2016 Non Crows AFL Discussion thread Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,537
Likes
38,519
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
It's going to be interesting to see how this will effect Geelong in the long term.

No first round picks in 15, 16 and now 2017 is going to leave a massive hole on their list.

It won't be long before their list is a complete mess, I would say that if Geelong don't win anything next year then Danger is going to be looking back at 2012 as the closest he ever was to a grand final.
I said at the time danger went to then at the wrong time, because the cats should have been harvesting picks for a rebuild for a partial rebuild to replace their aging players. The strategy was all wrong.
 

GROTTO

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Posts
36,614
Likes
36,896
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Even if Ports venture intoChina
That's nice, this however is the first AFL game for Premiership points outside of Aus/NZ. Who knows if it'll last or be successful, but it's worth a crack and it's not costing us a whole lot.
Seriously who gives a flying fck about a game in China, I know your Club tries to mask it's on field pathetic performances with these off field side shows.

But bottom line I would hate for the Crows to play game in China or anywhere outside Australia during the H&A season, it's a distraction and will IMO hurt the Powers chances of creeping into the 8.

TBH I'm happy that you guys are playing in China.

Hopefully your team doesn't fly with Malaysian Airlines.
 

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Posts
48,515
Likes
63,215
Location
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Don't the rules simply say it means the club won't be able to trade their subsequent first rounder - so in this case their 2018 first?

It's like being caught speeding and the punishment is to keep driving without speeding anymore.

Where's Vader at?
I don't think so, they were allowed to trade 2017s pick as long as they use 2 by 2018. So they need to gain a pick to be able to use the 2.

I've tweeted Keane a couple of times for no response.
 

FR0GGY

Press the button
Joined
Oct 9, 2004
Posts
35,550
Likes
42,628
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
CDFC
I don't think so, they were allowed to trade 2017s pick as long as they use 2 by 2018. So they need to gain a pick to be able to use the 2.

I've tweeted Keane a couple of times for no response.
they are probably still writing the rules
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

RePete

Club Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Posts
2,488
Likes
3,593
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't think so, they were allowed to trade 2017s pick as long as they use 2 by 2018. So they need to gain a pick to be able to use the 2.

I've tweeted Keane a couple of times for no response.
Well based on their list void of young talent, and with most their aging players either gone or passed it in 2018, not hard to see them finishing say 14th, getting a top-5 pick and trading it and other picks for picks 17 & 18. Orrr maybe they could trade their 2019 first for a late 2018 first? So many possible ways to screw over their future :D
 

Sanders

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Posts
25,451
Likes
32,869
AFL Club
Adelaide
Reckon the reason this china shemozzle is a suns home game is that this allows the AFL to compensate them for losing a home game

In effect it's their pay off.
 

Bicks

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jun 10, 2009
Posts
29,598
Likes
41,294
Location
Victorian Central Highlands
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Panthers, GWV Rebels Beaufort Crows
Never change AFL, Never, ever......

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...l/news-story/193b777072a675dccc28411bd0dfecd1

Jaeger O’Meara trade to Hawthorn from Gold Coast remains a source of confusion and discontent in AFL

SAM LANDSBERGER, Herald Sun
5 minutes ago
premium_iconSubscriber only

MULTIPLE clubs remain confused by an AFL ruling which allowed Hawthorn to trade its future second-round pick to secure Jaeger O’Meara.

But league boss Gillon McLachlan on Wednesday declared all clubs and AFL staff were “clear” on rules governing the trading of future picks.

The AFL has conceded it issued incorrect paperwork regarding the O’Meara trade last week, which compounded confusion.



AFL media manager Patrick Keane tweeted after trade deadline that Gold Coast received GWS’s future second-round pick in the O’Meara trade, because Hawthorn was forced to keep its own.

The paperwork distributed by the league also stated that the Hawks on-traded the Giants’ pick to the Suns.

But the AFL now says Hawthorn swapped pick No. 10 and its own future second-rounder for the midfield jet.



