The AFL has not made one decision, made one announcement on the FS since last draft.
Only click bait media is drumming up panic.
Everyone on here is jumping at shadows, so far over zero changes.
2 Likes
Deleted
I think that’s totally fair, and as I’ve said repeatedly, figuring out if the NGAs are actually working would be pretty easy to do by going through historical drafts, contacting ex players, etc. If it’s not working, scrap it. If it is working but too broad, tighten it up. Do it on a timeline that clubs can plan around. Make it clear that if they sign a 13 year old, that they know what the access rules will be when they’re 18.
But the complaints from st kilda were about the northern academies, and freo were complaining about father-son. Which, again, fine. Complain away. Everyone can have their opinions, and ideally they should be backing them up with facts.
When the pies traded out their future first round pick because they knew Daicos was going to be there next year, they had every right in the world to assume that was going to be the rule the next year. When north cut funding to their NGAs in the wake of the “no top 40 matching” rules, they should have been able to do so without thinking “oh ■■■■, what if the rules change in a couple of years and we don’t get Ryley Sanders”.
If Essendon, or any other team, makes decisions about the 2027 draft this year, which we can do, we should be able to do so knowing what impact Tasmania will be having on that draft, and what the rules about bid matching will be. I’d personally argue that should include what teams will be able to do with picks in 2027, which means we should know what you’ll be able to do with picks that might not get used until 2029. That’s five years. It’s an incredibly low bar to say “I would like to know what the rules will be for the draft picks I’m making decisions with right now”. Academies and father/son and NGAs may be compromising the draft, but constantly changing the rules also compromises the draft because it means nobody know what the ■■■■ they’re dealing with.
5 Likes
If they seriously lock the first round from father sons, just scrap it.
how embarrassing would that be to only take the ■■■■ father son prospects. Christ this league just defies belief.
7 Likes
Click bait media is the mouth piece of the AFL and are conditioning us.
1 Like
I’m still not sure why we shouldn’t worry. Like I said, you can’t just plan for it if the AFL says you don’t get access. Melbourne didn’t get Mac Andrew, Saints didn’t get Cam McKenzie, North didn’t get Ryley Sanders, we got Lual off the Dogs, and none of them have the potential of Bewick. We may need to completely destroy our draft hand for a year if it means we can’t match a bid, which would be devastating right before Tasmania come in.
Normally I’d agree. Cal Twomey reported it and then doubled down on the Lunchtime Catch up podcast. I think there is a story here but I agree it would be good if the AFL would just come out and say something rather than have the media try and put 2 and 2 together.
1 Like
It’s not that big a deal. I’d the player wants to move after being drafted they request a trade and then the clubs negotiate a deal market price or they trade beforehand again at a market price. Father son should be abandoned completely we don’t need it all we have e to do is trade which allows the club finishing last to get adequate compenaation
They won’t do that as it makes it harder for the synthetic clubs which is what the AwFL cares most about.
That shows more spine than EFC ever displays against AwFL stitch-ups.
You sweet summer child, whatever makes you think the AwFL wants the system to be fair as possible?
Their whole raison d’etre is to make things as totally unfair as they can get away with.
2 Likes
I still get up in the am and think there are good people in the world.
Is that our forward line?
3 Likes