Training 2021 Preseason Training

[boncer34]

What was the knock on him?

Glandular fever

 

[EnolaGay]

Glandular fever

That'll do it to ya

 

[Megabattimus]

We could still.

We have 3 spots to fill (Mozzie LTI, McQuillan reitrement and an empty spot).

We could sign Waterman and still take two picks into the MSD

Yeah that's what I'm figuring we'll do.

 

[11kgm]

draftcentral.com.au

This domain may be for sale!

afl.draftcentral.com.au

originally an inside mid hmm

 

[The Donners]

Having watched the tid bits of footage from the intra club, it appeared Wright was in the ruck and didn’t kick a goal. Could someone shed some light on what position he played and how he competed?

 

[Howard Moon]

perhaps we sent the others home but can still take a good look at dunkley as hes already training with us via the vfl?

does that count as an allowable train on player?

 

[ghostdog]

Having watched the tid bits of footage from the intra club, it appeared Wright was in the ruck and didn’t kick a goal. Could someone shed some light on what position he played and how he competed?

Apparently Wright was forward but had a quiet game. Unsurprising that he rucked occasionally. He'll ruck forward I think, supporting Draper or Phillips if Drapes is injured. I read somewhere that Bryan has had an excellent preseason and it might not be inconceivable to think he could get a run this year. Whether that's as a ruckman remains to be seen.

 

[Towno78]

The problem I have with that is that we could lose someone else between now and then.

And suggesting we'd have "somebody in mind for the MSD" is a bit disingenuous because they'd be eligible for this one too

Perhaps they hoped to fill 2 but were not impressed with what they saw?

 

[fairbump_playon]

Perhaps they hoped to fill 2 but were not impressed with what they saw?

There’s no point adding two or three Sam Grimleys

 

[SloppyJoe]

What was the knock on him?

As mentioned above, he contracted glandular fever in his first season (2015 I think) and it really hit him for six. Never played a game for us and was delisted after a couple of seasons. To add insult to injury we then picked up his younger brother who has since played 30-40 games.

He made a return to the WAFL in 2019 as a mid sized forward and started kicking goals. Averaged 2-3 goals a game in 2020. At 182cm he might even fall in the small forward bracket at AFL level, but he plays taller than that.

I hear the glandular fever affected his tank and his midfield days are likely behind him. But that could just be conjecture.

 

[Old Campaigner]

So essentially a small forward who is good overhead? How’s his tackling and defensive efforts?

 

[SloppyJoe]

So essentially a small forward who is good overhead? How’s his tackling and defensive efforts?

I didn't see enough of him to be able to fairly comment. Here are some tackle stats, for what they're worth: https://www.wafl.com.au/player/alec-waterman

 

[rumply]

 

[Cup_o_Jobe]

It really is such a silly, unnecessary change to the rules. The league is so hyper-obsessed with turning footy into T20.

 

[EnolaGay]

The man on the mark needs to channel a witches hat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jmoo wan]

It really is such a silly, unnecessary change to the rules. The league is so hyper-obsessed with turning footy into T20.

it is so ****ing dumb and poorly thought out - it goes against years of instinctual behavior playing footy. And the punishment is far too severe.

 

[60sbomber]

Dumbest rule change since the introduction of the protected area. It presents yet another opportunity for the umpires to step in and penalise trivial indiscretions with game changing penalties.
Do they really believe anchoring the man on the mark will open up the game by allowing more diagonal kicks? Absolute garbage.
Can we just forget about all the 50m penalty nonsense for trivial "transgressions"?
While we're at it, abandon the protected area, and just make a rule that players other than the man on the mark can't interfere with the kick taker before the umpire calls play on. Interfere being the operative word. No interference, no penalty. Simple.

 

[boncer34]

Dumbest rule change since the introduction of the protected area. It presents yet another opportunity for the umpires to step in and penalise trivial indiscretions with game changing penalties.
Do they really believe anchoring the man on the mark will open up the game by allowing more diagonal kicks? Absolute garbage.
Can we just forget about all the 50m penalty nonsense for trivial "transgressions"?
While we're at it, abandon the protected area, and just make a rule that players other than the man on the mark can't interfere with the kick taker before the umpire calls play on. Interfere being the operative word. No interference, no penalty. Simple.

All umpires I've spoken to reflect the thoughts of the general public on this rule.

 

[BrunoV]

All umpires I've spoken to reflect the thoughts of the general public on this rule.

Yep. The umpires should not be blamed for being between the rock and the hard place the AFL continually places them in.

 

[60sbomber]

Yep. The umpires should not be blamed for being between the rock and the hard place the AFL continually places them in.

I definitely agree with that. All of the horrible interpretations we have been lumbered with have come from the rule makers and the umpires coaches/instructors. The umpires are just doing what they're instructed to do.

 

[TheGrizz]

I imagine the player on the mark rule will be adjudicated similarly to the protected area rule last year.

They will be red hot early to make the point, there will be 1or 2 or a game like the Langford one where they take a step literally as they shape up to handball.
Then as the season goes on give a little more leeway and use a bit of discretion and call it when guys are taking multiple steps or moving off the mark whilst preempting handballs.

 

[faible]

Then as the season goes on give a little more leeway and use a bit of discretion and call it when guys are taking multiple steps or moving off the mark whilst preempting handballs.

Except when Essendon players are involved.

We'll see our players pinged for even considering moving, whilst whoever we're playing performs the nutbush around the mark and nothing is noted.

 

[boncer34]

I imagine the player on the mark rule will be adjudicated similarly to the protected area rule last year.

They will be red hot early to make the point, there will be 1or 2 or a game like the Langford one where they take a step literally as they shape up to handball.
Then as the season goes on give a little more leeway and use a bit of discretion and call it when guys are taking multiple steps or moving off the mark whilst preempting handballs.

I only hope they become red hot on players coming off their line. And I hope someone tells BT the bloody rule, him screaming WHY IS THAT PLAY ON when a player has taken 5 steps sideways is incredibly annoying.

 

[Ati Tude]

I only hope they become red hot on players coming off their line. And I hope someone tells BT the bloody rule, him screaming WHY IS THAT PLAY ON when a player has taken 5 steps sideways is incredibly annoying.

But what's going to also happen is that the umpires' interpretation of the rule will be hot and cold over the season and just provide more angst. One of the benefits of a more normal pre season comp was that rules could be trialed but now they just bring them straight into the main season. We are all going to complain about the umpiring but gee the AFL makes it hard for them and this rule change is just stupid. Is there any other game in the world that changes and tinkers with rules as much as AFL?

 

[MiguelM]

But what's going to also happen is that the umpires' interpretation of the rule will be hot and cold over the season and just provide more angst. One of the benefits of a more normal pre season comp was that rules could be trialed but now they just bring them straight into the main season. We are all going to complain about the umpiring but gee the AFL makes it hard for them and this rule change is just stupid. Is there any other game in the world that changes and tinkers with rules as much as AFL?

Agree, then they will bring in another rule to counteract the new one!

We are quickly becoming the most over officiated game in the world. and too many open to interpretation.