AFL - Good Ideas, Terrible Ideas, Too Many Ideas, No Idea


Do I have to photoshop your head on that photo or can we just assume that’s what I’ve done?


He needs a tie and a denim jacket to complete the ensemble.


No, I’m afraid I must insist




I have never seen a 50 metre penalty incurred deliberately by a player. Back in the days when it was only 15 metres that happened, but there is no situation where a 50 metre penalty is worth sacrificing.


Agree. It’s one thing to use a leg to protect yourself while you take a mark. It’s another thing to lift the foot and shove the stops of your boot in an opponent’s gut.


Agree. Mckernan could be that big bodied mid we’ve been looking for… :slight_smile:


I’m sure if we could just go and take contested marks then we’d be a much better footy team.

Nearly all discussions around this rule change seem to have forgotten there’s usually an opposition ruckman trying to do the same thing at the same time.


‘Trying’ is the operative word. Not all ruckmen ‘can’. More mobile rucks like McKernan, Grundy, etc. might be able to pull off a grab/fend-off/kick or handball well enough for it to be a worthwhile tactic, now and again.


If you deliberately try for the two-handed grab, you’re a 99% chance to lose the contest. It has to just be an opportune thing (opponent loses their feet, throw-in falls short, bad bounce, etc.) that you just capitalise on and have a first look option (eg: towards centre, towards boundary, towards D50) ready for that.


Not trying to be difficult - just think it’s an interesting discussion.

Mids take the ball all the time in two hands, get tackled, but have the core/quad strength to stand up and get the handball away… Why not a particularly strong ruckmen, who already has his arms and ball above his shoulders?


I know. I’m just discussing too :slight_smile:

If you instruct a ruckman to try and take the ball out of the ruck, you’re essentially just creating a contested mark situation where two players are competing for position with one trying to catch it and one trying to spoil. How many contested marking situations result in a mark being taken? Not many. If you tried to build that into a stoppage strategy, you’re setting yourself up for too many variables to work against you (aforementioned bad throws/bounces, etc.)


Alessio was very good at kicking goals by taking it out of the ruck in the forward line. There’s a time and a place for it though


for the traders so amongst you

Trading first-round picks: Misunderstood rule explained

Marc McGowan

The Bombers gave up their 2018 and 2019 first-round selections to the Giants for Dylan Shiel

ESSENDON will be able to shop around its first-round draft pick for the third straight year when the 2019 NAB AFL Trade Period begins.

There has been some confusion in the reporting of the rules around trading first-round picks, including an interpretation that teams could always trade their first selection from the current year and were only restricted in trading future ones.

But can confirm this is not the case.

The Bombers have transformed themselves into a premiership threat in the past year with a series of trade prizes, including Devon Smith, Jake Stringer, Adam Saad and, most recently, Dylan Shiel.

They gave up their 2017 first-round selection to Greater Western Sydney as part of the Smith deal, then handed over this year’s and next to the Giants for Shiel.

Essendon last had a pick in the first round in 2016, when it made Andy McGrath the No.1 overall choice, and the Bombers also claimed Darcy Parish (selection five) and Aaron Francis (six) that way in 2015.

That means the Bombers satisfy the AFL’s new rule, which comes into play next year, regarding the use of at least two first-round picks in the previous four-year period.

The only exception to that is where a club has applied for and received special permission, with the AFL weighing up the age of the players brought in and other draft selections used in that time.

The rule, outlined in the Determination for the trading of future draft selections document, is designed to protect teams from trading themselves into long-term trouble.

The AFL alerted the 18 clubs about the incoming requirement in 2015, the year future draft pick trading was introduced.

As of now, only Geelong and Collingwood would have to use their first-round selection in 2019, although the Pies will likely match a first-round bid this year for Isaac Quaynor and possibly Will Kelly.

Quaynor is a Collingwood Next Generation Academy member, while Kelly – son of 1990 premiership player and leading player agent Craig Kelly – is a father-son prospect.

The Magpies will meet the four-year quota if they match a first-round bid for either of those players and would then be able to do as they please with their first-round pick next year.

Essendon is in a similar scenario to Hawthorn and Melbourne under the new trade conditions.

All three clubs drafted two players in the first round in 2015, but the Hawks and Demons haven’t used one since and neither has one this year.

They can do as they wish with their first-round pick in the 2019 NAB AFL Trade Period, including offloading a future one, because they have used at least two in the preceding four-year period.

However, like the Bombers, unless they trade in extra first-round selections this year or next, they will have to start using those picks in 2020 until they satisfy the four-year rolling requirement.

That trio of teams will have used just one first-round pick or fewer through the 2019 draft – assuming they don’t acquire any extras – once their two from 2015 drop off.

They will be the last three clubs in that situation, barring AFL permission, now that the four-year rule is in place, which demands at least two first-round picks are used in that period.

An end-of-first-round compensation selection does not count in a club’s rolling four-year tally.

** Picks are subject to change until draft night*

*** Collingwood, North Melbourne and Sydney are expected to match first-round bids for Isaac Quaynor (and possibly Will Kelly), Tarryn Thomas and Nick Blakey, respectively*

^ The Swans ended up with Brisbane’s end-of-first-round priority pick in 2016, and Gold Coast ended up with Geelong’s end-of-first-round free agency compensation pick in 2017. Neither counts as a first-round pick for these purposes.


Great news! This means the question can be asked and discussed another 10,000 times in next year’s draft period.


Frankly that still didn’t make sense to me. Does that mean in 2019 we could trade our 2020 selection because we’d taken more than 2 between 2015 and 2018? Then in 2020 we couldn’t trade 2021 because we’d only used 1 between 2016 and 2019. Likewise in 2021.


The full idiocy of the draft being split hadn’t hit me until I actually looked at the times.
First round is on the Thursday night. Which, this year, with all the trading, only includes 11 or 12 clubs, with GC/GWS/Port making up 10 of those picks.

Fans of Ess/Rich/Coll/Hawthorn - ie basically everyone, will have to tune in on the friday - at 10AM!! - for the rest. Even C*nton fans will be over and out after about 2 minutes.

This change has been made to boost ratings, apparently.


things that aren’t happening for $100.


It’s a six hour extravaganza (not counting the rookie draft and post-draft “no, really, they’re still kinda delisted free agents” shenanigans).

Having the lower picks during work hours is a productivity bonanza for the country.


I for one look forward to watching Thursday night just to see them trying to fill the runtime whilst only talking about 10 players going to clubs that no one cares about. It would make an absolutely wonderful drinking game.