Rookie Draft

[Vinnie Vegas]

With our first pick at 26 in the rookie draft, I am expecting players of the quality of Casey-Leigh and Carter to be taken by the Pies. Almost a non event for us.

Brent Macaffer was pick #26 in the rookie draft. I am expecting players of the quality of Brent Macaffer.

Jarryd Blair and your namesake Harry O'Brien also taken in the 20s of the rookie draft in recent times.

 

[jonbe54]

Brent Macaffer was pick #26 in the rookie draft. I am expecting players of the quality of Brent Macaffer.

Jarryd Blair and your namesake Harry O'Brien also taken in the 20s of the rookie draft in recent times.

Its fair enough praising hine and so we should but should not forget the training and coaching staff who make his visions real

 

[Old Spice]

jake king, 190cm, 80kg, 13/3/1992 (ACT)

This guy is a must get for us.

Want him picked up just to play against Jake King and to give him a mini pile driver.

 

[Harry O]

Brent Macaffer was pick #26 in the rookie draft. I am expecting players of the quality of Brent Macaffer.

Jarryd Blair and your namesake Harry O'Brien also taken in the 20s of the rookie draft in recent times.

Lightening doesn't tend to strike in the same place so regularly. Anyone hoping to get anything of note in the rookie draft for the Pies this year is deluded.

 

[jonbe54]

Lightening doesn't tend to strike in the same place so regularly. Anyone hoping to get anything of note in the rookie draft for the Pies this year is deluded.

Harry the trouble with the draft is so many recruiters get blinded by the numbers and who represented at what level. Hine and co look at the player and if he can fill a role at the club. You don't need super stats to do that - something other recruiters seem not to understand. That's why we get jewels and others shake their heads in wonder. Hine sees behind the obvious and our team benefits therefore.

 

[Histrionics]

i hope we take luke shreeve

he's a gun

Oh hai Luke

 

[Grapie]

We have 4 live rockie picks. That is, 10 to start less 2 vets and 4 already on the rockie list. (Per the AFL site which showed all the lists the clubs submitted just before last weeks draft, so I would have confidence in its accuracy.)

 

[Quicky]

We have 4 live rockie picks. That is, 10 to start less 2 vets and 4 already on the rockie list. (Per the AFL site which showed all the lists the clubs submitted just before last weeks draft, so I would have confidence in its accuracy.)

From the AFL player rules document 2010:

21.1 Rookie List – Establishment and Number

21.1.1 Establishing Rookie List​

Each Club must maintain a Rookie List up to a maximum number of​

Players as detailed in Appendix 2.

(appendix: minimum of 4 maximum of 6 rookies; minus veterans up to 2; plus 2 extra rookies for the 2010-12 seasons)

21.1.3 Rookie Lists​

In addition to maintaining the maximum number of allowable Players
on the Rookie Lists under 21.1.1 and 21.1.2, each Club may for AFL
seasons 2010, 2011 and 2012 include a maximum of 2 extra players​

on their Rookie Lists.

If you are in fact correct i'd be interested in knowing when the AFL changed the rules (and expanded the rookie list to 10) as they were not the rules as of May 2010 this year.

 

[Grapie]

On AFL site click 'news" and then "news achieve" and then the news item re lists status to see the status of all lists post-draft.
Rookie list
1. Cribbin, Paul*
2. Hunter, Tom
3. McNamara, Seamus*
4. Reed, Scott
5.
6.
7.
8

 

[Quicky]

On AFL site click 'news" and then "news achieve" and then the news item re lists status to see the status of all lists post-draft.
Rookie list
1. Cribbin, Paul*
2. Hunter, Tom
3. McNamara, Seamus*
4. Reed, Scott
5.
6.
7.
8

This link? Yeah I saw it. But it doesn't mean that the article isn't wrong which seems more likely to me than the AFL players rules document being wrong. Unless the rules have changed since May this year when the rules document was published.

 

[Grapie]

Seems a bit of a stretch to suggest that the AFL has twice put up the status of all the clubs lists in the last two weeks and that they are all wrong by showing 2 extra rockie positions. I am guessing that the basic rules may be over-ridden by special arrangements in place for the two years of the compromised draft providing for two additional rockie positions.

 

[Quicky]

Seems a bit of a stretch to suggest that the AFL has twice put up the status of all the clubs lists in the last two weeks and that they are all wrong by showing 2 extra rockie positions. I am guessing that the basic rules may be over-ridden by special arrangements in place for the two years of the compromised draft providing for two additional rockie positions.

The information that I am going off is the official AFL player rules document for this season. It is a 195 page document which includes everything from draft rules to the tribunal points system. It seems strange to me that the AFL would make provisions for 2 extra rookies (see the rules I posted above) and then mid year change the rules to include provisions for an additional two rookies on top of this. Essentially altering rules - an official rules document - mid season. Especially when I have read nothing of these changes until this article on the clubs lists. I'm not suggesting it hasn't happened, just that I am sceptical. For the moment I am choosing to go off the rules document until I see it confirmed as otherwise. It seems just as likely to me that the AFL website has made a gaff with the article. It happens alot, remember our shit-down defense?

