F/S rule

[*PAF]

Toots posted this list on the Port board of the current F/S players in the AFL.

• Jonathan Brown (Brisbane Lions)
• Shane Morrison (Brisbane Lions/Richmond)
• Jarrad Waite (Carlton)
• Lance Whitnall (Carlton)
• Luke Blackwell (Carlton)
• Cameron Cloke (Collingwood)
• Travis Cloke (Collingwood)
• Nick Davis (Collingwood/Sydney)
• Brayden Shaw (Collingwood)
• Heath Shaw (Collingwood)
• Rhys Shaw (Collingwood)
• Dustin Fletcher (Essendon)
• Jobe Watson (Essendon)
• Brett Peake (Fremantle)
• Gary Ablett (Geelong)
• Nathan Ablett (Geelong)
• Mark Blake (Geelong)
• Tim Callan (Geelong)
• David Clarke (Geelong/Carlton)
• Matthew Scarlett (Geelong)
• Steven Greene (Hawthorn)
• Jessie W Smith (Kangaroos)
• Brett Ebert (Port Adelaide)
• Joel Bowden (Richmond)
• Matthew Richardson (Richmond)
• Sean Dempster (Sydney)
• Stephen Doyle (Sydney)
• Heath James (Sydney)

Assuming the list is correct, then if we were to remove the "50 game players" that do not qualify anymore, and add the players that would now qualify such as Chad and Kane Cornes for the Crows, they seem to have it pretty right in as far as spread goes.

 

[Quadzilla]

... and add the players that would now qualify such as Chad and Kane Cornes for the Crows, they seem to have it pretty right in as far as spread goes.

Um ... how do crows get Chad & Kane? please explain?

 

[*PAF]

Um ... how do crows get Chad & Kane? please explain?

Nowadays they would as Glenelg is in their "back yard" so to speak.
Back when they were drafted not so.

 

[sydney eagle]

I beleive that Asley Mc Intosh Ben Cousins and Mitch Morton were F/S selections for the Eagles as well.

 

[Quadzilla]

Nowadays they would as Glenelg is in their "back yard" so to speak.
Back when they were drafted not so.

Ah ok ...

Maybe so, but did Studley play enuf games in the eligible period anyway ... if he coached one more season they would have got him for the '100 game rule' i think?

 

[*PAF]

Ah ok ...

Maybe so, but did Studley play enuf games in the eligible period anyway ... if he coached one more season they would have got him for the '100 game rule' i think?

Only an assumption, but I think it is a fair one.
317 games with Glenelg between 1967 and 1982

 

[*PAF]

I beleive that Asley Mc Intosh Ben Cousins and Mitch Morton were F/S selections for the Eagles as well.

I think you are right. Cousins at the very least was a F/S selection.

 

[macca23]

and add the players that would now qualify such as Chad and Kane Cornes for the Crows, they seem to have it pretty right in as far as spread goes.

So now that we've missed out on these 2 top of the range players and got fk-all, while other teams benefited on easier rules than ours, it's suddenly fair??

We got r*ped, but the raping's stopped now, so everything's all right now??

Facts are facts. We've been dudded!!

 

[*PAF]

So now that we've missed out on these 2 top of the range players and got fk-all, while other teams benefited on easier rules than ours, it's suddenly fair??

We got r*ped, but the raping's stopped now, so everything's all right now??

Facts are facts. We've been dudded!!

NOTE: None of the above are my quotes.

 

[noddy]

NOTE: None of the above are my quotes.

Ah but you pointed our esteemed friend in that direction.

 

[Silvagnis]

Toots posted this list on the Port board of the current F/S players in the AFL.

• Jonathan Brown (Brisbane Lions)
• Shane Morrison (Brisbane Lions/Richmond)
• Jarrad Waite (Carlton)
• Lance Whitnall (Carlton)
• Luke Blackwell (Carlton)
• Cameron Cloke (Collingwood)
• Travis Cloke (Collingwood)
• Nick Davis (Collingwood/Sydney)
• Brayden Shaw (Collingwood)
• Heath Shaw (Collingwood)
• Rhys Shaw (Collingwood)
• Dustin Fletcher (Essendon)
• Jobe Watson (Essendon)
• Brett Peake (Fremantle)
• Gary Ablett (Geelong)
• Nathan Ablett (Geelong)
• Mark Blake (Geelong)
• Tim Callan (Geelong)
• David Clarke (Geelong/Carlton)
• Matthew Scarlett (Geelong)
• Steven Greene (Hawthorn)
• Jessie W Smith (Kangaroos)
• Brett Ebert (Port Adelaide)
• Joel Bowden (Richmond)
• Matthew Richardson (Richmond)
• Sean Dempster (Sydney)
• Stephen Doyle (Sydney)
• Heath James (Sydney)

These five players have been delisted.

Mitch Morton is a Father-Son pick who should be included given the debate, he's a future gun and a local F-S selection for West Coast. IIRC Tim Clarke snubbed the offer by the Cats because he didn't want the pressure with being David's son. Patrick Bowden played with the Dogs before joining his brother at the Richmond, but I'm not sure if he was eligible under the F-S rule.

• Chris Johnson Melbourne F-S
• Luke Darcy Bulldogs eligible for Crows?

 

[*PAF]

Ah but you pointed our esteemed friend in that direction.

Nah, sorry noddy perhaps I should have explained.