Clubs contacted yesterday by the Herald Sun were split as to whether Hawthorn had been allowed to trade its future second-round selection after earlier offloading its future first-round selection.

One called for an official inquiry, believing the O’Meara deal was illegal and questioned the presence of AFL figures in the trade room.

Another club powerbroker believed the AFL was facing pressure to get the O’Meara trade done, because it didn’t want to “stoke the fire” as it thrashes out a new pay deal with the AFL Players’ Association.



A third club wondered whether the AFL was hesitant to let the possibility of O’Meara joining Essendon for free through the pre-season draft materialise.

Suspicions also rose as to why the O’Meara trade, among others, did not lob on the official board until well after the 2pm deadline.

But four list bosses agreed that “from go to whoa” clubs have been able to do what Hawthorn did.

“That’s my understanding. As long as you trade in another pick in that round, it’s OK,” one said.

“It’s a bit silly in that you can bring in pick 36 and trade 19, but it’s clear enough I think.”

The conflicting understanding highlight the ambiguity surrounding trade rules, which clubs said had not been updated since being introduced last year.

It is believed Collingwood was open to offloading its first and second-round picks last year after bringing in St Kilda’s second-round selection for Nathan Freeman.
Instead, Brisbane Lions chose the Saints’ future second pick instead of the Pies’ in exchange for James Aish.

The Hawks gave Gold Coast its choice of future picks and when it was confirmed the second on offer belonged to GWS, the Suns opted for Hawthorn’s.

“I don’t think that’s correct at all (that clubs don’t understand the rule),” McLachlan said on Wednesday.

“The rules are clear. The (O’Meara) trade was perfectly legal and I don’t think there’s any grey in that.

“If anyone needed clarification they spoke to (integrity officer) Ken Wood during the process and I think they got pretty clear answers.”

McLachlan dismissed the bungled paperwork as an “administrative error”.

“I reckon people could be happy to make a clerical error and I think it’s a little overhyped,” he said.

Geelong recruiting boss Stephen Wells admitted during trade period he was unaware his club could trade its first pick in 2017 after offloading its first pick in 2015 and 2016.

That loophole helped the Cats secure Zach Tuohy.
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,537
Likes
38,519
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
Never change AFL, Never, ever......

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...l/news-story/193b777072a675dccc28411bd0dfecd1

Jaeger O’Meara trade to Hawthorn from Gold Coast remains a source of confusion and discontent in AFL

SAM LANDSBERGER, Herald Sun
5 minutes ago
premium_iconSubscriber only

MULTIPLE clubs remain confused by an AFL ruling which allowed Hawthorn to trade its future second-round pick to secure Jaeger O’Meara.

But league boss Gillon McLachlan on Wednesday declared all clubs and AFL staff were “clear” on rules governing the trading of future picks.

The AFL has conceded it issued incorrect paperwork regarding the O’Meara trade last week, which compounded confusion.



AFL media manager Patrick Keane tweeted after trade deadline that Gold Coast received GWS’s future second-round pick in the O’Meara trade, because Hawthorn was forced to keep its own.

The paperwork distributed by the league also stated that the Hawks on-traded the Giants’ pick to the Suns.

But the AFL now says Hawthorn swapped pick No. 10 and its own future second-rounder for the midfield jet.



Clubs contacted yesterday by the Herald Sun were split as to whether Hawthorn had been allowed to trade its future second-round selection after earlier offloading its future first-round selection.

One called for an official inquiry, believing the O’Meara deal was illegal and questioned the presence of AFL figures in the trade room.

Another club powerbroker believed the AFL was facing pressure to get the O’Meara trade done, because it didn’t want to “stoke the fire” as it thrashes out a new pay deal with the AFL Players’ Association.



A third club wondered whether the AFL was hesitant to let the possibility of O’Meara joining Essendon for free through the pre-season draft materialise.

Suspicions also rose as to why the O’Meara trade, among others, did not lob on the official board until well after the 2pm deadline.

But four list bosses agreed that “from go to whoa” clubs have been able to do what Hawthorn did.

