Delistings

Remove this Banner Ad

I doubt we'd re-rookie him.

We have 9 rookie spots. We could have retained up to 3 players for a second year.
Murphy & Orreal retained, Coney & Pyke to be added, still leaves 5 free spots.

Given the increase in all clubs rookie positions next year, the talent is going to be spread fairly thin.

Therefore I'd assume if the club thought Bruce was worthwhile persisting with, we would have retained him.
 
scottwade said:
I doubt we'd re-rookie him.

We have 9 rookie spots. We could have retained up to 3 players for a second year.
Murphy & Orreal retained, Coney & Pyke to be added, still leaves 5 free spots.

Given the increase in all clubs rookie positions next year, the talent is going to be spread fairly thin.

Therefore I'd assume if the club thought Bruce was worthwhile persisting with, we would have retained him.
Click to expand...

Pyke does not count towards our total rookie list. We are allowed up to 8 players on our 'international' rookie list. This does not include Irish players.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rookie_list
 

Log in to remove this ad.

grimlock said:
Matty O'Dwyer was de-listed and re-rookied last year. Was this due to the restrictions on the number of players allowed on the rookie list?
Click to expand...

Don't believe so. But last year, with only 4 non-NSW rookie spots, Smith retained and Murphy and Orreal already committed to, we'd have been left with no live picks in the main part of the rookie list. By delisting MOD (whose form in 2007 wasn't that great) and inviting him to train with a chance of getting picked up again, they gave themselves the option of picking someone else if they wished.

Not so clear cut this year. The only (convoluted) reason for delisted Bruce if they actually want to retain him is that I think (ie it used to be the rule but they keep changing them, so who knows) that you can only retain 1 3rd year rookie. It is possible they are looking ahead to the following year expecting they might want to keep both Bruce and Orreal on but will only be allowed to keep one as a 3rd year. Orreal is probably marginally more likely to be picked up by another club before he can be re-rookied by the Swans, especially if Bruce still qualifies as a local, priority pick.

But yes, that is all a bit far-fetched. I am probably just grasping at straws because I'm pretty surprised and very disappointed that Bruce hasn't been retained.
 
I was looking through the list of delisted players and elevated rookies a name piqued my interested. Lachlan Keefe was listed under Collingwood as a "3 YEAR NON REG ROOKIE". Did a quick Google search on him and turned up this article: http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/ne...-on-soccer-tall/2007/12/20/1197740466645.html

Very similar to Orreal and the article does in fact note the similarities. Why didn't we do the same thing with Orreal given that he was basically next to chance of playing senior footbal this year? Would have definitely helped if the scenario you posted above was true and possibly gained another rookie spot this year. Perhaps the restrictions by AFL Canberra would have come into play?
 
grimlock said:
I was looking through the list of delisted players and elevated rookies a name piqued my interested. Lachlan Keefe was listed under Collingwood as a "3 YEAR NON REG ROOKIE". Did a quick Google search on him and turned up this article: http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/ne...-on-soccer-tall/2007/12/20/1197740466645.html

Very similar to Orreal and the article does in fact note the similarities. Why didn't we do the same thing with Orreal given that he was basically next to chance of playing senior footbal this year? Would have definitely helped if the scenario you posted above was true and possibly gained another rookie spot this year. Perhaps the restrictions by AFL Canberra would have come into play?
Click to expand...

We actually did.

We picked Orreal up under that rule, but once (pre)selected the player is placed on the club's rookie list (at the end of the year) and can't play aussie rules football (with any club at any level) until he joins his AFL club (Orreal with us, Keefe with Collingwood).

So Keefe is one of 3 Collingwood rookies, along with the Irishman Dyas & NSW scholarship rookie Reed. But effectively, other than schools football, Keefe will have played no aussie rules football at all. So basically although Collingwood identified him in December 2007, he has wasted a whole year, other than presumably some skills sessions.
 
Scott, the Google search also revealed that Keefe played VFL with the Collingwood VFL side. Obviously the difference there is that he won't count as one of the allocated AFL listed players that the Collingwood VFL side are allowed while I think Orreal wouldn't have qualified as a local junior if he were to play as a top-up.
 
grimlock said:
Scott, the Google search also revealed that Keefe played VFL with the Collingwood VFL side. Obviously the difference there is that he won't count as one of the allocated AFL listed players that the Collingwood VFL side are allowed while I think Orreal wouldn't have qualified as a local junior if he were to play as a top-up.
Click to expand...

thats lachlan okeefe mate, was formerly on essendons list, a ruckman who is originally from the calder cannons
 
liz said:
Don't believe so. But last year, with only 4 non-NSW rookie spots, Smith retained and Murphy and Orreal already committed to, we'd have been left with no live picks in the main part of the rookie list. By delisting MOD (whose form in 2007 wasn't that great) and inviting him to train with a chance of getting picked up again, they gave themselves the option of picking someone else if they wished.