 

[Grapie]

The information that I am going off is the official AFL player rules document for this season. It is a 195 page document which includes everything from draft rules to the tribunal points system. It seems strange to me that the AFL would make provisions for 2 extra rookies (see the rules I posted above) and then mid year change the rules to include provisions for an additional two rookies on top of this. Essentially altering rules - an official rules document - mid season. Especially when I have read nothing of these changes until this article on the clubs lists. I'm not suggesting it hasn't happened, just that I am sceptical. For the moment I am choosing to go off the rules document until I see it confirmed as otherwise. It seems just as likely to me that the AFL website has made a gaff with the article. It happens alot, remember our shit-down defense?

Quicky I cannot fault your logic.

 

[Quicky]

Alright, Vader has helped answer the question for me over on the Drafts and Trading board.

I was right in saying that the rookie list is a maximum of 8 players. The issue is with the status of McNamara and Cribbin.

I was wrong in thinking that McNamara had to come onto the rookie list and he remains outside the list next year.

The interesting one is Cribbin. As an Irish rookie he is supposed to take up a spot on the rookie list but there is a loophole where if he is not an Irish citizen we can select him as an International rookie. What the go is with this I'm not sure but it seems - if you believe the AFL website - that we have found an clever way to select Cribbin outside the list.

This means we will have either 3 or 4 rookie selections depending on the status of Cribbin.

Here is the thread on the Drafts and Trading board:

Originally Posted by Quicky
Thanks Vader. But that poses some other questions for me. I was under the impression:

1) that International rookies were only outside the rookie list in their 1st season (McNamara is in his second season).
2) that Irish rookies (Cribbin) do not count as International rookies and take up a spot on the rookie list (something to do with a deal the AFL made with the GAA).

Incorrect on #1. There is no statute of limitations. All the rule says is:

21.1.2 Additional Rookie List Players
In addition to maintaining the maximum number of allowable Players
on their Rookie List under Rule 21.1.1, each Club may include a
maximum of 3 extra Players on its Rookie List provided those
Players are:
(a) former Scholarship List Players at that Club who have been
nominated under Rule 33.5.1 or 33.9.2; or
(b) former International Scholarship List Players at that Club who
have been nominated under Rule 34.5.1 or 34.8;

Correct on #2. Here's the relevant rule in the AFL Player Rules document:

34.2.4 Player Eligibility for Inclusion on International Scholarship List
A Player is eligible to be included on the International Scholarship
List of a Club only if the Player satisfies the age requirements under
Rule 34.2.5 and:
(a) is not an Australian citizen and the Player has been domiciled
in the International Development Region for at least 3
continuous years immediately before his inclusion on an
International Scholarship List and has not to the satisfaction of
the General Manager – Football Operations lived in Australia
for any substantial period of time prior to his inclusion on the
International Scholarship List; or
(b) has been a resident in Australia for no more than 3 years
before his inclusion on an International Scholarship List and
prior to being a resident in Australia, he has been domiciled in
the International Development Region for at least 3 continuous
years.

where

International Development Region: means any country of the world save and except for Australia and Ireland.
However, this only applies to Irish citizens.. Non-citizens who were recruited from Ireland are covered by rule 21.1.2:

(d) International Players with the exception of Players who are
Irish citizens or who have, in the opinion of the General
Manager – Football Operations, lived for a substantial period
of time in Ireland prior to inclusion on the Rookie List;

 

[Grapie]

Brillant work Quicky and Vader.

In summary, McNamara being outside the list explains one of the differences, but it would appear unlikely the other one can be explained by Cribbin not being considered to be Irish. I wonder if it has something to do with some rule changes I seem to remember the AFL announced in late August re 1)older rookies, and 2), the ability to add a rookie between the end of the NAB cup and the start of the official season.

 

[Quicky]

Brillant work Quicky and Vader.

In summary, McNamara being outside the list explains one of the differences, but it would appear unlikely the other one can be explained by Cribbin not being considered to be Irish. I wonder if it has something to do with some rule changes I seem to remember the AFL announced in late August re 1)older rookies, and 2), the ability to add a rookie between the end of the NAB cup and the start of the official season.

In the years 2010-12 you can select 2 rookies older than 23 years which is the max age for rookies usually.

I'm not sure about point 2 I havn't read anything on it.

It seems to me Cribbins status can be explained by two things:

1) He is not an Irish citizen (He could possibly have been born elsewhere like Britain and never gotten his Irish citizenship) and we can select him as an International rookie like we have McNamara.

