The numpty questions thread
- Thread starter weevil
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Maybe it's a post count thing then. Sorry I don't know more, guys.
____
.
- Sep 1, 2009
- 7,563
- 9,054
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Everton, Brisbane Bullets, Thai Port FC
Awesome, and you only have 3121 more posts than me Skoob.I guess it's a long way to the top if you want a
sausage rollsignature role?
OHHH, THE COMMITMENT. <sigh>
You should be able to get a sig after 20 posts and 5 days of membership, if you can't just message an admin (Chief, grizzlym or Fred)
Morgs_
Club Legend
- Jun 8, 2012
- 1,299
- 1,840
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Morgs_
Club Legend
- Jun 8, 2012
- 1,299
- 1,840
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
You still trying to increase your post size? Compensating for something?
I've got a looong way to go then
Lixy_
Debutant
Thanks heaps! Chief just sorted it for me. Legend!
Davemonkey
Strider of the middle way.
- Mar 13, 2012
- 4,200
- 5,794
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Video games are a team aren't they?
Davemonkey
Strider of the middle way.
- Mar 13, 2012
- 4,200
- 5,794
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Video games are a team aren't they?
Ahh I shall hit up [user]Chief[/user]. Or no more beer.
Can anyone here explain the rules about mature age rookies - or come to think of it the Rookie List in general?
The other day I read something about Heath Scotland being delisted by Carlton and then picked up as a mature age rookie. Then there is the possibility we might do the same with Banfield. I know people casually suggest this sort of thing all of the time (including me), but what are rules about it?
I assume mature rookies still aren't able to play seniors until there is a long term injury (or an existing free spot on the list where they can be promoted to) - is that right?
The other day I read something about Heath Scotland being delisted by Carlton and then picked up as a mature age rookie. Then there is the possibility we might do the same with Banfield. I know people casually suggest this sort of thing all of the time (including me), but what are rules about it?
I assume mature rookies still aren't able to play seniors until there is a long term injury (or an existing free spot on the list where they can be promoted to) - is that right?
There were new rules which started last year that involved the size of the senior list and rookie list. Basically now it means that you have 44 players on both lists combined, but it has to be either 38 senior list/6 rookie list, 39/5 or 40/4.
If a team doesn't have 40 players on their senior list they can nominate 1 (if they have 39 on their senior list) or 2 players (if they have 38) as nominated rookies which means they are rookie players that are essentially on the main list. It's what we did with Clarke last year, we left only 39 players on our senior list after the last list lodgement, then selected Clarke as our nominated rookie to fill that last spot.
If a team has 40 players on their main list after the final list lodgement, they won't be able to nominate a rookie to play in the senior team unless there is a long term injury (think it's still 10 weeks), or they utilise the mid-season elevation (normally after round 11/12).
In Carlton's situation, they aren't planning to have the full compliment of 40 players on their main list, and plan to play Scotland as a nominated rookie (as we did Clarke).
The reason we'd delist Banfield and pick him up as a rookie listed player is because we don't have the list space to take all our second round picks. Under that assumption, we'll have 40 players on our senior list, therefore we won't be able to nominate a rookie, and hence Banfield can't play seniors unless the situations mentioned above occur (LTI or mid-season elevation).
If a team doesn't have 40 players on their senior list they can nominate 1 (if they have 39 on their senior list) or 2 players (if they have 38) as nominated rookies which means they are rookie players that are essentially on the main list. It's what we did with Clarke last year, we left only 39 players on our senior list after the last list lodgement, then selected Clarke as our nominated rookie to fill that last spot.
If a team has 40 players on their main list after the final list lodgement, they won't be able to nominate a rookie to play in the senior team unless there is a long term injury (think it's still 10 weeks), or they utilise the mid-season elevation (normally after round 11/12).
In Carlton's situation, they aren't planning to have the full compliment of 40 players on their main list, and plan to play Scotland as a nominated rookie (as we did Clarke).
The reason we'd delist Banfield and pick him up as a rookie listed player is because we don't have the list space to take all our second round picks. Under that assumption, we'll have 40 players on our senior list, therefore we won't be able to nominate a rookie, and hence Banfield can't play seniors unless the situations mentioned above occur (LTI or mid-season elevation).
Thanks for that JasRulz63.
I assume Carlton put Scotland on their Rookie list just for salary cap purposes then (I think I read somewhere else that the first $x amount of a rookie's contract isn't counted for salary cap purposes).
Are there still rules in place about who exactly can be put on the Rookie list (or is it now open to anyone over 18 regardless of whether they have already playing at AFL level or not)? Also is it still the case that you can only spend a certain number of seasons on the Rookie list?
