Changes to Rookie List rules

[Bluto]

Well, it looks like the AFL have finally realised what a farce the mature age rookie restrictions are and have updated the rules as follows:

Players who have not yet made their AFL debut, but may previously have been on a senior or rookie list, will now be eligible to be listed as mature-age rookies.

Of course this is how the rule should have been in the first place, unlucky for Brad Smith.

Which brings me to my question, which players running around the WAFL at the moment fit the Brad Smith criteria of having been on a list but not debuted?

The only one who immediately comes to mind is Zac Beeck, who I think was on the Eagles list at some point.

And are there any that would fill a gap in our roster?

 

[Danlington]

josh head last year!

 

[ImperialPurple]

Luke Newick was on our rookie list for a year a while back.

How's he travelling these days?

 

[Bluto]

josh head last year!

Yep, he would have worked.

Another former Docker rookie lister is Luke Newick the Subiaco ruckman. I think he will be about 26 or so this year, good age for a backup ruckman which we could probably use to be honest. Not a Subi follower though, so not sure how he goes.

Season stats here. Average.

EDIT: For some reason IP's post didnt show up for me before I wrote this. Great minds.

 

[FootyEater]

Zack beeck would be the go.

newick i thought was closer to 28/29

a mature aged ruckman would be a good stop gap for us if warnie leaves, connely is still too young, beeck dominated last week against the sharks

 

[ImperialPurple]

Beeck's a total headcase isn't he?

Plus he's ineligible. IIRC he played one game for the weevils.

 

[PapaJ]

Beeck's a total headcase isn't he?

Plus he's ineligible. IIRC he played one game for the weevils.

Yea that's right, 1 game in 2004.