La Dee-vina Comedia

I haven't been to many of the old suburban grounds. My first one was Glenferrie Oval and I've also been to Albert Park, Moorabbin and Princes Park. And I think that's it for Victoria. I don't miss any of them. However, I have also been to the SCG. It was in the early 2000s. It's a fabulous viewing experience except for the pillars in the Members Stand. I believe the SCG's two old grandstands are now heritage protected so can't be removed, even if the SCG custodians wished to do so.

Let me be upfront. I don't like tattoos. Never have. Never will. But if I did, I'd be concerned about the apparently unregulated pigments in Australia. This story refers to changes being made in Europe to ban some pigments considered to be carcinogens. It also points out that about one quarter of the European population aged between 18-35 has some ink. Note the story refers to the possibility pigments are leading to "reproductive difficulties". I hope all our tattooed players stay safe and healthy, but just imagine missing out on a Luke Jackson son because the tattoo pigment affected his ability to reproduce. PS: I wonder how many people with tattoos are anti-vax because of concerns about what impact the vaccine may have in the longer term?

Perhaps it's because you've apparently achieved everything else on your bucket list so it pales in comparison with some of the others.

I fully expect someone to come on here and criticise him for going one-handed. (And I have someone specific in mind who I choose not to name.)

I really, really hope that the groups were not strung out because the slower runners have sped up, not the other way around.

I can understand him shaking his head as he can't inherit your happiness. The million dollars, on the other hand... As to the original question, I've just noticed that 186 just happens to be twice 93. A nice symmetry given the 93 points was in one half of football.

The 6-6-6 rule should make it harder to defend. Presumably, if the 6-6-6 rules has done what was intended, the "Chris Sullivan line" should be a higher number now than 3 years ago.

Has it been used every year since 2008? Can't say I noticed.

"appears to have been taken at an airport"...that Perth Airport written on the TV above Woewodin's head is a bit of a giveaway. Otherwise I would have thought a Kalgoorlie shopping mall, maybe?

As mentioned above, all the above have not won a Premiership. The point I wanted to make is that while many people seem to claim that a player can't be considered a champion if they haven't won a Premiership (and Demonland has been littered with occasional such comments over the years), these players have all had extraordinary careers and would all be considered champions of their era. Conversely, there are Premiership players who just happened to be lucky enough to be in a winning Grand Final team, even though their careers were not otherwise particularly notable. Mitch Morton and Stephen Armstrong come to mind. And good luck to them. Being a VFL/AFL footballer is a terrific achievement, but that won't automatically make them champions of the game. (I'm sure someone could put such a team together.)

No idea. If they did, it's not the answer I'm looking for.

What is the common thread that ties all these champion players together? (There's a reason for putting this team together which we can discuss after someone provides the answer. Which shouldn't take long.) FB: Nathan Burke Paul Roos Brad Hardie HB: Robert Murphy David Neitz Kevin Murray C: Robert Flower Robert Harvey Lenny Hayes HF: Nathan Buckley Matthew Pavlich Matthew Richardson FF: Gary Ablett Sr Tony Lockett Nick Reiwoldt Foll: Len Thomson Nathan Fyfe Bob Skilton Inter: Jim Stynes Phil Carman Patrick Dangerfield Brad Johnson Sub: Garry Lyon

The knee bone's connected to the... something. The something's connected to the red thing. The red thing's connected to my wristwatch!... Uh oh.

It's the year that brought us more Covid, climate change problems, Trump and the protests in Washington, Putin's continuing belligerence, Xi's continuing belligerence, working and learning from home, Craig Kelly and Clive Palmer, protests and a Melbourne Premiership. So, all in all, a pretty good year*. Happy New Year to all. Let 2022 be a repeat of the Year of the Demons *Note: I appreciate that this has been a hard year for many. Please appreciate the tongue in cheek nature of this post.

Stress fracture in the hip? I've never heard of this condition before, for anyone. It sounds like it might be very painful, given the amount of force that goes through the hips just for everyday activities, let alone football.

I don't know if it's just the military grade haircut, but to my eyes he looks to have significantly bulked up, particularly in the upper body. Am I imagining that?

I imagine England cricket will now try and get Peter Jackson to be CEO and Paul Roos to become coach.

I struggle with this. I'm never sure whether (1) I want to crush Collingwood from the opening bounce, or, (2) just remain a goal or so ahead of them for the whole game just to keep their hopes alive only to have them crushed at the end, or, (3) be something like 7 goals down at three-quarter time only to overpower them at the end.

Brought to you by the same artists who draw Adam and Eve with navels.

For anyone out there still unvaccinated, here's a graph which might give you cause to reconsider. It's from Britain but I imagine it's the same situation everywhere.

Did I hear someone (maybe Jimmy Bartel, perhaps) say that our scoring rate in the last quarter and a half of the GF was greater than Geelong's in the 186 match? I'm not gloating, but it gives me some idea of how bad we were then and how far we have come.

Further to Diamond Jim's comment above, I believe Pfizer* is the recommended 3rd dose if you've previously had AZ. *And possibly Moderna, too.

Has it happened anywhere? Neither of the junior Abletts had their father's #5, Jobe Watson was different from his father, as was Dustin Fletcher. If it has happened, I can't think of any. And that may be for good reason as it increases pressure on the son. So, I'd rather sons not take their father's number. The only consideration I see that might possibly be relevant with allocation of numbers (apart from not allocating a son his father's number) is who's locker they might be near. For example, it might be a good idea to give the #2 to someone who might benefit from being near May and/or Salem in the changing room.

Isn't this rule already in place?

It's reported in today's Age newspaper (possibly paywalled) that there will be a stricter interpretation of head high contact in season 2022. Most significantly, "the potential to cause injury in certain circumstances must be factored into the determination of the impact, rather than “strong consideration” being given to it...The result of this change will be that, where there is careless conduct that is high contact and has the potential to cause injury, a medium impact classification will usually apply, and a one-match suspension will be the minimum sanction applied.” At last it appears that the risk of the incident causing injury will become relevant rather than just the outcome. In other words, if you bump a player and there is a head knock, expect a penalty whether or not the player bumped was injured.