I assume Carlton put Scotland on their Rookie list just for salary cap purposes then (I think I read somewhere else that the first $x amount of a rookie's contract isn't counted for salary cap purposes).
Are there still rules in place about who exactly can be put on the Rookie list (or is it now open to anyone over 18 regardless of whether they have already playing at AFL level or not)? Also is it still the case that you can only spend a certain number of seasons on the Rookie list?
- Oct 20, 2012
- 2,352
- 1,319
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
not sure about your first question dont think there are any restrictions in regards to who can be on it. However I do know that maximum numberof seasons that can be spent on the rookie list 3 after which Im pretty sure you have to be upgraded onto the senior list
From memory it's the amount equal to what a first year third round draftee (I think) is paid that isn't included into the cap. Quite sure rookies are paid the same as a third round draftee these days, so about $52k or so without match payments. I think as a nominated rookie, half of their football payments are excluded from the TPP.
There's no restrictions on it any more as long as they go through the draft and are drafted onto the Rookie list (so in theory other teams could jump in and draft the player, but there seems to be a 'gentleman's agreement' amongst clubs that means it doesn't happen). The AFL introduced the changes (mainly the removal of the age limit) to encourage more state league players an opportunity at league level.
As captainrich mentioned above, the limit is three years, with the player having to consent to the third year.
Viceregal
Norm Smith Medallist
In the best 22 next year thread people are talking about 'x's position depending on pre-season form ... for some reason I have in my mind that they cancelled the NAB cup and were starting early and there was no pre-season .... wrong?
- Aug 17, 2012
- 14,041
- 20,994
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
18 matches over 18 days or something similar. Practice matches would be a good name for it.
Fatcat08
Cool and Footbally
Veteran
Lions Board Service Medal
Brisbane Lions - Mitch Robinson Player Sponsor 2016
Brisbane Lions - 2013 Elliot Yeo Player Sponsor
Brisbane Lions - 2013 Daniel Rich Player Sponsor
Brisbane Lions - Callum Bartlett 2012 Player Sponsor
Brisbane Lions - Ryan Harwood 2011 Player Sponsor
Brisbane Lions - Todd Banfield 2010 Player Sponsor
Viceregal
Norm Smith Medallist
Cool thanks!
BL_dobsmob
Team Captain
- Aug 22, 2013
- 348
- 649
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- 49ers since 1982
Re the Media Alert thread.
I often land on Big Footy and see there is a Media Alert and think oh good someone is talking bout the Lions again only to find that it is a new post about something said 24 hours ago.
The Bump has got me all excited for nothing.
Is it possible to have a separate Media Alert discussion thread and keep the Alerts thread for the alerts only.
Don't know how this would work in BF - locked thread or posted by Mods only - nah forget it (they've got enough to do
).
But still a question about how the bump premature anticipation could be curtailed for only those that ARE Media alerts.
I often land on Big Footy and see there is a Media Alert and think oh good someone is talking bout the Lions again only to find that it is a new post about something said 24 hours ago.
The Bump has got me all excited for nothing.
Is it possible to have a separate Media Alert discussion thread and keep the Alerts thread for the alerts only.
Don't know how this would work in BF - locked thread or posted by Mods only - nah forget it (they've got enough to do
).But still a question about how the bump premature anticipation
could be curtailed for only those that ARE Media alerts.
- Dec 2, 2013
- 2,511
- 4,992
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
I figure this question wouldn't really be suitable anywhere else.
I follow Tom Rockliff and Jack Redden on Instagram and occasionally view rocliff's twitter account just to keep up to speed with the club.
Recently, however. I've noticed that whilst there used to be continual posts of photos with Tom and Jack together, there is now no mention of each other. I saw that one of them referred to Ashley McGrath as his roomie, although I'd put that down to the fact they were roommates on the Arizona Trip. I'm hoping this isn't true, but I have a feeling that Jack Redden and Tom Rockliff might have had a falling out. The alternative to this is that they're no longer living together. This question is strange, but just wondering if anyone knows the reason. Might just be talking nonsense.
I follow Tom Rockliff and Jack Redden on Instagram and occasionally view rocliff's twitter account just to keep up to speed with the club.
Recently, however. I've noticed that whilst there used to be continual posts of photos with Tom and Jack together, there is now no mention of each other. I saw that one of them referred to Ashley McGrath as his roomie, although I'd put that down to the fact they were roommates on the Arizona Trip. I'm hoping this isn't true, but I have a feeling that Jack Redden and Tom Rockliff might have had a falling out. The alternative to this is that they're no longer living together. This question is strange, but just wondering if anyone knows the reason. Might just be talking nonsense.
