La Dee-vina Comedia

I assume from Dustin Martin's omission that this list is of the best 50 performers in 2021 rather than 50 best players in the competition now. That's fine...but I still think Martin should have made the top 50. And I obviously missed too many Sydney games. Was Buddy really that good this year? I appreciate he made the All-Australian squad, but I didn't think he was a particularly impactful player.

He learned it first hand when he was on the receiving end pushed out of the captaincy in favour of Luke Hodge.

While I agree, he may have been saved precisely because the lack of lower level football means that clubs have less knowledge on potential replacements for fringe players. He may have had his contract renewed because any alternative is a greater risk and even less developed than ususal.

Is the trade period always this boring? Or is it just because this year we have had something far more enjoyable still in the front of our minds? This is a serious question. In previous years, because we've had little else to be enthusiastic about, trading and drafting became the highlights for us. But were other years as slow and boring as this one?

The neutrals I know (generally Collingwood, Richmond and St Kilda supporters) all loved the game. Partly it was because they liked seeing Melbourne finally break through and partly because the game was in the balance with a minute to go before three quarter time followed by the onslaught which they also loved.

Or might help lower the average age at Geelong. I actually don't see him being chosen by Geeong but assuming he's properly fit, I would have thought he could be good for Gold Coast to give the younger talent some protection.

Not sure about that. If you're relying on the year to remind you, how would you know if it was 20 goals or 21 in 2021? If we'd kicked 20 goals and 21 behinds, then I would agree.

same

I think there's been a misunderstanding. I agree it's Stevic's job to give evidence. What I was trying to say was that stating that Stevic's evidence was a bit weak is similar to blaming victim's of crimes for not speaking up about crimes perpetrated against them. I sense we're all in agreement here - that Stevic's evidence was not as "tough" as one might have expected.

Victim blaming. We don't like it in the court system and we shouldn't accept it in this instance either.

If Ratten doesn't really rate Dunstan, perhaps he got all his votes from the opposition coaches. So maybe he's twice as good as the AFLCA votes would suggest.🙂

Is this even possible? Isn't Chandler a rookie? And haven't I read somewhere that rookies can't be traded (ie, are the equivalent of free agents)?

Irresepective of what happens today, I can't believe there is still discussion about whether Toby Greene should be captain of GWS. One of the major themes of this year's Premiership has been selflessness. There is nothing more selfish than putting yourself regularly in the position of being suspended. I would be horrified if my team chose an habitual offender to be captain.

"An outnumber at stoppages" - this sounds more like a Western movie title than an AFL game strategy.

Does Dunstan coming in mean we need to shed another player to enable us to meet whatever drafting rules are in place?

I agree he seemed honest. He was also impressive. For a person who I had never heard of until the last 48 hours, I came away from that interview convinced that he's on a mission to be in a senior management role one day, probably in football, but certainly somewhere in professional sport. Whether it's as a CEO or as a senior AFL Executive I'm not sure. But I think his future is in a head office in a senior role on the admin, rather than the coaching, side. I should have been more clear in my earlier post. He didn't deliberately avoid the issue of salary as the question wasn't asked. I'm just amused when people wonder why others change jobs that they seem not to consider that more money might have played a part. In his case, I assume there's more money, but there is also clearly the opportunity for professional growth. I hope he does well.

Dan McPherson was interviewed by Sam McClure and Gerard Healy last night on 3AW. When asked why he was shifting from Melbourne to NM he gave what I suspect was a half-true answer. The new job will broaden his experience. He explained that he's done a number of different jobs in footy admin since finishing as a player with Sydney, usually only staying 2-3 years in each role. He's got a business and/or commerce degree and has been mainly doing logistics and admin work. His new job gives him more exposure on the football side (ie, overseeing things like fitness and conditioning, a role in list management, etc). It all makes perfect sense for someone who likely wants to be a club CEO or Head of football operations one day. Why do I suspect it was a half-true answer? I expect he's also getting more money. He didn't have to say so, but it's not unreasonable to assume that also motivated him to change.

I didn't choose this goal (I selected ANB's), but depending on what you mean by "technically", this was still a superb team goal. The way and the speed with which the ball was released from the centre and the centimetre perfect (sorry, Dennis) handpass from Jackson were as "technically perfect" as you'd like to see. When watching that goal I'm finding my admiration is more for the handpass from Jackson than the kick itself. The way the ball landed so perfectly in Oliver's grasp as he's running at top pace without having to change his speed or his direction is quite extraordinary to watch. Over and over again.

Can I add... Eddie McGuire - name dropper extraordinaire

In fact, "AFL" now means three different things: The name of the game (although I think the game should be called Australian Football or, preferably, Australian Rules Football) The name of the organisation which is in charge of the code from professional through to grassroots amateur competitions The name of the men's competition. The reason why I say that changing the name to AFLM is inevitable is because of things like professional job titles. If a person has responsiblity for say, "AFL Development" at a club, does that mean development of the men's only or the men's and women's competition? Eventually, clarity is going to be needed. It's not a problem now, but I predict it will be. And for every person that argues "the AFL should stay the AFL", why? The competition was the VFL from 1897 to 1990 (or thereabouts). It's only been the "AFL" for 30 odd years. A lot of people complained when that change was made to accommodate the fact that the competition had gone national. I see no reason why the name can't change again to reflect the gender diversity that we now see.

If I may respond to my learned friend. I beseech the panel to consider thus: Ms Wilson's approach to AFL football and its administration holds the powers that be to account. In so doing, she improves the standard of administration and therefore the quality of the game that is presented to the masses for their enjoyment. If Ms Wilson did not pursue the matters that she takes on, problems would not be publicly identified and those in control would just sweep issues of concern under the carpet to the inevitable detriment of our great game. I would like to plead that rather than add an additional peanut, the second that has been assigned to her be removed.

Pardon my ignorance, but the story and job title are ambiguous. It says he was "General Manager Football Operations, AFLW & VFL". Does that mean he did the football operations job for just the Women's and VFL teams? Or did he do the football operations for the men's team plus had some sort of overall management responsibility for the women's and VFL teams? Or something else? [Sidenote: Another reason why AFLM will eventually and inevitably become the norm to describe the men's competition.]

ANB's. Because after that goal I knew we had won the game and I could enjoy the rest of the game.

Bold statement, given the number of Smiths that have played the game.

In essence I agree with your point, but sometimes good players are traded out for reasons such as homesickness, age profile, salary cap management and player behaviour (ie, off field issues).