Collingwood are in danger of breaching AFL's 1st round rules

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Nov 8, 2000
Posts
73,795
Likes
52,128
Location
Ask me tomorrow
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Cronulla, Dallas Cowboys, Forest
Moderator #27
It's a stupid blanket rule designed to stop middling teams from making quick fixes that ruin their future.

Competitive teams should be allowed to do as they please until it is demonstrated to be failing. Have to take advantage of any window you have.

Similarly, when a team is too young and needs mature AFL talent, they should not be limited in the future picks they can trade.

Perhaps, it needs to be a case by case analysis made by true football people.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Posts
17,107
Likes
17,916
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#28
I think we broke that rule with the Omeara trade and it was days before anyone realised.
For us it was the Future 1st and Future 2nd/3rd/4th rule where you can only do one or the other.

The AFL ended up deciding that replacing our Future 2nd with someone else's Future 2nd was enough to be okay. Mostly because they had already signed off on the deals.

And while #freekickhawthorn may be what people are thinking, what they really should be thinking is: why not just have simple rules and enforce them properly.

The AFL lives for grey areas.
 

4tone

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Posts
1,000
Likes
801
AFL Club
Collingwood
#29
I only read the first couple words and thought, yeah he's right, Collingwood are guilty as charged for having the best list in 2019, I read a little further and didn't care what the thread was about.
 

Scotland

Hall of Famer
Joined
May 5, 2006
Posts
45,239
Likes
46,197
AFL Club
West Coast
#30
2014 2
2015 0
2016 0
2017 1
2018 0

2019 0*

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-18/cats-back-themselves-into-a-trading-corner

The AFL this week confirmed to AFL.com.au that unless a club has acquired two first-round picks between 2015-2018, it cannot trade away its first-round selection for 2019.
Errr, wat?

Outside of Collingwood, the rest of the competition has already met its quota and is free to place 2018 and 2019 first-round picks on the table.

The Pies selected boom youngster Jaidyn Stephenson at No.6 in the 2017 NAB AFL Draft and will need to trigger one first-round selection in 2018 or 2019 after not taking any between 2015-16.
Errr, wat?

Classic AFL making it up as they go along. It's a silly rule anyway because the only punishment is not being able to trade any more first round picks. Which doesn't really affect you if you've already traded them because the AFL don't know their own rules...
 

Scotland

Hall of Famer
Joined
May 5, 2006
Posts
45,239
Likes
46,197
AFL Club
West Coast
#31
For us it was the Future 1st and Future 2nd/3rd/4th rule where you can only do one or the other.

The AFL ended up deciding that replacing our Future 2nd with someone else's Future 2nd was enough to be okay. Mostly because they had already signed off on the deals.

And while #freekickhawthorn may be what people are thinking, what they really should be thinking is: why not just have simple rules and enforce them properly.

The AFL lives for grey areas.
It was a glorious time on BigFooty.

'They can't trade their future 2nd round pick if they've already traded their 1st to St Kilda'.

Nek minit, Hawks trade their 2nd round pick and swap a bunch of later picks to Carlton for GWS' 2nd round pick.

The deal was probably on the table for a couple of days before the AFL just caved and decided it was close enough to what they intended.
 

Mofra

Moderator
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Posts
38,660
Likes
95,325
Location
Footscray
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Footscray, The Exers
Moderator #32
Wasn't the point of the rule to stop teams perpetually down the bottom sabotaging their recovery?

If the Hawks and Collingwood have breached this technical rule - Collingwood just played in a GF and the Hawks finished the H&A season in the top four so they hardly need saving from themselves by the supposedly benevolent AFL. Play on.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Posts
17,107
Likes
17,916
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#35
It was a glorious time on BigFooty.

'They can't trade their future 2nd round pick if they've already traded their 1st to St Kilda'.

Nek minit, Hawks trade their 2nd round pick and swap a bunch of later picks to Carlton for GWS' 2nd round pick.

The deal was probably on the table for a couple of days before the AFL just caved and decided it was close enough to what they intended.
Yeah, plus it was the AFL most likely demanding GCS accept the final offer for fear of the AFLPA stepping in and going ballistic (particularly since GCS were basically shooting themselves in the foot out of stubborn stupidity).

All the player agreements have very little weight under the law. They are very much a case of gentlemen agreements where both sides try and make as much money as they can.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

dave123

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Posts
7,669
Likes
6,308
Location
somewhere
AFL Club
West Coast
#39
If swans or west coast broke that rule the VFL would be alll over it

Richmond or Collingwood..ptttffff it’s waived
 

Luv_our_club

Premiership Player
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Posts
4,809
Likes
8,175
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#40
Rule is not needed anyway
Rule prevents a team like GWS hypothetically getting too many high placed academy picks without using a first rounder.

The AFL know that Sydney and GWS are trading out of the first round to get more points. And if it happened too much, everyone else would see what a scam it is.
 

Crankyhawk

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Posts
12,381
Likes
7,741
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#42
They will just write to the AFL and get it waived.
Just like Geelong did. The afl should bin the rule as I can’t see it being enforced- clubs will just point to Geelong (and now maybe Collingwood and next year hawthorn) not meeting criteria.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Posts
2,663
Likes
3,955
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Sydney City Roosters
#47
Seems you lot are piling the Sodium on more
Losing Grand Finals do that to you though .. :cool:

In regards to the rules, I have no issue with it and think Collingwood getting Beams isnt what they actually need to take the next step anyway.
 

PowerForGood

Self-imposed Suspension to 2019.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Posts
14,421
Likes
11,475
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool FC
#49
Seriously everyone it's not even really a rule until Sydney are caught breaching it and fined.
 

loki04

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Posts
21,025
Likes
15,732
Location
BHill
AFL Club
Collingwood
#50
2014 2
2015 0
2016 0
2017 1
2018 0

2019 0*

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-18/cats-back-themselves-into-a-trading-corner



Errr, wat?



Errr, wat?

Classic AFL making it up as they go along. It's a silly rule anyway because the only punishment is not being able to trade any more first round picks. Which doesn't really affect you if you've already traded them because the AFL don't know their own rules...
It doesn't start until 2019...

and they have exemption rules in place...

And according to the October 2015 document, Determination for the trading of future draft selections, the first four-year block will not come into effect until the 2019 exchange period.

The delayed introduction of future trading rules was so as not to prejudice clubs’ existing long-term list strategies.

Exemptions will be determined based on the age of players brought in through trades and what draft picks the club has used.

The Cats traded two first-round draft picks for Patrick Dangerfield. Picture: Getty Images
The future-pick document also demands that club boards authorise the trading of a future first-round selection before the trade period.

Geelong does not have a first-round pick this year, after trading it last year for Carlton’s Zach Tuohy, and last used one in 2014, drafting Nakia Cockatoo at No.10.

But the Cats are allowed to go another two years without using one.
https://outline.com/gXmYSn
 
Top Bottom