On another thread I said that to prove that the law is wrong, that is the newest and latest law as it has been changed a few times, then figures to prove it to be need to be shown.
Unfortunately for you lot that appears not to be the case if the list is correct and it will make your arguments as to why Gibbs should qualify under the F/S rule all that harder to prove.

I posted the list so that people on here could add or take away from it where appropriate and discuss the list rather than have another Gibbs thread. I was actually planning to do one tonight but luckily for me Toots had already done one so I pinched it.

As far as the past goes, the AFL had you lot over the barrel for quite some time prior to the latest changes. Not sure that can be used as an argument why you should recruit Gibbs though.

 

[Crow-mo]

there's a number missing, for example does the name Marc Murphy ring any bells?

A correct and proper test would start with how many players were eligible in a given time frame, consider which players declined to be picked up F/S, who the clubs declined to draft, and who has subsequently been delisted. But then, that would be less disingenuous and what would the point of that be?

 

[*PAF]

there's a number missing, for example does the name Marc Murphy ring any bells?
A correct and proper test would start with how many players were eligible in a given time frame, consider which players declined to be picked up F/S, who the clubs declined to draft, and who has subsequently been delisted.
...

Well what are you waiting for, fix the list.

... But then, that would be less disingenuous and what would the point of that be?

Have I ever said you are a painful child?


On another note: why am I interested?
No nothing to do with trolling at all. I am interested for the same reasons most on the Port board probably are and most on here would be if this discussion was happening on the Port board.
Whatever happens to the Crows wrt the F/S rule will also happen to Port.
At first glance the rule certainly appears to be too harsh on the South Australian teams, you have none and we probably should also have none, however that is easy to say and harder to prove.

wrt Gibbs two things are certain, and they are
1. He will most likely be a first round pick and perhaps a high one at that.
2. Port has no chance in getting him so personally I have no direct interest in him, but I am interested in seeing which way the rule will go for the reasons explained above, plus it will affect us for longer than it will you lot since we joined later.

EDIT: Best case scenario _ You lot do all the hard work to fix the rule, we benefit from it more than you do.

 

[Crow-mo]

Well what are you waiting for, fix the list.

Why? the list is irrelevant. it doesn't even cover the symptons, let alone the underlying flaws.

Have I ever said you are a painful child?

awww don't be like that, I'm hurt.

 

[Mego Red]

wrt Gibbs two things are certain, and they are
1. He will most likely be a first round pick and perhaps a high one at that.
2. Port has no chance in getting him so personally I have no direct interest in him

Wait - I think considering the near-certainty that Port will have a very early pick, you have a very direct interest in Gibbs staying in the mix ...

 

[Quadzilla]

Wait - I think considering the near-certainty that Port will have a very early pick, you have a very direct interest in Gibbs staying in the mix ...

Are you planning to trade yours to us then?

 

[Ants]

What does this list have to do at all with whether or not the rule is fair?

I mean, St Kilda doesn't have a f/s son selection, should the rule change for them? Merv Neagle has 5 sons, if they all become AFL footballers should Essendon be penalised because it got too lucky?

I'm not saying the rules applying to AFC are fair. What I am saying is your criteria by which to judge the rules is stupid. The criteria would be how many players could have had children that were eligible.

You should ignore how many children they had, how many of them were sons, and what rare few were good enough to be selected.

Did AFC have as much of a chance of getting f/s selections as ex-VFL clubs, that should be the criteria of judging the fairness of the rule.
And it seems no-one has put up any data on this.

 

[Vader]

What does this list have to do at all with whether or not the rule is fair?

I mean, St Kilda doesn't have a f/s son selection, should the rule change for them? Merv Neagle has 5 sons, if they all become AFL footballers should Essendon be penalised because it got too lucky?

I'm not saying the rules applying to AFC are fair. What I am saying is your criteria by which to judge the rules is stupid. The criteria would be how many players could have had children that were eligible.

You should ignore how many children they had, how many of them were sons, and what rare few were good enough to be selected.

Did AFC have as much of a chance of getting f/s selections as ex-VFL clubs, that should be the criteria of judging the fairness of the rule.
And it seems no-one has put up any data on this.

The big question is this: How many players (for each club) became eligible (in terms of games played) to produce F/S eligible sons during the period 1971-1990?

 

[Ants]

Exactly.

 

[*PAF]

What does this list have to do at all with whether or not the rule is fair?
...
Did AFC have as much of a chance of getting f/s selections as ex-VFL clubs, that should be the criteria of judging the fairness of the rule.
And it seems no-one has put up any data on this.

I don't disagree at all, but it's a start.
Better than just saying the rule is bad and then repeating it over and over again.

 

[*PAF]

The big question is this: How many players (for each club) became eligible (in terms of games played) to produce F/S eligible sons during the period 1971-1990?

IIRC that apparently was the criteria used for coming up with the latest version of the rule.

 

[Crow-mo]

IIRC that apparently was the criteria used for coming up with the latest version of the rule.

see you do understand. that's why you're a troll

 

[sworc36]

Dont worry guys Im just wondering what they'll do when the sons of Jarman, McLeod, Hart, Smart, Rehn and Rowie are eligible. They may not all turn out to follow in their fathers footsteps but Im betting there will be some real guns in those blood lines.

 

[*PAF]

see you do understand. that's why you're a troll

Man you're like one of them yap yap dogs.

Try reading what people post before you start your petty abuses next time.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4587841&postcount=29