Player Watch Dougie Cochrane APPROVED to be in Port's NGA, signs for Port Magpies for 2026

[Ford Fairlane]

I got 2 weeks.

 

[VineValerian]

Roll two x twenty sided die and whatever total number comes up, it will be that many weeks.

Honestly I don't know why we can't have been told by now, so it really is anyone's guess.

It's hard to come up with an argument to counter the perfect scenario that Dougie's situation screams at you.

You have to spend an inordinate amount of time fabricating a plausible and defensible argument that prevents Port from drafting him.

Patience Padawan

 

[SC_Power]

It's hard to come up with an argument to counter the perfect scenario that Dougie's situation screams at you.

You have to spend an inordinate amount of time fabricating a plausible and defensible argument that prevents Port from drafting him.

Patience Padawan

AFL in a session with Vic teams….

 

[sr36]

It's hard to come up with an argument to counter the perfect scenario that Dougie's situation screams at you.

You have to spend an inordinate amount of time fabricating a plausible and defensible argument that prevents Port from drafting him.

Patience Padawan

I wouldn't assume the hold up is the AFL in this case. It might depend on how formal the recognition of aboriginality has to be for NGA. Formal Conformation of Aboriginality isn't just about ancestry and isn't fait accompli with ancestry.

There's 3 parts: ancestry, identifying as Aboriginal and being recognised as Aboriginal by community. With the third part: Aboriginal organisations aren't always keen on people with no connection to community who are only recently claiming aborigniality receiving benefits set aside for Aboriginals.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

I wouldn't assume the hold up is the AFL in this case. It might depend on how formal the recognition of aboriginality has to be for NGA. Formal Conformation of Aboriginality isn't just about ancestry and isn't fait accompli with ancestry.

There's 3 parts: ancestry, identifying as Aboriginal and being recognised as Aboriginal by community. With the third part: Aboriginal organisations aren't always keen on people with no connection to community who are only recently claiming aborigniality receiving benefits set aside for Aboriginals.

Why? If they're aboriginal then what's the problem, shouldn't they look at it as an opportunity?

 

[backtozero]

I wouldn't assume the hold up is the AFL in this case. It might depend on how formal the recognition of aboriginality has to be for NGA. Formal Conformation of Aboriginality isn't just about ancestry and isn't fait accompli with ancestry.

There's 3 parts: ancestry, identifying as Aboriginal and being recognised as Aboriginal by community. With the third part: Aboriginal organisations aren't always keen on people with no connection to community who are only recently claiming aborigniality receiving benefits set aside for Aboriginals.

Someone with Aboriginal ancestry isn't going to be denied being identified as such. Absolutely zero chance.

 

[MrMeaner]

Why? If they're aboriginal then what's the problem, shouldn't they look at it as an opportunity?

I only have experience with one organisation, so it may not be what is happening here. But my experience was with a group that was very political, with a couple of factions fighting for control. I can imagine in a situation like that, accepting another family brings the risk of throwing out the numbers.

In the end, the people involved in Indigenous organisations are people, with all the strengths, weaknesses and blind spots, and interests that come with that.

 

[sr36]

Someone with Aboriginal ancestry isn't going to be denied being identified as such. Absolutely zero chance.

You're probably right, but it isn't ancestry alone which is used to categorise someone as Aboriginal. There is the self identification and community acceptance parts of it. And some Aboriginal only job positions do require official confirmation of the last part. I don't know if that's the case with the NGA program.

 

[backtozero]

You're probably right, but it isn't ancestry alone which is used to categorise someone as Aboriginal. There is the self identification and community acceptance parts of it. And some Aboriginal only job positions do require official confirmation of the last part. I don't know if that's the case with the NGA program.

The self-identification isn't going to be called into question if the ancestry is proven, though.

 

[sr36]

Why? If they're aboriginal then what's the problem, shouldn't they look at it as an opportunity?

It's a political issue within Aboriginal communities. The broader issue involves funding. Some Aboriginals aren't happy about people who have identified and been identified as white suddenly identifying as Aboriginal when grants can be had. Just as many in the broader community aren't happy about it either.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

I’m confused by the AFL here (surprise surprise), if on one hand he’s been accepted into the AFLs indigenous academy but on the other being asked to prove his heritage?

Those two don’t align. If you’ve accepted him into the academy how is that not acknowledging and accepting his indigenous heritage already?

 

[sr36]

I’m confused by the AFL here (surprise surprise), if on one hand he’s been accepted into the AFLs indigenous academy but on the other being asked to prove his heritage?

Those two don’t align. If you’ve accepted him into the academy how is that not acknowledging and accepting his indigenous heritage already?

No one knows what the hold up is, but it's quite possible that the two programs require different burdens of proof. Formal proof of ancestry can be difficult as it was often hidden as can formal proof of community acceptance

 

[davesnothere]

I’m confused by the AFL here (surprise surprise), if on one hand he’s been accepted into the AFLs indigenous academy but on the other being asked to prove his heritage?

Those two don’t align. If you’ve accepted him into the academy how is that not acknowledging and accepting his indigenous heritage already?

They must give him the benefit of any possible doubt unless proven otherwise.

Makes sense

 

[foreverbutcherskies]

Why? If they're aboriginal then what's the problem, shouldn't they look at it as an opportunity?

Disclaimer: only talking on behalf of observations I’ve made of the ONE community I’ve predominantly worked with, not reflective of the hundreds out there but basically:
You know how people get ****ed off about communities ‘exploiting’ these benefits, getting an unfair leg up etc? Well, the communities hate those people even more. Because some people do occasionally come in, thinking there’s this unlimited bucket of money, claim heritage, TRY to take money and bounce.

