Not for the first time, a regular and significant contributor through the season has missed out on a Premiership Medal courtesy of an untimely injury. Also not for the first time, a player with barely a handful of games is elevated into the Grand Final team and secures a Premiership Medal

Matthew Stokes — 18 games, 27 goals in home-and-away matches for 2009 — could legitimately have expected to have secured a place in the team for the Grand Final but for an injury a couple of weeks prior. As it stands, his compensation for his efforts is a mention by Captain Tom Harley in his comments on the dais.

Brad Ottens, by way of contrast, played 3 home-and-away games and 3 finals to secure his Medal.

Teammates know the players who have contributed through the year, as do clubs and their supporters. Nevertheless, I think it's past time that the AFL looked at setting a benchmark that a player who plays, say, 40% of home and away and finals games for the winning club, should receive a Premiership Medal irrespective of participating in the Grand Final.

It's pretty easy to mount a case, in the example above, that Stokes did more across the season to get Geelong into a Grand final-winning position than did Ottens.

The same might also apply for Runners Up medals.

I was discussing reactions to Matthew Lloyd's retirement announcement with a companion, especially a short letter published in The Age (I think) proposing jail time for Lloyd since he'd now escaped his four-match suspension over the Sewell collision in Round 22, and I realised that the Sewell incident and the ramifications of it must have been a considerable part of Lloyd's decision-making process.

It cannot have been an easy decision to retire with the knowledge that some part of the football world would consider he was running away from the penalty. Watching Lloyd on Channel 10’s Before the Game, he is pretty clearly comfortable with the decision and ready to deal with any suggestions that he aimed to take Sewell out.

For what it’s worth, I think Lloyd’s decision is the correct one, perhaps a year late. In contrast to Hird, who could still materially affect the course of a game during his last season, Lloyd has rarely had a decisive impact on a game since returning from his massive hamstring injury.

Nevertheless, Lloyd has had a wonderful career for the Bombers and fully deserves all of the accolades he is receiving.

Let’s leave aside for a moment whether there’s a need for pre-game “entertainment” at the AFL Grand Final. For 2009, inclement weather may have marked a partial return to sanity.

Mark Seymour, Jimmy Barnes and John Farnham performed from a stage situated above an access driveway onto the ground. Terrific idea on two counts: they were close enough to some of the crowd to actually feed off some crowd energy; and there was no need to construct a large and intricate temporary stage in the middle of the ground (which would then need to be dismatled and wheeled off the ground).

A small dais was in place for the performance of James Morrison and six accompanying trumpeters to play. . . the club songs? Why?

Of course, there was also the obligatory crowd of youthful people performing in unison. One suspects the AFL “entertainment” gurus are students of Kim Jong Il and feel a similar need to display massed uniform conformity. In the extremely windy conditions, it would not have been surprising to see performers being lifted off into the stratosphere by the piece of picture (of the Premiership Cup) they were holding aloft.

But it was all topped off by the contextually-isolated arrival of the real Premiership Cup via some sort of flying fox arrangement strung between two light towers. What the #*^@ did this represent?

Let’s return to why this “entertainment” is needed. The NFL has a tradition, on a far smaller and more intimate arena, of providing an “entertainment” extravaganza at half time of the Superbowl. Given the stop-start nature of NFL football, perhaps it’s not surprising that the crowd need something “exciting” to gee them up at half time. The NFL also cater to the cultural needs of their audience — see examples in sport such as cheer leaders at gridiron games and organists leading crowd chants during the many breaks in baseball.

I fail to see how the AFL’s hit and miss attempts at “entertainment” cater to the needs, cultural or otherwise, of a Grand Final crowd.

If the spectacle of Geoffrey Edelsten arriving on the blue carpet for the Brownlow function wasn't strange enough on its own, the 'bordello chic' paraded by his fiance quite takes one's breath away.

Isn't it some time now since Edelsten was involved as proprietor of a team? Haven't there been significant questions raised about his fitness for various pursuits in the meantime? Still, were it not for an amply displayed bosom, we'd probably never even know he was there.

And while we're (vaguely) on the topic of fashion, since when did black tie mean wearing a quite normal, albeit black, necktie? Call me old-fashioned, but black tie on an invitation surely means a tuxedo with a bow tie?

And would it hurt for one or two of the chaps to actually button their collar and have their (incorrect) tie appropriately fastened, with the knot at the junction of the collar rather than at some distant place halfway to their chest? They really do look quite scruffy and their girls could quite justifiably stack on a turn over it.

Further media speculation today, apparently fuelled by conversations at a weekend buck's party, would suggest that Essendon Captain Matthew Lloyd will hang up the boots. Lloyd's realistic options are pretty limited.

Since returning from tearing the hamstring off the bone, Lloyd's impact on the game has been minimal. Had he not been the club Captain, and had he not been the club's all-time leading goal kicker, it's not hard to imagine that he would have been sidelined a year or two ago. He hasn't displayed the explosive pace required to play at full forward, and over his career has relied more than most full forwards on his leading. Body-on-body contested marking has never been a particular feature of his game, although he is clearly quite strong.

