Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation Part 3

[daniel_4tw]

Of course the AFL will do whatever they want for whatever narrative they want at the time.

At least they’re giving themselves the ‘we can make up the rules’ in writing I guess.

Remember when they put a trading ban on Sydney because they were mad they took Franklin from GWS?

 

[Cromulant]

Of course the AFL will do whatever they want for whatever narrative they want at the time.

At least they’re giving themselves the ‘we can make up the rules’ in writing I guess.

Remember when they put a trading ban on Sydney because they were mad they took Franklin from GWS?

It was that and the fact they'd used their COLA allowance to bring in 2 players on 1mil a year

 

[Straight Outta Crompton]

Once you stop viewing the AFL as the governing body of a sport, and start understanding it for what it truly is - a sports entertainment business - everything else makes sense. The ambiguity of their own rules, and the opaqueness of their interpretations, serve the 'entertainment' part of the business. Clubs might hate it, but you know each and every rule the AFL creates will be interpreted in the way that best suits their commercial interests; this will be no different.

 

[maxlilly]

Once you stop viewing the AFL as the governing body of a sport, and start understanding it for what it truly is - a sports entertainment business - everything else makes sense. The ambiguity of their own rules, and the opaqueness of their interpretations, serve the 'entertainment' part of the business. Clubs might hate it, but you know each and every rule the AFL creates will be interpreted in the way that best suits their commercial interests; this will be no different.

It's exactly the same with the umpiring in AFL.
Everything is open to interpretation to get the result you want

 

[maxlilly]

Rumour is someone will be changing their name soon .
If I was such a poor judge of horse flesh it would be enough to make Me Go Red and Krissedoff.View attachment 2256155View attachment 2256156

View attachment 2256159
Mostyn, 6 Brownlow votes in 2 games he will drag that shit truck side over the line eventually.
TDK @ Crows = Premiership Contender

It’s spelt Kristof.

Maybe he should change his name to 'Nicksy' with he amount of bad calls he makes

 

[Vader]

Once you stop viewing the AFL as the governing body of a sport, and start understanding it for what it truly is - a sports entertainment business - everything else makes sense. The ambiguity of their own rules, and the opaqueness of their interpretations, serve the 'entertainment' part of the business. Clubs might hate it, but you know each and every rule the AFL creates will be interpreted in the way that best suits their commercial interests; this will be no different.

All of this may be true. None of it gives any reason whatsoever for them allowing Port to break the draft rules in order to trade for NWM.

 

[George CantStandYa]

I’m concerned Mostyn is being bullied

 

[daniel_4tw]

It was that and the fact they'd used their COLA allowance to bring in 2 players on 1mil a year

Sure. But Sydney didn’t break any rules.


The AFL just not happy with something they created so they change the rules. Peak AFL. Was disgraceful (despite the leg up Sydney usually get).

 

[spenze]

I’m concerned Mostyn is being bullied

Sometimes people can't tell if his opinion is emotional and they don't give him some leeway.

 

[Mostyn]

Rumour is someone will be changing their name soon .
If I was such a poor judge of horse flesh it would be enough to make Me Go Red and Krissedoff.View attachment 2256155View attachment 2256156

View attachment 2256159
Mostyn, 6 Brownlow votes in 2 games he will drag that shit truck side over the line eventually.
TDK @ Crows = Premiership Contender

It’s spelt Kristof.

Hahahaha - yeah, fair cop. Very good start to the year, so maybe it will be money well spent!

 

[Mostyn]

All of this may be true. None of it gives any reason whatsoever for them allowing Port to break the draft rules in order to trade for NWM.

They aren't rules. They consider them guidelines.

If they were rules, they'd make them public so people could work within them.

The fact they don't ever make them public should tell us something.

 

[Vader]

They aren't rules. They consider them guidelines.

No, they are rules.

If they were rules, they'd make them public so people could work within them.

Now you're just taking the piss. How long did it take them to officially communicate the Inactive List & Father/Daughter rules, via the AFL Rules document (which is published every year)?

The fact they don't ever make them public should tell us something.

It tells us that the AFL is both lazy and incompetent when it comes to communicating their rules to the public. It certainly doesn't tell us that these rules don't exist, or that they haven't been communicated to the clubs.

 

[Cromulant]

They aren't rules. They consider them guidelines.