“That’s my understanding. As long as you trade in another pick in that round, it’s OK,” one said.

“It’s a bit silly in that you can bring in pick 36 and trade 19, but it’s clear enough I think.”

The conflicting understanding highlight the ambiguity surrounding trade rules, which clubs said had not been updated since being introduced last year.

It is believed Collingwood was open to offloading its first and second-round picks last year after bringing in St Kilda’s second-round selection for Nathan Freeman.
Instead, Brisbane Lions chose the Saints’ future second pick instead of the Pies’ in exchange for James Aish.

The Hawks gave Gold Coast its choice of future picks and when it was confirmed the second on offer belonged to GWS, the Suns opted for Hawthorn’s.

“I don’t think that’s correct at all (that clubs don’t understand the rule),” McLachlan said on Wednesday.

“The rules are clear. The (O’Meara) trade was perfectly legal and I don’t think there’s any grey in that.

“If anyone needed clarification they spoke to (integrity officer) Ken Wood during the process and I think they got pretty clear answers.”

McLachlan dismissed the bungled paperwork as an “administrative error”.

“I reckon people could be happy to make a clerical error and I think it’s a little overhyped,” he said.

Geelong recruiting boss Stephen Wells admitted during trade period he was unaware his club could trade its first pick in 2017 after offloading its first pick in 2015 and 2016.

That loophole helped the Cats secure Zach Tuohy.
I thought I was reading a spackler spoof...
 

adelaidecrows

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Posts
12,508
Likes
11,979
Location
Wasleys
AFL Club
Adelaide
I thought I was reading a spackler spoof...
The AFL is a professional sport run by amateur fan boys. All CEO's have been inbred. The AFL need to go outside and get fresh talent and ideas in. Target someone who runs the EPL or NFL, NBA etc. Just bring the AFL into the professional era for goodness sake.
 

conVINCEd

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2003
Posts
4,124
Likes
2,844
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
I don't think so, they were allowed to trade 2017s pick as long as they use 2 by 2018. So they need to gain a pick to be able to use the 2.

I've tweeted Keane a couple of times for no response.
Sure but what is the punishment if they can't land another first rounder? [probably what you're asking Patrick]

I'm sure I've read somewhere that the penalty is simply making the club hold their first pick the subsequent year (and probably the year following) to fulfil the 2 first rounders in 4 years requirements.
 

Large 1

Club Legend
Joined
May 7, 2015
Posts
1,052
Likes
2,395
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't think so, they were allowed to trade 2017s pick as long as they use 2 by 2018. So they need to gain a pick to be able to use the 2.

I've tweeted Keane a couple of times for no response.
Their solution will be to swap their 2019 1st (and maybe a sweetener) for another teams 2018 first. Then they have 2 firsts in 2018 and are fine.

2015(0), 2016(0), 2017(0), 2018(2), 2019(0)...no 4 year period without 2 pick.

They could even trade out their 2020 and 2021 1st and still be fine using 2 first round picks in 7 years!

In other words, the rule is a f##king joke! And the penalty will likely be stopping them from 1 years of future trading if need be.
 

Jetwa5h

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Posts
1,135
Likes
615
Location
On the line interwebs thingy
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Glenelg
Their solution will be to swap their 2019 1st (and maybe a sweetener) for another teams 2018 first. Then they have 2 firsts in 2018 and are fine.

2015(0), 2016(0), 2017(0), 2018(2), 2019(0)...no 4 year period without 2 pick.

They could even trade out their 2020 and 2021 1st and still be fine using 2 first round picks in 7 years!

In other words, the rule is a f##king joke! And the penalty will likely be stopping them from 1 years of future trading if need be.
And if clubs refuse?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Posts
48,515
Likes
63,215
Location
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Sure but what is the punishment if they can't land another first rounder? [probably what you're asking Patrick]

I'm sure I've read somewhere that the penalty is simply making the club hold their first pick the subsequent year (and probably the year following) to fulfil the 2 first rounders in 4 years requirements.
That's pathetic
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom