Some of those barriers are being removed with rookie listed players now effectively being main listers (except in pay terms).
Do we actually know that this is the ruling thought?
Surely the AFL haven’t deliberately created a situation where they have removed impedements to F/Ss being picked up by the fathers clubs for players who are probably not rated main draft, and then left a hole in the middle of what is essentially one draft (with a 30 minute break between them) where opposition clubs can take the player with no possible option from the father’s club.
I mean we know that the AFL probably haven’t thought it through, but surely given the points situation is 0 points for any pick at that stage, a club in that situation should be able to match contract terms of a main list spot (ie 2 years, same $$) and take them as first pick of the rookie draft. Given that there are no impedements to rookies being selected in the 1s, then this essentially would mean no loss to the player, and solve that potential stupid loophole.
surely
Of course if a GCS is out of the draft at pick 15 there are points involved, but you’d think they’d go into debt next year on points, match the contract terms and lose a rookie spot
Why should they? If you don’t rate them high enough to be senior list and someone else does - tough.
1 Like
If it was something we were genuinely worried about, and we both really want the players but also really don’t want them on the main list then wait until the third round, once all the points affecting bids have come in, figure out who has the last pick in the draft, and swap it for pick 84. Get them to chuck in a future 9th rounder that nobody will ever use if you have to make it “commercial”.
If we’re intending to pass anyway to leave an extra rookie spot open then it’s no loss to us, and there’s no reason for them not to take the upgrade.
Nobody can bid after us, we don’t face the nightmare scenario of giving a project player a two year contract, and everybody’s happy if slightly confused about massively overthinking the whole thing.
3 Likes
Looks a very likely prospect with exciting attributes. Hopefully we secure Matty.
16 Likes
My observations just from watching that clip.
Matt has that uncanny ability to weave through traffic often by taking the ball and running in unexpected directions, top that off with his ability to read the play, find the ball and his burst of speed, make him an exciting prospect. He appear to be excellent with second and third efforts, he keeps running and features in many one-two passages of play. Darst I put the mocka on him, but he reminds me of Saad.
Criticisms:
A few of his kicks were a bit loopy but I figure kicking at speed may have caused that. Some of his kicks to leads were superb. My biggest criticism would be his handball, so many of his handballs in that clip didn’t reach or missed the intended target.
There’s a lot to work with there.
Good luck Matty. Are ya watching Jackets?
3 Likes
He seems to stay on his feet and has a hard edge as well
1 Like
Don’t agree with that at all.
No real difference between rookie and senior lists, except $ and contact length.
The is no difference between how someone is “rated” at draft pick 70 vs rookie 10, it just depends on list balance etc.
The new system has been changed such that there is flexibility in the way clubs do it. The whole point is that you don’t need to nominate borderline guys for the main draft specifically, even if they are only a 10% chance of being taken by another club. The AFL has tried to make it easier for the types to get to their fathers club wherever in the draft they would be taken. A kid whody grown up at a club, and who’d been nominated F/S under this system believes 95% that he’s going to that club. The club have shown that they “rate” them and are going to think of matching whatever bid is made for them (and given the discounts available will likely take them). I don’t believe the AFL would deliberately create a loophole where a club may not get a choice to match late in the draft.
I think I’d better look up the rules
1 Like
The accadacca remix was cause for state execution. Looks good, hard to tell what sort of pace he’s got, doesn’t look that quick but made the rest of them look treacle. Very small but good courage. Good VFL player my prediction, which is no knock.
Think he is around 181 cm
I don’t think it’s a loophole. If anything the ability to not take the player when able and instead taking nobody at all in the hope you can get them for less money on a shorter contract would be the loophole. Merely nominating a player doesn’t show anything about how you rate them; you’re not obliged at all to take a player you’ve nominated.
As regards the rules, you’d be after 6.2 (f) and 8.8.
(f) Passing on a Draft selection
A Club that passes on any Draft selection at a National Draft Selection Meeting
shall be excluded from exercising any further Draft selection(s) at that National
Draft Selection Meeting.
8.8
(a) Subject to Rule 8.8(b), where an eligible Father/Son Player has been nominated
in accordance with Rule 8.4(b) and is not selected at a National Draft or Pre-Season
Draft Selection Meeting, the Club with whom he is eligible as a
Father/Son Player may include him on its Rookie List prior to the Rookie Draft
Selection Meeting in accordance with Rule 10.4.
(b) Prior to the inclusion of a Player on its Rookie List under Rule 8.8(a), the Club
must provide to the AFL written evidence of the Club’s and Player’s agreement
to be listed as a Rookie. That agreement must specify that the Player can and
will only be listed on the Club’s Rookie List if he is not selected by any Club at
the National or Pre-Season Draft Selection Meeting.
1 Like
Why have you bolded the final text? Hell, why does it even exist? It doesn’t stop any club (including the father-son one) from selecting him in the earlier drafts.
Because it shows that what Frosty calls a loophole is actually deliberately built into the system. That you can’t match ND picks with a rookie selection.
1 Like
It’s not supposed to?
I’d guess the reason it actually exists is as left over language from the rule where you had to nominate a F/S pick as either a ND pick or a rookie pick, and it’s saying if you choose to run the gauntlet of not picking them on the main list, well then tough ■■■■ if someone else does.
It doesn’t say that specifically
Agree completely with the Merv comparison- same kicking style, ability to weave, and take opponents to ground with a following up elbow / arm.
Certainly worth a rookie punt as a back up small defender.
2 Likes
Pick 34. Excitement Machine
Pick 66. Matty Neagle
Pick 84. Mason Fletcher
13 Likes
That was impressive. Has a lot of nice tools.
Ball tracking, burst speed, lateral movement, shimmy n shake escapology.
Whats his H&W? Looks around 6’ maybe 80 kegs?
Name names
2 Likes
The swear filter may be blocking the real name of “Excitement Machine”.