List Mgmt. 2020 Trade Thread - Part IV

[MCG-Unit]

Not any more. That's an SA thing now.

Oh dear - thanks, edited now

 

[Mstr Strokesman]

The only club footy I've ever played was under 10s. I took one mark for the entire season, somehow I happened to be where the ball landed and didn't drop it. Went back and kicked the absolute bejeezus out of the ball (I probably had 5 disposals total for the season) and it went straight up in the air, and straight back down to me. I looked at the umpire thinking wtf happens now, I don't think he knew either and just said have another go. I don't remember what happened with that one but I would say it would have been a stoppage or turnover.

Ok I will have a go at this game .
Are you Jayson Daniels or Clint Jones

 

[Groater]

We had 45 players this season (40 Senior Listed, 5 Rookie Listed [Wilkie, Bell, Langlands, Mayo, Alabakis]), with Alabakis being a Cat B rookie.

Based on comings and goings over trade period:

• Lost 6 Seniors (Hind, Phillips, Parker, Brown, Abbott, Austin)
• Lost 3 Cat A Rookies (Bells, Langlands, Mayo)

Gives us 34 Senior Listed and 2 Rookie Listed

• Gained 3 Seniors (Crouch, Higgins, McKernan)

Gives us 37 Senior Listed and 2 Rookie Listed as it currently stands.

Given this, I predict:

• Wilkie remaining on the Rookie List for one more year

and, either:

1. Sign Frawley as a DFA, and then cut one further Senior Listed player for each pick we want to use (minimum one)
2. Draft Frawley as a rookie, take one pick at the Draft (Pick 21), and then cut one further Senior Listed player for each additional pick we want to use.
3. Don't draft Frawley at all, take one pick at the Draft (Pick 21), and then cut one further Senior Listed player for each additional pick we want to use.

Given all of this, who is the (at least one) unlucky player that we are going to delist? Savage? Lonie?

We had 39 listed senior players - no.32 wasn't assigned to anyone this year.

Still a very good chance that Lonie and Savage leave as DFA.

I hope we take 2 players in the draft and upgrade Wilkie. 3 new rookies would be great too.

 

[NextYearPlease]

I think limiting the interchange is pointless and won't do anything to produce a better product. Tired players won't make the product better and lead to more scoring. All it will do is decrease the skill level within the game and lead to clubs picking athletes over footballers. But no excuses for Hill here, this suits him perfectly.

Also think mandating 3 players inside 50 for each throw in or stoppage is only going to slow down everything. Think 1 player per team is enough for their desired result. Hopefully this doesn't get implemented at AFL level.

I like the reduced interchanges, I'd reduce them even further. Loved it when the likes of Harvey and Roo could run an opponent in to the ground and let their superior fitness shine as the game went on.


On SM-T290 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[sammm]

The lateral mark movement is going to be hilarious whenever Buddy lines up for goal and the ump calls a 50 against.
Can’t wait to watch all these fifties for players doing what comes natural and thats simply following the ball carrier run up off around the mark to get extra distance.

buddy is still alowed to go off his line, . it the man on the mark that won't be able to. unfair Pardon me

 

[Munga]

buddy is still alowed to go off his line, . it the man on the mark that won't be able to. unfair Pardon me

Yep, it's total bullsh!te.

Simple workaround, DON'T actually man the mark, just stay close enough to it. The ump points to the mark (which is another slowing of the game!) but no one should stand on the death spot, rather a little to the left or right or behind, just not on it! F!@# them, it's another moronic and unnecessary rule introduced.

 

[PostmanBish]

Yep, it's total bullsh!te.

Simple workaround, DON'T actually man the mark, just stay close enough to it. The ump points to the mark (which is another slowing of the game!) but no one should stand on the death spot, rather a little to the left or right or behind, just not on it! F!@# them, it's another moronic and unnecessary rule introduced.

Bet they still pay 50 against the Saints in that circumstance ...

 

[Simple Jack]

Bet they still pay 50 against the Saints in that circumstance ...

Umpires should receive 50 lashings for every 50 they pay that isn't approved by a supermajority of a panel of randomly selected fans at the end of each round.

That'd cut down on the number of ridiculously bullshit inconsistent 50s they pay over the course of even a single game, let alone the whole round or season.

Also should be televised. It'll help the AFL to boost lost 'rona revenue. I know I'd tune in to see that little #12 ****er get what's coming to him.

 

[L_W_P]

Yep, it's total bullsh!te.

Simple workaround, DON'T actually man the mark, just stay close enough to it. The ump points to the mark (which is another slowing of the game!) but no one should stand on the death spot, rather a little to the left or right or behind, just not on it! F!@# them, it's another moronic and unnecessary rule introduced.

I don't think they will allow that.

Either the defending/penalized team will be forced toput a player on the mark, essentially playing a man down around the ground, or there will be a 10-15m 'protected area' around the mark. That way, if you choose not to man the mark, you are still at least a kick off the play.

For so long now players have been coached to move "East-West" on the mark. Now they have to stand still. Going to be fun watching the ball move up and down the ground without a kick required.

Wonder how they will go with players moving off the line in defence? So often a bloke takes a mark in the back pocket and moves back on a 45 degree angle to line up a kick toward the boundary. Surely that will have to be called play on?

They should just bite the bullet, go to 16 on the field and last touch out of bounds between the arcs. Less players = more space. Last touch = more corridor play.