Were Lloyd interested in entertaining offers from other clubs, and it seems he would take a good deal of convincing, it's hard to see which club might benefit and even harder to imagine they'd risk a position on an already tight list for someone of Lloyd's age and medical history. For the Bombers, the future is more important than some sort of grand round farewell for a fading favourite son.

It seems like there will be a whiff of sour grapes about this scenario, no matter what happens, and that is sad. Nevertheless, the team is more important than one player, especially one well past his prime. If Lloyd were to announce his retirement before the Crichton Medal presentation, there would be a standing ovation second only to James Hird's waiting for him.

Update: Lloyd's column in this weekend's Sunday Age effectively puts to bed the notion that Lloyd is consumed by himself. His is clearly an issue of desire and commitment. There can be no doubt that elite AFL in the 21st century requires even more mental application than ever before in the game's history. Lloyd is right to take the time to make sure he has the mental and physical wherewithall to participate in another season. Limited list numbers, salary cap and the club's future don't allow the luxury of carrying a favoured son for sentimental reasons.

Perhaps Judd has been ill-advised by his Carlton minders. Perhaps his limited sleep in the hours after the Blues exited the season was some sort of excuse for his now-infamous “martial arts” allusion. Perhaps the litany of excuses, pseudo-explanations, self-justifications and pleadings might have been better left unuttered. Perhaps Judd and Carlton would have been better served following the Matthews pattern and simply sucking it up when it came their turn to cop it back.

The Hawthorn hard men of the early eighties could, arguably, be labeled as thugs, but they took what was coming without a whimper when it was their turn.

Judd has not only tarnished his brand with an ill-judged action, but compounded it by whinging when called to account.

Whatever you think of Essendon Captain, Matthew Lloyd, the fevered speculation in the media over his playing future ignores one simple fact: there’s no ‘I’ in ‘team’.

As club Captain and all-time club leading goal kicker, Lloyd is, I think, entitled to some extra consideration, such as immunity from a stint in the VFL and a dignified exit from on-field activity, but anything further has to be seen in the context of the team’s future.

Clarion calls for Lloyd to be played exclusively at full forward comprehensively ignore the future. The opportunity for the likes of Jay Neagle, Scott Gumbleton and Michael Hurley (among others) to benefit from his advice and presence on-field is simply not available if Lloyd plays his customary role.

If Lloyd were demanding guarantees other than immunity from the VFL, he would be placing himself above the team. I’d be very surprised if that were the case.

Update: Not surprisingly to me, the handwringing over the possibility of Lloyd moving to another club turned out to be yet more media wishful thinking masquerading as journalism. We really are ill served by those who claim to keep us informed. If there’s no story, they'll simple make one up to fit their preferred scenario.

Update #2: Lloyd's column in this weekend's Sunday Age effectively puts to bed the notion that Lloyd is consumed by himself. His is clearly an issue of desire and commitment. There can be no doubt that elite AFL in the 21st century requires even more mental application than ever before in the game's history. Lloyd is right to take the time to make sure he has the mental and physical wherewithall to participate in another season. Limited list numbers, salary cap and the club's future don't allow the luxury of carrying a favoured son for sentimental reasons.

It’s easy, and strangly comforting, to pronounce the demise of brand Judd following the one-time golden boy’s exploration of Michael Rischitelli’s face last weekend. History, though, would suggest the brand will survive.

In 1985, Leigh Matthews struck Geelong’s Neville Bruns in an off-the-ball incident. Matthews was deregistered for four weeks, charged by Victoria Police and fined $1100. At pretty much any level, Matthews’ transgression surpasses Judd’s by a considerable distance.

Matthews went on to a successful and decorated career as a coach, winning four Premierships in that role, and, between coaching stints and since retirement, respected media columnist and colour commentator.

While Judd will forever be associated with the Rischitelli incident, his brand has not been trashed.

Notwithstanding Matthews rehabilitation, Judd would do well to nevertheless guard himself well for the remainder of his career. He need only look to the one-time King of Arden Street to see what can happen when the well of public sympathy dries up, albeit in that case for off-field indiscretions.

There's been a lot of press this week about 'finals pressure', especially in connection with the Bombers and Blues, whos’ young players have not participated in a finals campaign.

I was thinking about this, again especially in regard to the Bombers and Blues, both of whom regularly play in front of high-volume crowds at the MGC.

Forty years ago, when most teams in the then-VFL played only occasionally at the MCG — when they played Melbourne, or, post 1965, Richmond — crowds at traditional suburban venues were probably no more than 35,000 at most. In those days, there were four finals games over four weeks (first semi, second semi, preliminary, Grand Final). On each of the Saturdays in September, the MCG would host a finals game for each of under-18s, reserves and seniors. With three games being played, not to mention a rare chance to see games at the ’G, crowds of 90,000-plus weren't at all unusual, even for the 'minor' finals.

So, a group of players unused to playing at the MCG, unused to playing before 90,000 people and playing for a place in history, might easily feel additional pressure.

For a young group of players who already play regularly in front of big crowds, I wonder whether there is any extra pressure in a finals game, other than, perhaps, the Preliminary and Grand Finals.