2) The website is wrong

 

[itwdandy]

-----------------
medium midfielders
------------------
rhys cooyou, 181cm, 68kg, 22/3/1991 (WA)
caleb shadbolt 181cm, 78kg, 21 y.o (WA)
stephen clifton, 184cm, 89kg, 23 y.o (Vic)
jackson sketcher, 182cm, 82kg, 17/2/1992 (Vic)
ed curnow, 180cm, 82kg, 17/11/1989
johnathan beech, 185cm, 81kg, 9/11/1990 (SA)
jackson bolton, 183cm, 72kg, 15/7/1992 (Vic)
mitch carter, 184cm, 80kg, 2/7/1991 (WA)
josh duncan, 182cm, 82kg, 21.6.1991 (NSW)
michael evans, 182cm, 75kg, 28/2/1992 (WA)
mitch gent, 183cm, 78kg, 5/2/1992 (Vic)
taylor gilchrist, 190cm, 74kg, 19/10/1990 (Vic)
cameron grover, 176cm, 73kg, 21/12/1992 (WA)
scott hancock, 182cm, 78kg, 11.5.1992 (WA)
brad harvey, 185cm, 83kg, 16/4/1992 (Vic)
jason johannisen, 176cm, 67kg, 8/11/1992 (WA)
mitch keddel, 185cm, 89kg, 7.8.1988 (Vic)
adam kennedy, 181cm, 72kg, 12/7/1992 (Vic)
joel latham, 180kg, 74kg, d.o.b?
archie longbottom, 182cm, 80kg, 19y.o (SA)

archie longbottom, 182cm, 80kg, 19y.o (SA)

Could play nicely "Along-Side Bottom"

 

[Snoop Dog]

heres a phantom rookie i put together which might generate some chat around names etc.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=778647

 

[TradeDraft]

# 17 – COLLINGWOOD
Tyler Chalwell - East Fremantle / 193cm / 89kg
JB like presence. Played Colts pretty much all year save for a couple of reserves games which he went well in. Played ruck at Colts level but also spent ime up fwd, down back on a wing etc etc. Vertical leap was the equal best of the National Draft Combine but also scored a 14.6 beep test which is good enough to play midfield. Dominates the airspace around him and is very good with his footskills as well. Notwithstanding the limited footage he also seems to show an ability to get the ball moving quickly and also enjoys the physical contact.

If he is not taked by a WA Club in the 1st RD I can defiantly see us doing this?

# 34 – COLLINGWOOD
Jack Frost – Sandringham / 194cm / 83kg
One of my very favourite players and am somewhat surprised he hasn’t been talked about more. Had a terrific year for the Dragons and been really consistent. Has played at both ends of the field and is a terrific height for a KPD or KPF and also has terrific pace (tested faster than Farmer over 20m) and agility. Josh Jenkins or Kory Beard another I would look at

Be More Than Happy if we got Frost There

# 50 – COLLINGWOOD
Isiah Stevens – Swan Districts / 183cm / 75kg
You wont have heard much about him because the WA posters (like Swannies / Royal Eagle / ysaye / Monocle etc) don’t want anyone to know. Kid is an excitement machine from WA who has a super leap and terrific skill level – got those Jurrah like qualities but to be fair maybe a bit more like Weedon. Consistency the issue though and hence why here instead of the National Draft. Bit like Peterson insomuch as he plays medium fwd and can do most things. Tested incredibly well and would rather him than Cooyou. You want to see the hanger he took this year....WOW!

I be over the Moon if we got this Kid Talking about Upside

# 63 – COLLINGWOOD
Nathan Phillips – South Fremantle / 186 / 82
Midfielder from WA who has really committed to his footy in the last 12 months and is now reaping the rewards. Midfielder with good pace and that terrific ability to hurt offensively. Really come on this year after switching clubs and ACL is repairing well so is a chance. Won South’s B&F having only played 13 games! Pies have been speaking to him so will slot him here albeit we dont tend to do mature age rookies. Matthew Outridge would be nice as well.

This will be no Suprise at all

 

[TradeDraft]

Would be intrested in Steven Gaertner from St Kilda if he Walks

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...ised-to-walk-out/story-e6frf9jf-1225960802722

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Would be intrested in Steven Gaertner from St Kilda if he Walks

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...ised-to-walk-out/story-e6frf9jf-1225960802722

Considering he's apparently walking because he doesn't have the passion or desire to continue with the game, I'd say no.

*Source: His father (allegedly) on the Saints board.

 

[Snoop Dog]

and he hasnt improved his kicking at all

 

[Breakthelines]

What about Marty Clarke, can we Rookie him?

 

[Ed D]

I think someone was saying a while ago we had to have lodged the request before the draft or something. I don't think he'll be coming back, but who knows.

 

[twaters]

1. Looking at our potential VFL team, we don't have a CHF there - Taz/LBrown possible fill ins for now; Hartley/James Stewart possible NSW/ F/s candidates next couple of years but are developmental years off after that. Even Crow could fill in for VFL, but what about a rookie for there as top priority? With Brown and Chalwell well gone, probably only leaves an underdone Savage or a swingman such as Frost, Noonan (193/92 isn't bad if he just didn't barrack for St Kilda), or Fitzgerald.

2. To get anyone else out of that group here at second pick as a potential defensive KP is as likely as to pick up five hundred dollar notes on the footpath. If Nicholson is still here to back up Johnson or release Shaw more regularly, great.

3. Well we've apparently had a chat to Cooyou and Nathan Phillips, so they could be 3 and / or 4 and that's the end of it.

4. ...Or there is one KPP likely to last till here; can't recall a KPP taken at fourth rookie ever making it into the AFL, but keener watchers will thankfully correct me. Otherwise filled via 3 option above, or a mature age rookie.