2nds 2026 Adelaide Crows SANFL thread

[crows dude]

I'll have some of what you're smoking

I would give you some but I dont touch any of that crap.

 

[Vader]

There's 2 or 3 guys on every list, sometimes more, who have no business being on an AFL list.

Did you see the Dreamtime game last week ?? Or Richmond or Essendon this week ??

That's a bit of an own-goal argument, isn't it? The fact that Richmond & Essendon's injury lists are so long that these players are getting a game is proof that they need list sizes at least this big (arguably larger).

There have been a couple of instances in recent years where clubs had to field players who weren't AFL listed, due to the number of players MIA due to injury. From memory (and I could be wrong), both West Coast & Essendon have had to resort to this. If anything, current AFL list sizes are too small.

The problem you're talking about would be better addressed by removing 1-2 teams from the competition, thereby increasing the average level of talent in the pool. That's a whole other discussion.

 

[Syd Crow]

That's a bit of an own-goal argument, isn't it? The fact that Richmond & Essendon's injury lists are so long that these players are getting a game is proof that they need list sizes at least this big (arguably larger).

There have been a couple of instances in recent years where clubs had to field players who weren't AFL listed, due to the number of players MIA due to injury. From memory (and I could be wrong), both West Coast & Essendon have had to resort to this. If anything, current AFL list sizes are too small.

The problem you're talking about would be better addressed by removing 1-2 teams from the competition, thereby increasing the average level of talent in the pool. That's a whole other discussion.

Eagles in 2022 definitely did. Essendon apparently in 2016. So you are not wrong!

 

[Cromulant]

That's a bit of an own-goal argument, isn't it? The fact that Richmond & Essendon's injury lists are so long that these players are getting a game is proof that they need list sizes at least this big (arguably larger).

There have been a couple of instances in recent years where clubs had to field players who weren't AFL listed, due to the number of players MIA due to injury. From memory (and I could be wrong), both West Coast & Essendon have had to resort to this. If anything, current AFL list sizes are too small.

The problem you're talking about would be better addressed by removing 1-2 teams from the competition, thereby increasing the average level of talent in the pool. That's a whole other discussion.

I do understand that argument, but Richmond and Essendons injury lists are outliers rather than the rule.

The only thing that can come from increasing AFL list sizes is decreasing the standard at all levels of football.

 

[Cromulant]

Eagles in 2022 definitely did. Essendon apparently in 2016. So you are not wrong!

But thats because clubs are horribly managed isnt it ?? The fact Essendons name has been mentioned more than once goes to show you how poor they have been from top to bottom.

If you have 40 players on a list and you get to a point where you need extras, you're doing something badly wrong.

 

[Vader]

I do understand that argument, but Richmond and Essendons injury lists are outliers rather than the rule.

The only thing that can come from increasing AFL list sizes is decreasing the standard at all levels of football.

You're conflating 2 separate issues. List Sizes & the number of clubs in the competition.

List Sizes need to be big enough to provide a pool of reserve players in the event that the first choice players are unavailable due to injury/illness/suspension. Evidence suggests that current list sizes are barely adequate for meeting this requirement.

Adding further clubs to the competition decreases the average quality of the talent pool, by increasing the number of players in the system who really aren't good enough to be playing at this level. The problem you're complaining about (and it's a valid complaint) would be best addressed by reducing the number of clubs in the competition - ideally to no more than 16. We all know that this is never going to happen.

 

[Cromulant]

You're conflating 2 separate issues. List Sizes & the number of clubs in the competition.

List Sizes need to be big enough to provide a pool of reserve players in the event that the first choice players are unavailable due to injury/illness/suspension. Evidence suggests that current list sizes are barely adequate for meeting this requirement.

Adding further clubs to the competition decreases the average quality of the talent pool, by increasing the number of players in the system who really aren't good enough to be playing at this level. The problem you're complaining about (and it's a valid complaint) would be best addressed by reducing the number of clubs in the competition - ideally to no more than 16. We all know that this is never going to happen.

Theres no evidence that list sizes need to be increased, people have named 3 clubs in the last however many years. If it were a regular occurrence then sure.

If you increase the current lists by say, 5 players, thats 90 more you need to find. Where does it stop ??

 

[Vader]

Theres no evidence that list sizes need to be increased, people have named 3 clubs in the last however many years. If it were a regular occurrence then sure.

If you increase the current lists by say, 5 players, thats 90 more you need to find. Where does it stop ??

Conversely, if you reduce the number of clubs by 2 then you reduce the overall player numbers by ~90...

Another factor which nobody has yet mentioned is that the AFL is constantly increasing the number of players in the team - we only had 3 on the bench when Adelaide won their 1997/1998 premierships, now it's 5. Increasing team sizes inevitably results in more players being needed on team lists.

