St Kilda President Andrew Bassat tees off on the AFL draft system, specifically father/son and the Northern Academies

[Nvent]

Did you not see the players you landed last year with junk picks?

Yes I think its a joke.

 

[bergholt]

Does he also have a problem with Stkilda being gifted top end draft picks year after year after year for being shit? Or is that the right kind of unfairness?

There's a difference between equalisation and unequalisation. If you don't understand that then I'm not sure your comments are going to add to this thread.

 

[bergholt]

Apart from GWS and GC, every other team has access to F/S, so I am unsure what Bassat is complaining about.

Not equal access:

Here's the number of 100 gamers each club has who were born between 1965 and 1980 (roughly the age of current father-son fathers):

35: Melbourne
34: Essendon
33: Brisbane
32: West Coast
31:
30: Collingwood
29: Hawthorn, North Melbourne
28: Geelong
27: Adelaide
26: Carlton, Western Bulldogs
25: Sydney
24: Richmond
23: St Kilda
22:
21: Port Adelaide
20:
19:
18:
17:
16:
15:
14: Fremantle


Doesn't seem super even that Melbourne have 35 tickets in the lottery while the Saints have 23 (not to mention Freo having 14). That just exposes you more to the random vagaries of reproduction. Lockett, Loewe, Burke had daughters, for instance.

It's fundamentally never going to be even. If we care about equalisation then we can't have it. If you don't care about equalisation, that's fine, just say that.

 

[Nvent]

Does he also have a problem with Stkilda being gifted top end draft picks year after year after year for being shit? Or is that the right kind of unfairness?

Isn't that the rule though for all clubs?

 

[bergholt]

Remove FA compo

Reckon he would shut up right quick

What's FA compo got to do with it? It's another equalisation measure. If you don't like equalisation then just say it.

 

[SSSSSS]

I think the academies outside NSW and Qld clubs should go, personally. But pretending Owens was a "gun" junior is only accurate if you buy the shit from the AFL media where everyone is a star. He was around top 30 quality and that's about where he ended up.

I saw plenty of draft watchers (both on Bigfooty and in the media) having him in the 10-20 mark on their phantoms throughout the year, in fact I remember a few Saints posters worried that if he went first round they wouldn't be able to match. A lot of academy guys slip a little bit further down the rankings ala Gulden.

 

[Sully111]

The problem most here seem to have is you need to look at the issue on it's own merits.

Regardless of which club I support... I'll say it again... having the premier getting the best player in the draft for peanuts is ridiculous. It's an infinitely flawed system that needs to be fixed.

Either scrap it, or the club needs to pay a fair price.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Isn't that the rule though for all clubs?

Yes. So is father son.

And would you look at that, 2 of Stkilda's best young players were academy picks.

It's just a bit rich for the club with probably the best access to the draft over the last 25 years to start complaining about fairness.

 

[caloschwaby]

Semantically, fairness can refer either to the process or the outcome. Clearly I was talking about the outcome.

But also, because of historical differences in the number of 100 gamers (which I posted earlier), the process is also biased in particular ways which are not perfectly fair.

And that's why I'm saying that way of looking at it is wrong because there is no way to manipulate the conditions that exist to create F/S selections*. Players just play their careers > reach 100 games for a club > have kids at some point > hopefully get out 1-2 males > try and get them to be interested in footy > get them to a point where they're playing a high enough level of footy > then, and only then after all that does F/S even come into play.

The outcome being uneven is unfortunately completely irrelevant when there are no forces at play manipulating the conditions to create these outcomes. These are just organic things, you can't decide any of those preconditions for the fathers/sons and they take years to play out.

And it doesn't just happen to St Kilda - doesn't look likely either of Nathan Buckley's sons make it to the club, which is a shame for how big of a player he was but that's just life when they choose not to pursue footy. Nothing we can do except focus on developing the F/S there is a likelihood of taking.