If they were rules, they'd make them public so people could work within them.

The fact they don't ever make them public should tell us something.

They are rules, its pretty simple

 

[Mutineer]

Rumour is someone will be changing their name soon .
If I was such a poor judge of horse flesh it would be enough to make Me Go Red and Krissedoff.View attachment 2256155View attachment 2256156

View attachment 2256159
Mostyn, 6 Brownlow votes in 2 games he will drag that shit truck side over the line eventually.
TDK @ Crows = Premiership Contender

It’s spelt Kristof.

He has a history of questioning people's judgement on players, especially draftees i.e. Joel Freijah and Sam Lalor for example.

 

[Mostyn]

No, they are rules.

Now you're just taking the piss. How long did it take them to officially communicate the Inactive List & Father/Daughter rules, via the AFL Rules document (which is published every year)?

It tells us that the AFL is both lazy and incompetent when it comes to communicating their rules to the public. It certainly doesn't tell us that these rules don't exist, or that they haven't been communicated to the clubs.

If they are rules, show me the rule book.

Can you do that?

You're applying your standards to the AFL, instead of applying their standards to them.

They DELIBERATELY don't make these rules public because they assume the clubs will try to get around them - and they don't want anyone but themselves to be manipulating the rules.

 

[Mostyn]

He has a history of questioning people's judgement on players, especially draftees i.e. Joel Freijah and Sam Lalor for example.

Lol, you're very sensitive about Lalor.

All I said was we needed a full-time mid, not a mid-forward like Dusty.

No need to get so upset about it. I never said he wasn't a great prospect - he clearly is.

If you want to criticise my judgement, Kosi Pickett is right there. Me thinking he'd never go that early was why I had to change my name the first time.

 

[Mostyn]

They are rules, its pretty simple

Rules are black and white and public.

The AFL consistently gives itself wriggle room on these things.

 

[Floating Doughnut]

He has a history of questioning people's judgement on players, especially draftees i.e. Joel Freijah and Sam Lalor for example.

Don’t mind analysis being questioned its what makes a good forum if the clips are taken as well as they are given when the dust settles which Mostyn to his credit has always done pretty well .
Freijah on fire even with Dale back and Lalor a jet. Xavier Lindsay looks great imo.
Really bad luck for Lohmann, had him going to another level with Charlie slowing down.

 

[Vader]

If they are rules, show me the rule book.

Can you do that?

You're applying your standards to the AFL, instead of applying their standards to them.

They DELIBERATELY don't make these rules public because they assume the clubs will try to get around them - and they don't want anyone but themselves to be manipulating the rules.

Here's the rule book (attached). You can find it yourself, on the AFL website. Click on the hamburger (menu) icon in the top right corner, then scroll down to AFL Policies.

We know that there are rules which still haven't been published in the AFL Rules book, and there are others which took years before being added.

The Inactive List was introduced in 2020 or 2021. We know this because Bryce Gibbs was placed on the Inactive List for the 2021 season. The rules governing the Inactive List weren't published in the AFL Rules document until the 2025 edition.

The Father/Daughter rule has been in place since 2017 (source). The Father/Son rule is specified in the AFL Rules document. The Father/Daughter rule still isn't documented in the AFL Rules document, 8 years after its introduction.

These rules do exist. They have been circulated to the clubs, who know exactly how they are defined. However, the AFL are too ****ing lazy and/or incompetent to update the publicly available documentation detailing the rules.

 

[Vader]

Rules are black and white and public.

The AFL consistently gives itself wriggle room on these things.

Yes, they often have clauses giving themselves wriggle room.

However, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that they would use their "wriggle room" to allow Port to trade for NWM while breaking the 2x 1st round picks in 4 years rule. More to the point, there is not a snowball's chance in Hell that they would allow Port to count trading for NWM as one of those 2x 1st round picks.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The AFL have rules which they choose selectively to apply or not.

Eg. Special Geelong exception clause takes precedence.

 

[Vader]

The AFL have rules which they choose selectively to apply or not.

Eg. Special Geelong exception clause takes precedence.

Yes... no argument that Geelong gets special treatment, largely as a result of having so many ex-Geelong people in the AFL administration.

There is no reason to think that the AFL would choose to apply their rules selectively when it comes to Port, or Adelaide for that matter.