As for where it ends... The AFL reduced team sizes in the COVID era, cutting list sizes by 2 players. At the time we were told that this was a temporary measure, but as usual the AFL lied to us - and the numbers were never restored. Going back to list sizes as they were in 2020 would appear to resolve the problem. I don't see any reason for adding an extra 5 players, let alone going back to the 52 player lists we had when Adelaide first joined the competition in 1991.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

List sizes shrunk when the AFL Players Association successfully lobbied for higher rookie and draftee wages from memory

One avenue to increase the amount players was paid was to trim the number on the active roster

 

[Vader]

List sizes shrunk when the AFL Players Association successfully lobbied for higher rookie and draftee wages from memory

One avenue to increase the amount players was paid was to trim the number on the active roster

The most recent list reduction was a direct response to COVID, but the reduction before that may well have been blowback from AFLPA salary demands.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The most recent list reduction was a direct response to COVID, but the reduction before that may well have been blowback from AFLPA salary demands.

That's right. A bit like the coaching soft cap, some of the things that got scaled back during Covid have remained

Social distancing in shop queues largely has stayed which is glorious

 

[BRL121]

We have 11 players in SANFL on Saturday who have played AFL for us!

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Mark Keane

ADELAIDE

League

F Archie Ludowyke, Mitchell Marsh, Jay Boyle

HF Blake Drury, Nick Murray, Cameron Taheny

C Lachlan Sholl, Charlie Edwards, Chayce Jones

1

Chayce Jones

Age

26

Ht

180cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.0

3star

K

5.4

2star

HB

4.6

3star

M

1.7

2star

T

1.9

4star

CL

1.3

3star

D

8.9

2star

K

4.9

2star

HB

4.0

3star

M

1.4

2star

T

1.6

3star

CL

1.1

3star

D

9.4

3star

K

4.4

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.6

2star

T

1.8

4star

CL

0.8

3star

HB Mitchell Hinge, Finnbar Maley, Oscar Ryan

B Hugh Bond, Mark Keane, Indy Cotton

R Reilly O’Brien, Luke Pedlar, Billy Dowling

INT Ned Atkinson, Tom Bell

Tom Bell

Age

34

Ht

188cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

10.4

4star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.4

3star

T

3.5

5star

G

0.8

4star

No current season stats available

D

14.0

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

5.0

4star

M

2.4

3star

T

4.2

5star

G

0.6

3star

, Jaxon Bennett, Harrison Boyle, Tate Coleman, William Crane, Joseph Haines

IN Harrison Boyle, Tate Coleman, William Crane, Joseph Haines, Mark Keane, Luke Pedlar

OUT Taylor Walker

13

Taylor Walker

Age

36

Ht

192cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.0

3star

K

9.0

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

5.7

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

2.3

5star

No current season stats available

D

8.0

2star

K

6.4

3star

HB

1.6

2star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.6

5star

(AFL), Kieran Strachan (Managed), Tyler Welsh (Hamstring

 

[Cromulant]

Please tell me we arent going to play Murray forward.....

 

[TBM]

Please tell me we arent going to play Murray forward.....

And Finnbar at half back...

 

[Golumless]

And Finnbar at half back...

I don't particularly hate that one. Finbarr does have really good hands, and it's a lot easier to play defense. Could be a cheeky shutdown defender.

 

[Mutineer]

I don't particularly hate that one. Finbarr does have really good hands, and it's a lot easier to play defense. Could be a cheeky shutdown defender.

It's bullshit the way they are jerking Murray around if they line up like that. Nick was massive in defence last week, he's a defender and it's ridiculous Borlase is playing in front of him with every chance we won't have Jordan Butts next season

On top of that Maley has played forward/chop out ruck before he joined us and since. Maley is a very very average kick to boot.

 

[Cromulant]

It's bullshit the way they are jerking Murray around if they line up like that. Nick was massive in defence last week, he's a defender and it's ridiculous Borlase is playing in front of him with every chance we won't have Jordan Butts next season

On top of that Maley has played forward/chop out ruck before he joined us and since.

Its probably where Murray will end up playing anyway, just a bit of teamsheet shenanigans

 

[Mutineer]

Its probably where Murray will end up playing anyway, just a bit of teamsheet shenanigans

Hopefully

 

[Cromulant]

Hopefully

Well he'll be playing there in the Seniors next week with Butts gone again

 

[Golumless]

It's bullshit the way they are jerking Murray around if they line up like that. Nick was massive in defence last week, he's a defender and it's ridiculous Borlase is playing in front of him with every chance we won't have Jordan Butts next season

On top of that Maley has played forward/chop out ruck before he joined us and since. Maley is a very very average kick to boot.

Absolutely it is. It's desperate coaching to even consider Murray as a key forward. After all, if he had any genuine nous for it, he would have been a key forward in 2021, 2022 at the absolute latest. No club is turning down a genuine key forward option for a shutdown defender.

I'm not against the Maley in defense call, but that's only because there have been some bog average forwards who have turned into solid (especially shutdown) defenders. No issues there, but it shouldn't be at the expense of Murray who I fully agree, should be in the ones.

 

[Carmo]

Game is televised on channel 7 this week fyi

 

[Daniel6]

Game is televised on channel 7 this week fyi

Yeah, at 2 pm on the main channel 7

 

[crows dude]

We also have the tv game next week

 

[Mutineer]

Pedlar starting on ball