*The only way I can think of, and not sure what other clubs do regarding this, but Collingwood run events exclusively for Collingwood-playing fathers to bring their young kids to for a run around and hopefully get them on the path to playing footy (and hope they are gifted!). This is open for all clubs to operate without restriction so there is effectively no manipulation, just maximising yield which is probably what you're talking about with the "tickets in the lottery" analogy. There is no unfairness whatsoever in that.

 

[Bald]

One is an equalising measure (free agency compensation), the other is an unequalising measure (father-son). Not too hard to understand.

That’s a convenient way of trying to differentiate what really is just an allowance of a club to draft a player before another would otherwise be able to.

 

[Philhawk]

Saints being pretty uniquely disadvantaged to not get Cam McKenzie as an academy kid for the brief period the AFL changed, then reverted, the rules is also pretty funny/terrible.

 

[WillHayward]

We've had some shite F&S for us, JPK the best but made his career elsewhere. Langford has a purple patch at the right time but nothing long term.

Dear looks like being the best of the lot as an 18 year old already.

We've also been shafted out of NGA this year. Should have had 2x probable first round selections this year in Moraes and Tauru but for whatever reason they've been stripped of NGA eligibility.

Saints got Owens for cheap. He was a gun junior.

And Windhager who looks promising

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

That speech was a bit incoherent.

But I agree that the father son rule is a joke. I have still never heard a good argument for it to exist.

Its one of those concession to nostalgia and the old days of club loyalty.
It probably has no reason to exist in terms of "fairness", but it is at least luck of the draw rather than actually rigged like much else is.

 

[bergholt]

I saw plenty of draft watchers (both on Bigfooty and in the media) having him in the 10-20 mark on their phantoms throughout the year, in fact I remember a few Saints posters worried that if he went first round they wouldn't be able to match. A lot of academy guys slip a little bit further down the rankings ala Gulden.

Mitch Owens

central.rookieme.com

"One of a couple of St Kilda Next Generation Academy (NGA) prospects pushing for top 30 contention is Mitch Owens, a rising talent out of the Sandringham Dragons."

But yeah, you're right they often slip a bit because they're not open access. Another reason the current system doesn't work.

 

[SSSSSS]

Mitch Owens

central.rookieme.com

"One of a couple of St Kilda Next Generation Academy (NGA) prospects pushing for top 30 contention is Mitch Owens, a rising talent out of the Sandringham Dragons."

But yeah, you're right they often slip a bit because they're not open access. Another reason the current system doesn't work.

I mean even on that same page they projected Mitch as a 15-30 pick, which was pretty in line with alot of watchers at the 10-20 mark (10 probably a stretch but sometimes watchers have their favourites).

It's not an egregious steal like Daicos or the Ashcroft's but the Saints still got very good value from an academy pick.

 

[Bont the Lord]

Of course it's changed .When Jon Brown got drafted by the Lions there was an uproar. The eligibility rules were 50 games by the father, his dad played 51. The AFL subsequently changed it to 100 games.

Geelong then got Hawkins and there was an uproar, led by the Western Bulldogs. So the bidding system was introduced. Ironically, the first club affected by this was the Dogs when they drafted Liberatore and Wallis.

It may be too late but St Kilda could potentially have an awesome AFLW side because all their stars of the 80s, 90s and 00s had heaps of daughters.

Serious question. Where was this uproar led by the Western Bulldogs? First I've heard of it and happy to be proven wrong.

 

[Wargreymon90]

Its one of those concession to nostalgia and the old days of club loyalty.
It probably has no reason to exist in terms of "fairness", but it is at least luck of the draw rather than actually rigged like much else is.

I do agree. The rules are the same for each club and I don’t think St kilda should feel hard done by. Unlucky sure.

But I would say that for individual draftees, it is ridiculously unfair. Player X from rural WA who’s never lived anywhere else is told to pack up and move interstate where he knows no one.

Daicos and Darcy are given the option to play for the club they support because of daddy.

How anyone can see this as “romantic” is beyond me.

 

[bergholt]

And that's why I'm saying that way of looking at it is wrong because there is no way to manipulate the conditions that exist to create F/S selections*. Players just play their careers > reach 100 games for a club > have kids at some point > hopefully get out 1-2 males > try and get them to be interested in footy > get them to a point where they're playing a high enough level of footy > then, and only then after all that does F/S even come into play.

No, because more successful clubs are more likely to have 100 gamers. See the stats I posted up the thread. So that entrenches generational inequality.

*The only way I can think of, and not sure what other clubs do regarding this, but Collingwood run events exclusively for Collingwood-playing fathers to bring their young kids to for a run around and hopefully get them on the path to playing footy (and hope they are gifted!). This is open for all clubs to operate without restriction so there is effectively no manipulation, just maximising yield which is probably what you're talking about with the "tickets in the lottery" analogy. There is no unfairness whatsoever in that.

Except that richer clubs have more money to run these sorts of events, whereas shoestring clubs like the Saints and Kangas might not be able to spare the cash for it. So again that entrenches generational inequality.


I mean, it's fine, if you don't believe in equalisation and think we should move towards an EPL-style "cash buys flags" system then that's a perfectly valid belief. But just say that. Believing in equalisation and also father-son should produce cognitive dissonance because they're exactly at odds with each other.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Not to sound like a broken record, but people need to accept the AFL is an entertainment product, not a competitive sporting league.

It creates a better product to have sons play at the clubs their father's did - in a competitive league, no way would these concessions exist.

Just like it creates a better product to play the grand final in front of 100,000 people every year. Or have big clubs play in prime time. Or any of the other myriad iniquities.

I don't have a problem with clubs having access to F/S in the draft. What I do have a problem with is clubs not paying fair price for the F/S.

It scenarios like with Daicos where a club only has to hand over 3 or 4 early-mid 40's picks to get a top 2 player in the draft that is the problem.

Firstly the 20% discount needs to go. Just having rights to that player is advantage enough.
Secondly there has to be some sort of restriction to the pick used (e.g. one of the picks in the bid needs to be within 10 picks of the bid; or no more than 3 picks can be used to select the player).

 

[blueboy25]

No, because more successful clubs are more likely to have 100 gamers. See the stats I posted up the thread. So that entrenches generational inequality.



Except that richer clubs have more money to run these sorts of events, whereas shoestring clubs like the Saints and Kangas might not be able to spare the cash for it. So again that entrenches generational inequality.


I mean, it's fine, if you don't believe in equalisation and think we should move towards an EPL-style "cash buys flags" system then that's a perfectly valid belief. But just say that. Believing in equalisation and also father-son should produce cognitive dissonance because they're exactly at odds with each other.

If a club can't afford to have kids of former players spend some time at the club then they really are in trouble.

 

[bergholt]

If a club can't afford to have kids of former players spend some time at the club then they really are in trouble.

Correct! Clubs who don't have much money really don't have much money. The AFL needs them to stay around so that they can keep churning out huge TV rights deals (because otherwise there aren't enough games and fans). You either try to make them competitive - which is in everyone's interests because it makes the comp better to watch - or you ignore that and end up with the EPL where only a handful of clubs can actually win. As a supporter of a historically terrible club, do I deserve the chance to see a flag in my lifetime? Or should I just switch to supporting Carlton?

 

[Bont the Lord]

Ugle Hagen has no right to be at the WB.

Jed Walter and Ethan Read have no right to be at the GC. Am I doing this right?

 

[The Jack]

It's just a bit rich for the club with probably the best access to the draft over the last 25 years to start complaining about fairness.

You sure about that? Maybe do some research.

 

[SeaOfFire]

If Levi Ashcroft was a draft smoky who had sat out the last 12 months after serious injury, this thread doesn't happen.

I'm guessing all the hours of backyard training that went into the Ashcroft brothers should now be declared in the Lions' coaching salary cap.....

 

[Hollow Knight]

I wasn’t aware that St Kilda has some systemic disadvantage that prevents them from procreating.

What a weak-ass salty melt. Absolute loser energy.

As us Lions fans were repeatedly told through the 2010s… “fix ya culcha”.