Delistings

[Catman]

Does anyone know who is out of contract?

 

[catempire]

I think you're probably right rizzo.

That doesn't change the delisting scenario though. If we rookie Ranga, it just means we take 3 picks in the National Draft (15, 33 and 39).

 

[rizzo]

I think you're probably right rizzo.

That doesn't change the delisting scenario though. If we rookie Ranga, it just means we take 3 picks in the National Draft (15, 33 and 39).

It makes it easier though. Out: Nablett, Prismal and Scarlo (Vets) = three picks

 

[catempire]

It makes it easier though. Out: Nablett, Prismal and Scarlo (Vets) = three picks

That's what I mean. That isn't changed whether we pick Ranga in the ND or the RD.

 

[rizzo]

That's what I mean. That isn't changed whether we pick Ranga in the ND or the RD.

Depends on if the club just wants three picks or three "live picks". If we take three picks then it wont, but if we want three "live picks" we will have to delist another player.

it will be interesting to see what we do actually. Do you think we will just take the three picks CE?

 

[geelong_boy]

I think you're probably right rizzo.

That doesn't change the delisting scenario though. If we rookie Ranga, it just means we take 3 picks in the National Draft (15, 33 and 39).

Well at least the Prismal pick isn't a waste then (ie. used on Ranga who we would've picked up regardless).

 

[catempire]

Depends on if the club just wants three picks or three "live picks". If we take three picks then it wont, but if we want three "live picks" we will have to delist another player.

it will be interesting to see what we do actually. Do you think we will just take the three picks CE?

Options are:

1. Take 15, 33 and 39 in the National Draft and Ranga as a rookie; or

2. Take 15, 33 and Ranga in the National Draft and rookies as allowable.

In either scenario, we don't need to delist any more players.

I would have liked to have seen Byrnes traded and pick 49 used (either on Ranga or as an additional pick) but that's not going to happen now.

I think we'll take just the three (either 2 + Ranga or 3 + Ranga [rookie]).

 

[catempire]

Found this in the Scholarship player rules:

33.5 Inclusion of Scholarship List Player onto Rookie List

33.5.1 Rookie List
Subject to the Scholarship Player meeting age requirements under Player Rule 5, a Club may apply to the AFL to transfer a Player or Players from its Scholarship List onto its Rookie List provided it nominates such Player or Players prior to advising the AFL of its Primary List under Rule Player 4.1.1 and such Player consents to being nominated on the Rookie List.

 

[rizzo]

Found this in the Scholarship player rules:

Good find mate. Hopefully Ranga consents

 

[jim boy]

Why should he? He'd be getting a lot less money than he would if he nominted for the draft and got a second round pick, plus he'd have virtually no hope of playing next year where elsewhere he'd be getting a few deals. Don't want to piss him off before he even arrives.

 

[Vegas.]

Exactly, Ranga is not a F/S pick. He doesn't really owe anything to the GFC. Sure, we have given him the scholarship, but you reckon other clubs weren't lining up to do it?

He should, and probably will be drafted in the ND.

 

[Vdubs]

Jase D will stay on won't he?

I'm hoping Davenport gets a huge chance to prove himself next year. Should play all preseason games and be a starter season proper. We need more pace and unpredictability and goals. We don't seem to have anybody quite like a Prismall coming through, do we? JD maybe?

 

[Vegas.]

I wouldn't say Jase is like Prismall in terms of style. Quite the opposite probably.

Skills were Prissas strength, let down by pace and maybe flair.
Pace and flair are Davenports strengths, but his skills aren't all that flash.

To be honest, I would rather the guy with a good kick, given the shambles that was our foward entry in the PF and GF this year, but I wouldn't mind seeing Davenport in the ones to give it a shot. We didn't upgrade him to the senior list for nothing.

 

[HAPPYCHAPPY]

I wouldn't say Jase is like Prismall in terms of style. Quite the opposite probably.

Skills were Prissas strength, let down by pace and maybe flair.
Pace and flair are Davenports strengths, but his skills aren't all that flash.

To be honest, I would rather the guy with a good kick, given the shambles that was our foward entry in the PF and GF this year, but I wouldn't mind seeing Davenport in the ones to give it a shot. We didn't upgrade him to the senior list for nothing.

Spot on and at least you kno this guy will absolutely bust his gut for you.

 

[thegerman]

Ranga should be good, I hope he accepts the position that we give him, i.e. rookie list or full list. Either way I don't really care how he gets to the club, as long as he does.

He could be a very welcome replacement for Prismall in a few years.

 

[Turkey Tom]

We presently have 5 ruckmen on our list. Not sure we really need 5.

Ottens, Blake, West, Mumford, D.Simpson.

 

[vinum coupe]

Just found this:

The NSW AFL Scholarship scheme allows clubs to sign teenagers aged 15-17 within certain development regions in NSW, excluding Canberra and the Riverina. The player receives financial assistance and the club has first option to draft them, either to the full or rookie list.

By the sound of this we get a choice. Not Ranga.

Thanks for posting that.

But it doesn't mean Ranga has to sign anything. It just means the cats get first crack.

If the cats offer the rookie list only then I'd say his manager would be negligent if he didnt tell him to go for the full draft.