Ezard: gone for good?

[domc]

Any other players not coming immediately off of an AFL list must nominate for the national draft. If they are undrafted, they are eligible for the PSD. If they are undrafted there, they may be eligible for the rookie list if they're young enough.

I think Ezard cannot be rookie listed as he has been on an AFL list previously.

Thanks Powerstuff.

Pretty fair reasoning again.

We have tended before the last 12 months to have this problem of logjams with our younger players stagnating in the SANFL and not really developing to AFL standard.

I think it's fair to try to bring in as many bottom-age players to the group in the draft, frash faces as such, to maximise our chances of really finding some gems in there.

I agree with logjam theory PJ. I think we had to many young midfield/running/flank type players (which you obviously need more of) and not enough KPP's coming through (only Carlile and Willits compared to 3 young ruckmen in Deluca, Minson and Giles). Delisting Eckerman, Ezard and Ware will give us the opportunity to stock up on some young KP talent with this so called 'super' draft and hopefully uncover a real gem somewhere.

 

[dreamkillers]

This CBA runs from Nov 1 2003 to 31st Oct 2008. I think the other ones have had different dates. That might be why Basset was stuffed around.

The more I think about it, the more I think this is the reason why uncontracted players go straight to the the PSD.

1. If you nominate for the draft you do so knowing you take pot luck and you can be picked up by any club and you will be offered the standard minimum contract.

2. If you go to the PSD you can nominate your contract value/wage and if a club drafts you, then they have to pay that nominated wage. Players who haven't been on a list before only get the standard first year wage if they get drafted through the PSD.

If someone knows for sure that 1 is wrong, then I don't know the answer to the original question.

That's pretty much how I see it but not 100% sure if there were any changes in the last CBA that we haven't picked up on to date...............

 

[Mrs Mercuri]

Im very surprised that you have decided to cut Ezard when players like Thurstans and Willits are still at the club... no doubt you could re-draft him but he will be looked at by other clubs that for sure, including my Bombers!

 

[crazy_big_al]

I think Ezard cannot be rookie listed as he has been on an AFL list previously.

yes he can. its only mature age rookies that cant

 

[blackdiamond]

Im very surprised that you have decided to cut Ezard when players like Thurstans and Willits are still at the club... no doubt you could re-draft him but he will be looked at by other clubs that for sure, including my Bombers!

Thurstans has two more years of his contract to run and Willits could be anything and I would say has another year to run on his contract in any case.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I think Ezard cannot be rookie listed as he has been on an AFL list previously.

He can be rookie listed. A couple examples of 2006 rookies who were on a list previously, Steven Gilham - Port to Hawthorn, Steven Armstrong - Melbourne to West Coast, collect 1 premiership medal. You have to be under 23, so Ezard would qualify. Not sure if they will bring in the, one rookie over 23 years of age rule this draft or not.

 

[dreamkillers]

Im very surprised that you have decided to cut Ezard when players like Thurstans and Willits are still at the club

It certainly surprised a few of us...........

That said Thurstans and Willits are tall key position players which are always limited in numbers at most clubs whilst smaller players like Ezard are a lot more in abundance and there is also some doubt about his fitness given he went down with OP during the season.

 

[Captain Wacky]

Im very surprised that you have decided to cut Ezard when players like Thurstans and Willits are still at the club...

Er yeah, Willits has been a constant source of frustration...

 

[The Hobo]

He can be rookie listed. A couple examples of 2006 rookies who were on a list previously, Steven Gilham - Port to Hawthorn, Steven Armstrong - Melbourne to West Coast, collect 1 premiership medal. You have to be under 23, so Ezard would qualify. Not sure if they will bring in the, one rookie over 23 years of age rule this draft or not.

Tom Logan

 

[Macca19]

would like to see power give Elliott a go on list/rookie as he is now fit and ready to show what he is capable of. Hard in-under midfilder with good hands......just what Power need.

At 176cm and 68kg he is bloody small for an inside midfielder. Would need to put on about 15kg to handle AFL football.

 

[Powerstufff]

would like to see power give Elliott a go......

Who is he? What relevance to a thread on Ezard?

 

[Blitzkrieg Boy]

Elliott eh? I believe they are talking about Sam Elliott. Previously been on the Crow rookie list, de-listed this year. Highly reguarded in draft camp though. I wouldn't mind him at port. After all, we DID get Pearce under the crows radar before.

 

[Powerstufff]

.....I believe they are talking about Sam Elliott. Previously been on the Crow rookie list, de-listed this year.....

Thanks.

 

[dirtydog444]

Sam Elliott- 178cms/ 76kgs. (Where did ya get your stats?)

 

[Tredders66]

I wonder who will be number 9 next year then because i have Ezards match worn guernsey.

 

[Go_Dogs]

I was quite shocked to see that Ezard got delisted. Seemed to be traveling ok in the SANFL and was certaintly developing at AFL level. Was this his second year on the list?

I'd be quite interested in the Dogs having a look at him for a rookie spot too. Those guys who have been in the system a bit and know what is required can sometimes come off.

 

[Powerstufff]

I wonder who will be number 9 next year then because i have Ezards match worn guernsey.

May still be him. Hope so.