 

[hayes]

Forward pressure has ruined the game so I’m all for trying things to fix that but these tiny little tweaks like the man on the mark makes no difference. Trial the zone-like rules in the lower levels if you must but anything other than that is a waste of everyone’s time. Only other thing that seemed to work well was when they were super hot on holding the ball because that kept the game in motion.

 

[CaptainRisky]

My Ratts contact told me that they want to draft a good player , i asked why a good player and he couldn't tell me
#can only draft good player

 

[SaintsSeptember]

My Ratts contact told me that they want to draft a good player , i asked why a good player and he couldn't tell me
#can only draft good player

This is the trade thread. Please take your inside information to the Draft thread.
I for one am pissed, i had my heart set on a crap player.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

My Ratts contact told me that they want to draft a good player , i asked why a good player and he couldn't tell me
#can only draft good player

Clearly a change in strategy from the Cho Days #chocandraftanyoldfool

 

[hayes]

Hearing there are a lot of nervous players but also a lot of happy players. Make of that what you will.

 

[PostmanBish]

Umpires should receive 50 lashings for every 50 they pay that isn't approved by a supermajority of a panel of randomly selected fans at the end of each round.

That'd cut down on the number of ridiculously bullshit inconsistent 50s they pay over the course of even a single game, let alone the whole round or season.

Also should be televised. It'll help the AFL to boost lost 'rona revenue. I know I'd tune in to see that little #12 f***er get what's coming to him.

AFL meets Outlander ... I can go for that ... I reckon there's enough fan hated of umpires that they'd be seeking volunteer umps in the week after Round 1 ... sadomasochists only, must have own gimp mask

 

[Joffaboy]

Hearing there are a lot of nervous players but also a lot of happy players. Make of that what you will.

Hearing that some players are languid, others ebullient, a group are sanguine, and only one or two are fractious.

Make of that bookmark what you bank at will.

 

[PostmanBish]

buddy is still alowed to go off his line, . it the man on the mark that won't be able to. unfair Pardon me

One thing is for sure, we're going to need good users of the ball, or speedy movers (think Coff, Wilkie, Paton, Hill, Jones, Clark) running past our players after a mark as often as possible - this rule is going to make it really hard for the man on the mark to pre-empt a 5-7 metre handball to a guy coming at speed, and with the longer quarters, Hill should be going full seagull ... not just taking one chip, but the whole freakin' bucket ...

 

[magd2992]

Hearing there are a lot of nervous players but also a lot of happy players. Make of that what you will.

Can go any emotion

 

[Significant]

We had 39 listed senior players - no.32 wasn't assigned to anyone this year.

Still a very good chance that Lonie and Savage leave as DFA.

I hope we take 2 players in the draft and upgrade Wilkie. 3 new rookies would be great too.

We also don't have a 41, but lucky we have a 46 and a 48 so what I said originally is correct.

Currently 37 senior listed players.

Thanks for looking into it for me though!

You forgot Phillips as the other on delisted.
So that’s 36

Unsure what you mean, Phillips was included in the list of 6 senior players which have left the club?

Seriously guys, if you are going to pick the eyes out of information that took some time and effort to put together, without doing that same level of homework, don't bother commenting.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

One thing is for sure, we're going to need good users of the ball, or speedy movers (think Coff, Wilkie, Paton, Hill, Jones, Clark) running past our players after a mark as often as possible - this rule is going to make it really hard for the man on the mark to pre-empt a 5-7 metre handball to a guy coming at speed, and with the longer quarters, Hill should be going full seagull ... not just taking one chip, but the whole freakin' bucket ...

it doesnt make any logical sence why this rule has come to be ... if we apply this rule to every after the siren kick on goal in the history of the game every single one of them is now a 50m penalty... for what doesnt impact the player kicking in the slightest ... the penalty does not seem reasonable to the crime... its just like that interchange gate infringment rule they brought in where if a player steps over the yellow line painted on the grass to enter play in stead of going around it its a free kick and 50m penalty .. for a one step short cut ...

these reak of rule changes to justify the employment of certain people when we have the clubs having to delist players to lower list sizes and players taking a pay cut to carry the load of the impact of COVID why are we still paying (what i assume would be a healthy pay packet) these clowns who are just making ill thought out changes that make minimal impact to the flow of the game but make the officiating of the game harder more complex and more devisive ....

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

Hearing there are a lot of nervous players but also a lot of happy players. Make of that what you will.

im hearing that there are a few hungry players but their Uber eats is due any minute now so .....
problem is the food delivery has forgoten a serve of chips so there is a high chance of a dissapointed player out of the group ....

 

[borderbarry]

What is the distance of a kick for a mark at present? 15m 10m or 5m {a lot of marks are paid having travelled 9m or less].

 

[Significant]

What is the distance of a kick for a mark at present? 15m 10m or 5m {a lot of marks are paid having travelled 9m or less].

Fairly certain its 15m

 

[puppy_dog7]

3 seconds is fine, ample time for an in play disposal decision. Count it yourself, you'll see.

A little bit of chaos makes the game more interesting, and all the reset time for every mark does make it a bit boring.

But does the timer start from when the player marks it, or pushes back off the mark? If it’s when the mark is taken then that is actually no time at all to make a decision and get a decent kick away without trying to kick around the corner or kicking off a step.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

buddy is still alowed to go off his line, . it the man on the mark that won't be able to. unfair Pardon me

The Buddy rule is wrong. Clearly and simply.
If he needs to run in the arc, he needs to start further from the right so he ends up in the right position.

For starters it allows him to kick a low pass, which could be smothered if it went over the man on the mark.