List Mgmt. NGA, Father son watch

Remove this Banner Ad

With the news of Randall and Rajic having a baby I wonder if there will ever be a Mother Son rule or Mother Daughter?? We already have Father Daughters and Father Sons
Or whether games played by both parents as a whole are counted.
 
Will have to have played whatever Daisy Pearce managed to do to have her twins play for Melbourne
They haven't officially bought the rule in yet and were considering 30 games as the benchmark. Daisy has played 55. Chelsea has played 48, while Marijana has played 50, so their child should be eligible. Erin Phillips only played 46 games for Crows, so depends on what they choose.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Back then they had to have played the 200 games in a 20-year window, between 1971-1990. A fair chunk of Cornes' games were pre-1971, and he also spent 1979 playing for North Melbourne. His 317 games with Glenelg probably also includes a fair number of Escort Cup games, which we all (now) know are not counted by the AFL.

The 20-year window was removed as a result of the review the AFL did, after the Gibbs debacle. The rule change was referred to as the "Grandfather Rule", as most of the players who became newly eligible were so old that they were more likely to have grandsons of draftable age.

The Cornes sons would be eligible under the post-Gibbs rule update, but were not eligible under the original rules.
It was changed after the VFL reviewed and realised the original rule had done what they planned - made it near impossible for anyone to qualify.
They screwed us over completely.
 
They haven't officially bought the rule in yet and were considering 30 games as the benchmark. Daisy has played 55. Chelsea has played 48, while Marijana has played 50, so their child should be eligible. Erin Phillips only played 46 games for Crows, so depends on what they choose.
Erin won't reach enough games for Port no matter what they choose, but I'd fully expect her children to still somehow end up at Port. They AFL will make an 'original players exception' or some such.
 
Erin won't reach enough games for Port no matter what they choose, but I'd fully expect her children to still somehow end up at Port. They AFL will make an 'original players exception' or some such.
Do the woman get some legacy dispensation on games played. Daisey has 55 games. The men play 100 games for F/S. I also thought the kids had to be biological family kids like the men or have the rules changed.
 
They haven't officially bought the rule in yet and were considering 30 games as the benchmark. Daisy has played 55. Chelsea has played 48, while Marijana has played 50, so their child should be eligible. Erin Phillips only played 46 games for Crows, so depends on what they choose.

I know Chelsea has the knee injury but no way would I have put MJ on more games played than her
 
Do the woman get some legacy dispensation on games played. Daisey has 55 games. The men play 100 games for F/S. I also thought the kids had to be biological family kids like the men or have the rules changed.
I thought they could be adopted? I'm sure there's a rule but there's a requirement attached to it to do with age of the kid when adopted

Also as the first few seasons were only like 13 games I think it'll be 50 games eventually but 30 games for players who Played in the first 5 seasons
 
I don't think you can have like a "The blind side" movie type thing or JHF changing his name and saying Fabian is his "dad"
and going FS to Port, has to be legal and before they're 12??
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I thought they could be adopted? I'm sure there's a rule but there's a requirement attached to it to do with age of the kid when adopted

Also as the first few seasons were only like 13 games I think it'll be 50 games eventually but 30 games for players who Played in the first 5 seasons
The AFL Rules document, which specifies the rule, doesn't state that the parentage needs to be biological. Here's what it says:
8.1 Players Eligible – All Clubs
Subject to Rule 8.4, a Club may include a person on its Primary List or Rookie List if the person’s father played 100 or more Senior Matches (being either Home and Away or Finals Series Matches) with the Club.
Source: https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...nded-AFL-Rules-effective-28-February-2023.pdf

All it says is "father". Nothing about biological, adoptive, or any other type of relationship.
 
Is it wrong that I'm hopeful none of them reach the 100 game milestone?
You might not rate him but clearly the coaches rate what he's doing if you listened to Nicks interview yesterday..
Murphy said he had worked hard to develop as a pressure forward and took pride in doing the small things to help with team success.

“I pride myself on doing the little things that don’t necessarily come up on the stat sheet, so if we are winning and the coaches are happy I don’t really care what my stats look like,” Murphy said.

“(The nitty gritty) is my weapon which is funny at this level, and every good footy side I believe has a player like that who does those nitty gritty things and I pride myself on that.

“It’s my role, I play it and if it leads to winning I’ll keep doing it.”
 
Is he a crusher under sando's old terminology
All I know is Nicks said he was extremely happy with the way Murphy was carrying out his defined role....whatever that is he's nailing it in the coaching panels eyes.
 
I still can't get the Cornes one. 317 games for Glenelg. 47 for South Adelaide. Archimedes couldn't solve this mathematical equation.
The VFL weren't happy using Archimedes principle as it would have netted us the Cornes brothers.

Then they used Pythagoras's theorem. The root of Glenelg games squared + South games squared.

We still got them so they just decided to say NO. Is anyone disappointed?
 
Milera would be worth it. Does have generational footy in the blood
He would want to improve.
You might not rate him but clearly the coaches rate what he's doing if you listened to Nicks interview yesterday..
He's another full season away.
I'd hope we have more talent and don't need him before then.
 
Murphy's good is very good, his bad is very very very bad.....

That description is the opposite of how I'd describe Murphy.

He's more the type you know what you're going to get from him, ranging from meh to good. He'll put 100% in every week, no issues putting his body on the line to make a desperation play, can create and offers a decent bit in link play but lacks the raw offensive power needed to be anything more than a gap filler in a forward line. Mind you, with the three-headed monster Adelaide has on their hands for the next decade in Fog, Rankine and Thilthorpe, we are in need of gap fillers to help make it tick.

I think the biggest problem Murphy faces is Keays also fits that bill of being a gap filler in a lineup, and Keays is a step or two above Murph as a player. Still, I think he gets to 100 games.
 
That description is the opposite of how I'd describe Murphy.

He's more the type you know what you're going to get from him, ranging from meh to good. He'll put 100% in every week, no issues putting his body on the line to make a desperation play, can create and offers a decent bit in link play but lacks the raw offensive power needed to be anything more than a gap filler in a forward line. Mind you, with the three-headed monster Adelaide has on their hands for the next decade in Fog, Rankine and Thilthorpe, we are in need of gap fillers to help make it tick.

I think the biggest problem Murphy faces is Keays also fits that bill of being a gap filler in a lineup, and Keays is a step or two above Murph as a player. Still, I think he gets to 100 games.
But his bad isn't just meh and his good isn't just good whereas Keays bad is just meh and his good is just good. Murphy's ceiling is higher than Keays so I would select him if I was picking a side before Keays who is an effort player whereas Murphy can take high marks for his size and some of his pass and goal he kick are very very good.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. NGA, Father son watch

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top