Not so clear cut this year. The only (convoluted) reason for delisted Bruce if they actually want to retain him is that I think (ie it used to be the rule but they keep changing them, so who knows) that you can only retain 1 3rd year rookie. It is possible they are looking ahead to the following year expecting they might want to keep both Bruce and Orreal on but will only be allowed to keep one as a 3rd year. Orreal is probably marginally more likely to be picked up by another club before he can be re-rookied by the Swans, especially if Bruce still qualifies as a local, priority pick.

But yes, that is all a bit far-fetched. I am probably just grasping at straws because I'm pretty surprised and very disappointed that Bruce hasn't been retained.
Click to expand...

Bruce being retained as a normal rookie rather then a nsw rookie, something to do with the rules. He will be retained
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

eastlakes rule said:
thats lachlan okeefe mate, was formerly on essendons list, a ruckman who is originally from the calder cannons
Click to expand...


I think Grim was correct. The Pies effectively signed up Keefe almost a year ago on the same rule that we took Orreal under and had permission then to play him in their VFL side pending his selection at this year's rookie draft. This Keefe has not been on the Bombers - or any other - list previously.

Hope you're right about Bruce but don't understand why he'd be delisted if they want to retain him as a normal rookie. Don't really understand why they'd want to retain him as a normal, rather than NSW, rookie unless they particularly have their eye on 3 more local lads they want to priority rookie this year.
 
liz said:
I think Grim was correct. The Pies effectively signed up Keefe almost a year ago on the same rule that we took Orreal under and had permission then to play him in their VFL side pending his selection at this year's rookie draft. This Keefe has not been on the Bombers - or any other - list previously.

Hope you're right about Bruce but don't understand why he'd be delisted if they want to retain him as a normal rookie. Don't really understand why they'd want to retain him as a normal, rather than NSW, rookie unless they particularly have their eye on 3 more local lads they want to priority rookie this year.
Click to expand...

im saying there is a Lachlan Okeefe at Collingwoods VFL affliliate.

as welll as a lachlan keefe
 
I am surprised about Thornton. Maybe they have serious concerns about ultimate recovery from his LTI?

It makes sense for Swans to delist and relist, they do it every year!!!

Means that if some "gun" ( maybe one that didn't play last year due to injury etc) happens to slip through and not get drafted (as unlikely as that is this year) then at least Swans have room and option to pick them as a rookie and/or compare.


I also agree with those who reckon/hope Bruce will be relisted:thumbsu:
 
eastlakes rule said:
haha well wen u do have some association with the club not just as a supporter or groupie
Click to expand...

I know Aaron and not just as his groupie lol
But happy he is staying if this is the truth not only for mine and a few other benefits but this Boy has huge potential he had a killer year in the ressies and i cant bare 2 see us let someone go like him
 
Corpuscles said:
Does anyone have a link to the ACTAFL rules restricting the number of Swans "listed players"allowed in a ressies game? ( is it 12?)

I think we will find 3rd year rookies are deemed as "listed" such therefore so Aaron and maybe Kristen gets a game every week they are delisted and relisted to start again.
Click to expand...

For the purposes of the ACTAFL restrictions, any player on the senior or rookie list counts as "listed".
 
its time to promote excellence not mediocrity. winning the canberra league gf every year isnt going to help us win a flag. i don't know these players too well but the only one i would have even contemplated re-drafting is faulks as a kpp.

now that white will become our fb for the the next few years, there is no hope in hell for faulks.

people must remember that the world is in a financial crisis and we cant afford to retain all these second XI people and pay them 100 k for playing ressies. we already have a downturn in membership by 4000 and we need to keep the club in the black.

the right decisions are being made. i hope we use only 4 draft picks and no psd's and keep our budget down. the club would have said "no hard feelings, but we dont have the money or time for you under the current circumstances".
 
100 k for playing ressies?!

Rookies would be getting 40-50K, and senior listed players would be under 100..

Shit, what a good life.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Delistings

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top