King going with "can't hold Darcy Moore responsible for that". If that was Weitering I swear on anything he'd had that First Crack segment prepped ready to trade him to Tasi for a 4th rounder.
Anyway team is good enough to win. Need to find a way to play four quarters. Can't just roll over for [insert number here] minutes when things get tough and let the game get away.
I get Saints play two rucks but really going to need something from Reidy or Pittonet up forward to play both. Lord out is surprising as well. They better not go back to four in the midfield again.
So just confirming no clubs knew the details of the changes just that "a change" was happening. But surely clubs were treating the media's guesses at what might happen as gospel and making significant list decisions off the back of it...?
The funniest thing is the tweet used as their evidence states that the AFL was going to let the clubs know the specifics before the trade period last year. The fact that the rules have now only just been confirmed 7 months later makes it clear that things clearly changed since then.
You cant be serious. It's an academy that any NGA or Father/Son can join. So you can be either and get in. Dean was a father-son and was eligible join. Ison was an academy prospect and so was also eligible to join. You don't need to be both.
No my argument was they didn't know all the specifics. In fact, it was reported that the AFL had changed things over the last few weeks with the discount let alone over a 7 month period.
"They've been told they will get rules next week BEFORE trade". This was posted in September and the clubs are getting the rule changes in late April of the next year. "Might" helps no one. Announce the actual changes beforehand. This isn't some local competition it's the AFL
Yeh this is true but they also roll out a lot of crap, people get upset and then they don't end up enacting like. We do this same dance with the night GF every year.
No where did I say clubs didn't expect change. But to say clubs have to be ready for every single rule change that potentially could be made by the clowns at AFL house because they aren't competent enough to actually release them at least the year before they will be enacted is ridiculous.
Clubs were told there would be change in July last year. How do list managers adequately prepare if they don't know the specifics of those changes? They haven't been realised until now.
That's not what they said at all. The Peter Dean academy is for father sons OR academy prospects. Dean not an academy prospect but is a father son and so is still eligible
North have had a soft start to the year I see them falling. Regardless, the deals were fine:
9, 11, 43 and 54 for 21, 25, 27, 30, 46 and a North F2.
Also note, after bidding 9 and 11 got pushed back into the teens (13 and 15 from memory?)
We didn't have a lot more we could do imo. 9 and 11 had to go and we would have just taken the best offer for those individual picks. I just find it odd that the system they brought in for one year that no one complained about is now being changed again.