Community is aware of this, are very skeptical, do NOT want exploitative media making huge stories about unaccountable distribution of funding, consequently ensure there’s strong evidence that any $$ (mainly in grants) dispersed is to people who will use it for its intended purposes and hold things up to scrutiny. This does mean people need proof.

I mean, this shouldn’t come as a shock or be offensive to anyone. They are provided money to help uplift aboriginal culture, they want to ensure that money is allocated and used wisely. Part of that is ensuring people are who they say they are, and will do what they say will do with the money. Makes sense to me.

 

[sr36]

Disclaimer: only talking on behalf of observations I’ve made of the ONE community I’ve predominantly worked with, not reflective of the hundreds out there but basically:
You know how people get ****ed off about communities ‘exploiting’ these benefits, getting an unfair leg up etc? Well, the communities hate those people even more. Because some people do occasionally come in, thinking there’s this unlimited bucket of money, claim heritage, TRY to take money and bounce.

Community is aware of this, are very skeptical, do NOT want exploitative media making huge stories about unaccountable distribution of funding, consequently ensure there’s strong evidence that any $$ (mainly in grants) dispersed is to people who will use it for its intended purposes and hold things up to scrutiny. This does mean people need proof.

I mean, this shouldn’t come as a shock or be offensive to anyone. They are provided money to help uplift aboriginal culture, they want to ensure that money is allocated and used wisely. Part of that is ensuring people are who they say they are, and will do what they say will do with the money. Makes sense to me.

It's s political and ethical nightmare, because within it all you have the horror of the stolen generation, whose ancestors are the ones who find it hardest to demonstrate Aboriginality - in terms of both ancestry and community acceptance.

 

[backtozero]

Disclaimer: only talking on behalf of observations I’ve made of the ONE community I’ve predominantly worked with, not reflective of the hundreds out there but basically:
You know how people get ****ed off about communities ‘exploiting’ these benefits, getting an unfair leg up etc? Well, the communities hate those people even more. Because some people do occasionally come in, thinking there’s this unlimited bucket of money, claim heritage, TRY to take money and bounce.

Community is aware of this, are very skeptical, do NOT want exploitative media making huge stories about unaccountable distribution of funding, consequently ensure there’s strong evidence that any $$ (mainly in grants) dispersed is to people who will use it for its intended purposes and hold things up to scrutiny. This does mean people need proof.

I mean, this shouldn’t come as a shock or be offensive to anyone. They are provided money to help uplift aboriginal culture, they want to ensure that money is allocated and used wisely. Part of that is ensuring people are who they say they are, and will do what they say will do with the money. Makes sense to me.

Still don't see how this is relevant. Dougie isn't trying to claim benefits.

 

[Willsy10]

Lets be honest here, the kid just wants to play for Port.

 

[TazD]

Lets be honest here, the kid just wants to play for Port.

Yeah, but no one wants a free for all system.

 

[snozulu]

AFL has now handed the final decision to Geelong and Collingwoods CEOs. Cos cordone will inform the board this time in 2026.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

AFL has now handed the final decision to Geelong and Collingwoods CEOs. Cos cordone will inform the board this time in 2026.

 

[foreverbutcherskies]

Still don't see how this is relevant. Dougie isn't trying to claim benefits.

Sorry, should have clarified better. Also probably quoted the wrong post.

Basically: in said aforementioned community, proof of community acceptance for identity seemed to not take intent into account. So basically: try to keep it as a separate ‘thing’ I guess? ie: this community wouldn’t go ‘well Dougie isn’t trying to go for grants, only NGA access, therefore let’s make it easier to have proof of community acceptance’. They also wouldn’t go harder on him or his family either.

I was trying to back up what sr36 was saying. Things might not be that easy, and IF community acceptance is a part of the NGA, depending on the community, it can look a bit different. Which could then in turn, explain the hold up as they go through that process.
Not agreeing or disagreeing (actually not true, I want him in our academy lol). As sr36 mentioned earlier as well, the stolen generation makes this tricky as well.

TLDR: the problem is depending on community, acceptance could look the same no matter on intent, in turn due to exploitative people getting proof might take time. IF the NGA needs that. IF the community is similar to the one I’ve worked closely with. Therefore could all also be completely irrelevant.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

The good news (and the point of my previous post ) is that the person I got info from, who would definitely know, said it was looking good for Dougie and Port.

 

[Shaucob_Burjan]

Stalking a Cochrane family member's posts on a footy forum, they've always lived has Indigenous culture as part of their life but never had to verify that which they're in the process of doing

 

[shewho]

I expect a decision this week because the draft is next week (not Dougie’s but the decision could affect pick swaps).

I’m guessing the AFL won’t shaft us by refusing to give us access to Dougie. However, their overlords at Collingwood and Geelong will make sure we have to pay overs in draft capital to get him (or will make it so hard that we can’t).

I also expect there to be clarification this week about the rules for drafting 2026 academy players for the same reason- clubs need to know before this draft how they access their 2026 academy prospects because it may affect pick swaps next week.

 

[sr36]

I expect a decision this week because the draft is next week (not Dougie’s but the decision could affect pick swaps).

I’m guessing the AFL won’t shaft us by refusing to give us access to Dougie. However, their overlords at Collingwood and Geelong will make sure we have to pay overs in draft capital to get him (or will make it so hard that we can’t).

I also expect there to be clarification this week about the rules for drafting 2026 academy players for the same reason- clubs need to know before this draft how they access their 2026 academy prospects because it may affect pick swaps next week.

Depending on your season, it's a fair chance that Dougie would slip to your pick anyway, as who wants to spend a high pick on someone who appears so committed to playing at Port.