-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Father - Son's in this years tac or underage leagues
- Thread starter opng
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Hey mate, he prob wouldn't get picked up. Too small and gets bumped and thrown off the ball too easy even in school footy. Plays 1st's though. Great, skills, courage and poise
BTW he was born in 1990
No. The AFL has clarified this. Mitch was not eligible under the rules, and should not have been taken as F/S. They stuffed up. But they did not make WC relinquish Mitch. You really need to get some facts going, and do a little research.
Smell The Glove
Cancelled
KING-JAMES
Club Legend
KING-JAMES
Club Legend
Yeah i remember back years ago Dean in the paper with his baby, i knew it wasnt going to be Dean's
Only managed 260 games and was captain for a while, no wonder you've never heard of him.
more likely he is only 21 and in the last 7 years his name has never been mentioned. It is no wonder the lad cant even remember hearing the name. It might be different if he was a bulldogs supporter.
Dude just get over it.
KING-JAMES
Club Legend
that just means you are a football freak
No, it means that as an Essondon suppoter he was 6 when Steve Wally Wallis played his last game.....against the bombers....if his kid is half the player his dad was I'd sign him up
The bidding system would not be flawed if the AFL allowed themselves to fine tune the rule a little. That, however, would require too much subtlety and that is not what sporting institutions are about. The club who wishes to nominate the F/S selection should only have to offer their lowest pick in the equivalent round to ‘trump’ the offers from other clubs unless a rival club nominates a priority pick from before the first round.
- Thread starter
- #46
If you can fine tune it that would be great but it would be very hard for that as ive explaned in my prvious post e.g side that finishes first bid first round pick No.16 agsinst the side that FS is eligble for has to match it with pick No.1, it all works if side the the son is eligble finished high on ladder but then you have the problem if the side finished low on the ladder, maybe you could have a system where the FS's side only has to match it with their pick that was the closest but above that side. E.g they match pick 16 with pick 17 and again ive shown the extreme but thats what a lot of clubs would look at. And all this will have to be done before trade week.
The rule is meant to favour the side which the father played for regardless of where they finished on the ladder. That will always be the case or the rule is pointless. You cannot argue that you should maintain an old system just because the new one merely improves rather than perfects the perceived problem.
The idea off a bidding system was first brought up so that the selection given up for the kid would ‘roughly’ reflect his true value in an open draft. This rule would make it closer to an uncompromised draft system. If you were to have a bidding system that more exactly reflected the players perceived worth then that player might as well enter the draft. Thus the club with the ties to the player in question should only have to offer a pick that matches the equivalent ‘round’ of an oppositions ‘bid’ in order to surpass it regardless of whether it is an actual higher pick or not. This would include the side in question being able to use ‘any’ pick from the same round which it has acquired through trade. The only exception being priority selections where the player is deemed to be of the very highest calibre and thus is picked up by a club in great need. If this happens to be the case then the kid can go on to make his own legend at a needy club. If the original club has a problem with this then at least it has time to try and organize a trade for the PP.
The idea off a bidding system was first brought up so that the selection given up for the kid would ‘roughly’ reflect his true value in an open draft. This rule would make it closer to an uncompromised draft system. If you were to have a bidding system that more exactly reflected the players perceived worth then that player might as well enter the draft. Thus the club with the ties to the player in question should only have to offer a pick that matches the equivalent ‘round’ of an oppositions ‘bid’ in order to surpass it regardless of whether it is an actual higher pick or not. This would include the side in question being able to use ‘any’ pick from the same round which it has acquired through trade. The only exception being priority selections where the player is deemed to be of the very highest calibre and thus is picked up by a club in great need. If this happens to be the case then the kid can go on to make his own legend at a needy club. If the original club has a problem with this then at least it has time to try and organize a trade for the PP.
It's called basic football knowledge. Where is his son playing and how old? Our only quality father son has been Darcy. Don't want to think about David Round
- Thread starter
- #49
I understand what is being proposed but at round 1 and 2 picks are not of equal value like ive said pick 16 is not of equal value to pick 1, and im not sure what the legal piont would be, at the moment a player can refuse to to go to the fathers club (murphy/brisbane) would he be able to refuse going to the club that wins the bid that was not eligble to take him under FS but won the bid. With the priority pick youd have to make a round that was equal to that pick because if you dont a club has no way of matching a bid. And not every year there are two clubs with priority picks.
Now i understand where your coming from, your looking at it more from a club that is not eligble for that FS and im looking at it from a side that is eligble for the FS, but i would say thats how most clubs will look at it. if you say they can trade to get any pick from that round to match the bid all of a sudden youve placed that pick as of higher value giving the same example youve said that pick 8 is the same value as pick one. the bidding system works very well for round three and on except once you look at round 1 and 2 thats when the problems begin, but like ive said to a lot of people i dont think theres an easy answer.
Now ill give you another example lets say SOS's son is eligble for last year draft and he's worth a second round pick which is pick 32 for carlton and west coast offer their first round pick (no. 16 which is one pick off the second round) for carlton to match it they have to bid their first round pick (no.1), now i just see this as not right the kid goes from being the equivelent of pick 32 to pick 1 to me thats not fair and im not a carlton supporter, now if you'd said they only have to match it with their closest pick which is higher(pick 17) now to me that would be fair, if you'd said this would be the tinkering you'd talked about i would have agreed with you.
Get what your saying, but Lets take a different player. Say West Coast bid for Tom Hawkins, geelong would then only have had to use pick 25 odd (if west coast bid pick 16), but if Essendon wanted him with their first rounder, they would make geelong use pick 7. I like the sound of a bidding system, but lets make it second rounder as the highest. That way, the club with the father son selection can still get some benefits....
Similar threads
