The Father-Son rule is an unfair, elitist, anachronistic rule.

[Silvagnis]

Because I dont believe there should any possible way a top 4 side should get the best junior player in the land.

Nothing stopping a top four club from drafting Matt Egan, Harry Taylor, Menzel and Duncan after pick 16. If your player development is poor and they lack the right attitude, then your father-son picks could easily end up like Tambling, Egan and Oakleigh-Nicholls. Or Nathan Ablett. Mooney views him as a huge waste of talent. N Ablett and Blake still delivered them flags.

It's a great tradition that separates our code from the rest. I'd hate to see one of Walker's sons play for another club. If a player isn't rated as a first round pick, then your last pick should be enough. It makes a mockery of the rule if you're allowing rivals to make a cheap bid for the son of another club's all time great.

Carlton said no to drafting Sheldon's son with a late pick, so I think Buckley's going OK.

I'd love to see the hysteria if Jordan Bourke is tearing up the TAC Comp this year, and the Cats are strongly contending for B2B.

Mark Blake retired on 99 games.

The AFL will probably count NAB Cup games to ensure that any son's are drafted to Geelong.

 

[Vdubs]

They finished eighth and knocked us off in the elimination final in 2000. I don't remember Hawthorn ever being accused of tanking in the modern era; the times they've finished down the bottom have been simply because they were crap.

Well their crapness was providential in getting Buddy and Roughy to the club. The tanking or not issue is irrelevant here, but thanks for your knowledge and memory of the actual facts around these draft picks.

 

[ManWithNoName]

Another of Dan's ignoring, nonsensical rants about how everything should be different to the way it is. Should be banned from starting threads, while it's not as bad as his "Twenty20 is better than Test Cricket" or his "I'll rate premiership sides from the 19th Century" efforts, this is still very stupid.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Another of Dan's ignoring, nonsensical rants about how everything should be different to the way it is. Should be banned from starting threads, while it's not as bad as his "Twenty20 is better than Test Cricket" or his "I'll rate premiership sides from the 19th Century" efforts, this is still very stupid.

And he hasn't ben seen back in his thread for a while now.

 

[Big Fozza]

Imagine James Hird's eldest son turns out to be a gun junior footballer and gets drafted by Collingwood or Carlton before Essendon's first pick.

How much would you hate seeing Hird Junior in the black and white, or the navy blue?

That's why the rule is there.

/close thread

 

[Big Fozza]

Every team over time has the opportunity to benefit from it, and the bidding system makes things even more equitable.

If I get annoyed at Mitchell at Sydney or Wallace at the Bulldogs, I only have to think how I'd hate to see Voss Junior tearing it up for another club.

It is as equitable as such a rule can be - and I don't know why people are so keen to strip the emotion and tribalism out of the game.

another good post

 

[weevil]

Another of Dan's ignoring, nonsensical rants about how everything should be different to the way it is. Should be banned from starting threads, while it's not as bad as his "Twenty20 is better than Test Cricket" or his "I'll rate premiership sides from the 19th Century" efforts, this is still very stupid.

Oh yeah the “I’ll rate every premiership team in history and then I’ll spend the entire rest of the thread telling anyone who does not agree with every single one of my selections that they are wrong” threads.

Yeah, those threads were interesting windows into Dan’s psyche.

 

[Blue and Silver]

I fail to understand his argument about how other equally talented players are disadvantaged. Won't they be drafted by another club? Hypothetically in their draft year Dion Prestia (Pick 9) and Mitch Wallis played some pretty comprabable footy. Both were drafted.

Does he refer to fringe draftable players, and suggest that clubs might favour the F/S over another prospect (ala Dylan Buckley and Jed Bews this year)? In such a case such a player would still be involved in the rookie draft and could enter a secondary competition and attempt to gain selection through strong performances there. F/S selections affect no-one but the clubs and the players who are eligible.

 

[Father Jack]

No, it's simply they don't get to go to a specific club that they probably supported while growing up.

 

[Asgardian]

Ebert, no good

Blake, fair, third round was about right, earlier picks were Tenace and Thurley

Your logic aint logical.

