similar opinions.

Sorry to argue with you Durango, but Carlton defeated Collingwood (20.17.137 to 7.7.49) on 31 December 1999 in the so-called Who Cares Match Millenium Match. As to Dermott's choice for 2022 Premier, it's consistent with his style of standard contrarian analysis by not taking the soft option of choosing the 2021 Premier to win in 2022 as most media pundits will likely do.

Of course it's obvious that there's something missing, but those who are susceptible to extremism and conspiracy theories are clearly very receptive to misinformation, even if it's just simple language taken out of context. As you say, these people show utter stupidity and craziness. Having said that, I'm actually more concerned about the nutter not at that rally who sees the photo and decides to act upon it.

It's actually a very good photo contrasting the self-styled wizard's emerald attire with the austere bluestone of Victoria's Parliament House. The most troubling aspect is the yellow and red sign in the bottom left hand corner. I suspect there's a fourth word that's meant to follow "Dan" such as "ban", "law" or "mandate", but those three words in isolation are most concerning.

Yes, we have strayed a bit. The important point from a football perspective is that the players, officials and employees of venues have a safe workspace and that spectators can attend games in a way that keeps them as safe as possible. Let's be clear, though. There isn't really a vaccine mandate. A person can choose not to be vaccinated. What is being mandated are limitations on what unvaccinated people can do. Not being able to pursue a professional sporting career is one as is attending venues such as the MCG. It's really not that much different from mandates that allow employers or venues to prevent people who are intoxicated from participating.

Isn't that what a waist size measurement is for?

I hate to disagree with you Luci, but I don't think Binman's post is hyperbolic at all. It's certainly conjectural but given events in Washington on 6 January and the politically motivated murders of two British MPs in the last few years, what was once unthinkable now has to be taken very seriously.

If you are still one of the unvaxxed, keep in mind there are related downstream effects which might impact on your or your loved ones, like this story in the Sydney Morning Herald today. The longer Covid hangs around the greater the risk that you won't have a nurse to assist you in your time of need whether it's Covid-related or not. Imagine one of your loved ones turning up to hospital with an appendix that needs to be removed but the surgery is delayed because there are not enough nurses around.

What is "physical output" a measure of?

It's not necessarily a bad thing for a club to have a small amount of churn amongst its off-field employees. As long as those who replace those who leave have something valuable to offer. It can freshen up the place by bring new ideas and new personalities into the group.

I agree with all of this. I'm also suspicious that the loud voices who choose to protest against, well, almost anything, might be Lenin's "useful idiots" who are unwittingly allowing themselves to be used by international actors of bad faith in order to disrupt successful democracies.

Or (1) just get rid of the rookie list altogether, or (2) make it a true "rookie list" and only allow players onto it who have not previously been drafted.

He's joining the navy? Puts a new spin on being a defender!

I know it looks like a mistake made by the GC...but is it? Freeing up salary cap space by losing a 29/30 year old who's not going to be there when GC is challenging for a flag doesn't seem like much of a "mistake" to me. On the other hand, player relationship management is also important and if Greenwood is leaving because of the way he was treated, that doesn't send a positive message to the rest of the list.

Did I miss something? What's your source? Then I can decide whether I choose to believe what you've claimed or not. Just the same as you're doing with information published in The Age.