2021 Jumper numbers

Remove this Banner Ad

In the absence of Saintly Viewed I thought I'd kick this off. Unfortunately we have a lot of high jumper numbers to fill.

#1
#2 DeGoey
#3 Quaynor
#4 Grundy
#5 Elliott
#6 T. Brown
#7
#8
#9 Noble
#10 Pendlebury
#11
#12
#13 Adams
#14 Cameron
#15
#16 Mayne
#17 C. Brown
#18
#19 Greenwood
#20
#21
#22 Sidebottom
#23 Roughead
#24 Thomas
#25 Crisp
#26 Daicos
#27 Kelly
#28 Murphy
#29
#30 Moore
#31
#32 Hoskin-Elliott
#33
#34 Bianco
#35 Henry (assuming the recent trend continues)
#36 Sier
#37 Maynard
#38 Howe
#39 Ruscoe
#40
#41 Mihocek
#42 RIP Darren Millane
#43 Tohill
#44 Madgen
#45 Lynch
#46 Cox
#47 Keane
#48 Wilson

# TBC Rantall (prev. 35)
# TBC Macrae
# TBC McInnes
# TBC Poulter
# TBC McMahon
# TBC McCreery
# TBC Ginnivan
# TBC Chugg
 
Last edited:
Recently our existing players have held onto their number, but with a few higher ones available will this change?

Mihocek, Lynch and Cox seem unlikely to want an upgrade. Cox has previously had a chance, but stuck with 46.

With 35 rotation Rantall will get a higher number. Bianco and Ruscoe have only been at the club for one season, will they want something higher? Keane, Tohill and Wilson maybe some chance too?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

1 - J Daicos
7 - Maynard
11 - Mihocek
12 - Murphy
15 - Rantall
18 - Magden
20 - Keane
21 - Bianco

doubt most will want to change but I reckon a few of those suit...
 
Last edited:
1 - Daicos
7 - Maynard
11 - Mihocek
12 - Murphy
15 - Rantall
18 - Magden
20 - Keane
21 - Bianco

doubt most will want to change but I reckon a few of those suit...
Josh Daicos? Because Nick won't get drafted til this time next year, and we'll be hoping they give him 35
 
Josh Daicos? Because Nick won't get drafted til this time next year, and we'll be hoping they give him 35

yeah i was thinking josh, I have never thought 26 suited him, not sure why!

he seems to have the composure to carry the pressure of it too, I wouldn’t have suggested it last year.
 
Given the reduction from list sizes from 48 to 44, you think those toward the bottom will shift up?

The Age saying today in a pies article that the AFL has told clubs to expect 40 as the list size. Is that 40 senior spots plus 4 rookies?

If so we have cut 9 players already. Meaning we’ve got a lot of list positions to fill still if the list goes down to 44
 
In the absence of Saintly Viewed I thought I'd kick this off. Unfortunately we have a lot of high jumper numbers to fill.

#1
#2 DeGoey
#3 Quaynor
#4 Grundy
#5 Elliott
#6 T. Brown
#7
#8 Langdon
#9 Noble
#10 Pendlebury
#11
#12
#13 Adams
#14 Cameron
#15
#16 Mayne
#17 C. Brown
#18
#19 Greenwood
#20
#21
#22 Sidebottom
#23 Roughead
#24 Thomas
#25 Crisp
#26 Daicos
#27 Kelly
#28 Murphy
#29
#30 Moore
#31 Appleby
#32 Hoskin-Elliott
#33 Wills
#34 Bianco
#35
#36 Sier
#37 Maynard
#38 Howe
#39 Ruscoe
#40
#41 Mihocek
#42 RIP Darren Millane
#43 Tohill
#44 Madgen
#45 Lynch
#46 Cox
#47 Keane
#48 Wilson

#TBC Rantall
Who takes 22 and 10 when they retire?
 
No-one should take 1 any time soon, it's last three inhabitants didn't fare well did they?

My list would look something like this:

#1
#2 DeGoey
#3 Quaynor
#4 Grundy
#5 Elliott
#6 T. Brown
#7
#8 Langdon
#9 Noble
#10 Pendlebury
#11 Rantall (keep him near the skipper)
#12 Mihocek (he deserves a lower number and would look good in Banksy's old number 12)
#13 Adams
#14 Cameron
#15 Keane (the new anvil)
#16 Mayne
#17 C. Brown
#18 Cox (time he put some big boy pants on and took a proper number...get serious Coxy)
#19 Greenwood
#20 Kelly (the new flyer)
#21 Ruscoe (got a bit of the Wellingham swagger)
#22 Sidebottom
#23 Roughead
#24 Thomas
#25 Crisp
#26 Daicos
#27 Madgen (earned a promotion)
#28 Murphy
#29 Bianco (Scott Russell reincarnate)
#30 Moore
#31 Appleby
#32 Hoskin-Elliott
#33 (surely we could delist one more list clogger) Then give 33 to Wilson
#34 Reef
#35 ??????
#36 Sier
#37 Maynard
#38 Howe
#39 Lynch
#40 Tohill
#41
#42 RIP Darren Millane
#43
#44
#45
#46
#47
#48
 
The Age saying today in a pies article that the AFL has told clubs to expect 40 as the list size. Is that 40 senior spots plus 4 rookies?

If so we have cut 9 players already. Meaning we’ve got a lot of list positions to fill still if the list goes down to 44
yeah, I heard it was 44. decrease of 2 senior spots. 2 rookies, I think.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

yeah, I heard it was 44. decrease of 2 senior spots. 2 rookies, I think.

Lists are currently 44 with 38-40 on the senior list and 6-4 rookies. Cat B above that.
 
#8 has donned the back of a defender for the past 20 years (Clement, Lumumba, Langdon). Time for a change or will someone like Murphy keep the trend going?
 
Hopefully he'll want to keep 35 and be permitted to do so by the club.
Hopefully Pendlebury has more than just the next 2 seasons in him too.
 
Just noticed McMahon donning a Collingwood jumper for the first time which had number 8 on the back. Looks like the club is already starting to allocate numbers. Assume Henry gets number 35. Did anyone notice any other numbers?
 
Just noticed McMahon donning a Collingwood jumper for the first time which had number 8 on the back. Looks like the club is already starting to allocate numbers. Assume Henry gets number 35. Did anyone notice any other numbers?
Thats all Ive seen so far.

I imagine we may know more tomorrow.
 
With list sizes cut it wouldn't surprise me if a whole bunch of numbers are shifted, for instance Keane and Wilson getting lower numbers.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top