Brett Ebert has had a pretty fair career, so far, especially compared to someone like Mark Blake

 

[TempleKelvington]

With something like 20 f/s coming through the ranks over the next 5 to 10 years for the dogs I hope the rules stays. Having said that, it does not mean they will all be great players even so these days with the bidding process you don´t get the good ones for nothing anymore. Overtime all teams will benefit , and it´s good to see sons of guns play for their old mans team.

 

[TheRealComptroller]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


I can't believe a Geelong supporter would say this!

Yeah, it's a horseshit rule that has landed us Gary Ablett jnr, Matthew Scarlett (Team Of The Century full-back for the 21st Century. Bet on it!) and Tom Hawkins, amongst others.

Dude, you do realise the difference between getting what you want and doing the right thing?

I love it how in 2007 and 2009 both of our Norm Smith winners were players that had been available to every team. I love it how Boris has won 2 flag B&Fs and every team could have selected him; he went at #47 in 1999 making him passed over 3 times by some clubs.

I love it how the club has never finished bottom-four in the expansion era so never receiving a top 4 pick from the league.

Call me peverse but I just want the team's prowess to be as close to 100% pure as possible. By giving clubs a "first look" option on players no matter how minor the advantage (getting a player at #12 who would have gone at #8) is compromising the draft. That is an absolute.

I love it that zoning was abolished (Stevie would be playing for North now and Sel would be at Carlton, Chappy would be a Pie, Dunc and Smithy would be at WCE blah blah blah see earlier post) and the FS is essentially zoning-by-proxy.

History of father son picks and whether or not they were "cheap"....

2001
Ablett. definitely bargain, Cats picked up Bartel/Kelly as a bonus




2006

Hawkins, probably a good get, earlier picks were Selwoood and Djerrrkera. Was Tomahawk worthy of pick 7? Probably not

I think the poster _The_General_ (or any other drafting expert) would think you have this the wrong way around.

GAJ was rated #15-30. If the 2007- rule was around and a team had nominated him at #15 Geelong would have had to surrender selection #24 (Johnson) if it was after #25 Geelong would have ended up using the same #40 they used under the old system. Kelly was not part of the discussion; he was a traded pick from MFC for Clint Bizzell.

Hawkins was a top 5 certainty without the FS rule as he blitzed for Vic Metro and set the contested marking record for Div 1 IIRC. Perhaps not as high as #1 as Gibbs had that locked down; certainly higher than Mitch Thorpe and Travis Boak.

FFS people if Gibbs had been Crows-eligible the third best team of the year would have acquired the #1 junior. Sheer Madness. Sorry Adelaide fans.

 

[Furn]

Absolute crap. Fans like good players, but they especially like them if theres a family connection. Its an emotional game, people like to feel a connection with the team. Telling your kids "I saw his dad play" is a special intangible that youre not taking into account.

Essendons most popular player is probably Watson. Why? Because he's Tim Watsons son. StKilda fans pay a bit of special interest in young Winmar because of the family connection. At Collingwood the name Shaw is of special interest because his dad and uncle captained the club.

Its not becasue he's the captain and best player at all ? I guess Neagle is the second most popular player ?

The Shaw name means so much at the Pies you traded Rhyce for a 3rd rpound pick. Why ? because you'd rather a better player in your team.

 

[Blue and Silver]

No, it's simply they don't get to go to a specific club that they probably supported while growing up.

Nah I don't get it. This is a tradition thing, not about allowing draftees to pick their destination. Not all F/S's want to carry on in their father's footsteps.

 

[Dan26]

Dan26 isn't really an Essendon supporter. As someone mentioned before sounds more like a barracker of the AFL in general.

I've missed only 3 Essendon games in Melbourne in the last 15 years.

And yes, in addition to that I am also a fan of the sport itself (what footy fan isnt) am an AFL member, been to 21 Grand Finals.

Surely after all this time on Bigfooty (12 years) I don't need to justify my passion for Essendon to anyone, least of all you. Hell, since I became a member of Bigfooty in 2000, I've only missed two Essendon games in Melbourne (one of which I was best man at a mates wedding)

Since when does my logical, common-sense criticsm of an idiotic rule which adds nothing to the game, act as a trigger for you ciritcising me for not supporting my club? Bewildering.

You should apologise. I find your post far more insulting that any of the other posts where people are disagreeing with my opinion.

 

[Jentleman Geff]

Get over yourself, Dan. Surely in your 12 years on this board you would have realised that no one cares for your ideas, and with good reason.

 

[themidlandmaster]

Its not becasue he's the captain and best player at all ? I guess Neagle is the second most popular player ?

The Shaw name means so much at the Pies you traded Rhyce for a 3rd rpound pick. Why ? because you'd rather a better player in your team.

Rhyce requested a trade...

 

[Father Jack]

I've missed only 3 Essendon games in Melbourne in the last 15 years.

And yes, in addition to that I am also a fan of the sport itself (what footy fan isnt) am an AFL member, been to 21 Grand Finals.

Surely after all this time on Bigfooty (12 years) I don't need to justify my passion for Essendon to anyone, least of all you. Hell, since I became a member of Bigfooty in 2000, I've only missed two Essendon games in Melbourne (one of which I was best man at a mates wedding)

Since when does my logical, common-sense criticsm of an idiotic rule which adds nothing to the game, act as a trigger for you ciritcising me for not supporting my club? Bewildering.

You should apologise. I find your post far more insulting that any of the other posts where people are disagreeing with my opinion.

it's not idiotic, and it adds a fair bit to the game. Unless you have no feeling for the history of whatever club you happen to follow, in that case it could very well be seen as idiotic, i concede that.

 

[BluesMan]

Which goes to prove the beauty of the rule, players who's draft choice might have just been passed in get to have a try at cutting it on a AFL list

Lol wut? You're kidding right?

So the bloke, who should be drafted because he's better, isn't drafted, and his place is taken by someone not good enough to be draft, but is dafted because his dad played. So the bloke doesnt get drafted because his father didnt play AFL? please... ffs

This is what I dislike about the rule. Sometimes a player misses out becuase some other guys dad played.

 

[Slattery_20]

Essendons most popular player is probably Watson. Why? Because he's Tim Watsons son.

So he also must have been our most popular player when he wasn't getting a game. Or when he was getting a game but kept turning it over.
Certainly not my recollection. But you tell me.
IMHO him being our best player has a a little bit to do with it as well.

They'd be better with Cloke too

With 3, though?
That's the scuttlebutt that went round high school when Jason went to the Pies, package deal.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

So he also must have been our most popular player when he wasn't getting a game. Or when he was getting a game but kept turning it over.
Certainly not my recollection. But you tell me.

IMHO him being our best player has a a little bit to do with it as well.

If he wasnt a Watson he'd be as hated during his "turning it over" phase as Stanton has been in recent years. He was a popular player even when he wasnt your best player, Essendon fans gave him a bit more latitude in the early years because his dad was a legend.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Lol wut? You're kidding right?

So the bloke, who should be drafted because he's better, isn't drafted, and his place is taken by someone not good enough to be draft, but is dafted because his dad played. So the bloke doesnt get drafted because his father didnt play AFL? please... ffs

This is what I dislike about the rule. Sometimes a player misses out becuase some other guys dad played.

No player ever misses out on being drafted because of the father-son rule. Clubs only draft players if they think they can make the grade, and that includes father-sons. One player, one draft pick. Some players make it, some dont, famous father or not.

 

[AGC]

No player ever misses out on being drafted because of the father-son rule. Clubs only draft players if they think they can make the grade, and that includes father-sons. One player, one draft pick. Some players make it, some dont, famous father or not.

Agreed.
We had Lachie Fairley(f-s) who for the last 2 seasons has been touted as a rookie-draft selection at best. Many thought he'd get picked up with us, because of training with us, and his Dad.
Didn't end up being the case.

Players get drafted on talent, not on sentiment.

 

[Slattery_20]

If he wasnt a Watson he'd be as hated during his "turning it over" phase as Stanton has been in recent years. He was a popular player even when he wasnt your best player, Essendon fans gave him a bit more latitude in the early years because his dad was a legend.

If any of it were true you'd have a very, very good point.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

I only find it unfair because other than using it for Brennans son we have never had a father/son before, Ben Cousins doesn't really count because his was a zone selection, he could have chosen Geelong or Fremantle as well