Remove this Banner Ad

Future F/S Prospects?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

This is a little old now, but I only just noticed it.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,21822328-21545,00.html

Numbers add up but Port dynasty dudded

MICHELANGELO RUCCI
May 31, 2007 02:15am

PORT Adelaide coach Mark Williams on Sunday will become the 14th man to complete the 200-double in VFL-AFL football as player and coach.
And the bizarre irony of his 200 AFL games as the Power's coach - on top of his 201 VFL-AFL with Collingwood and Brisbane - is that they do not allow his three sons to qualify as a father-son pick at Alberton.
The AFL father-son rule does not take into account games coached - only those played.
Port football operations manager Peter Rohde yesterday noted how the original intent of the VFL's father-son rule - written for Ron Barassi to join Melbourne in the 1950s - applies well to Williams' sons.
But it is no longer applicable in the AFL.
"There was a time when the father-son rule took into account service as a coach or an administrator - but no more," Rohde said.
"There is more than irony to think that Brett Ebert did not technically qualify as a father-son pick at Port Adelaide. But in view of Russell's achievements here, Brett fitted exactly what the father-son rule should be about.
"And the same with Mark and his sons. Mark has noted, more than once, the irony that his sons are aligned to Collingwood under the father-son rule rather than Port.
"He had six years at Collingwood. He is now in his 15th year at Port Adelaide."
Williams' 179 SANFL games - 115 with Port Adelaide and 64 with West Adelaide from 1976-1992 - do not help either.
Williams needed 200 SANFL games, from 1976 to 1996, with one SA league club to have his three sons eligible under the current father-son rule to follow the family line started by their grandfather Fos at Alberton in 1950.
This leaves Williams' three sons - Marcus, Isaac and Louis - and perhaps the fourth if Williams' fifth child, due in September, is a son, aligned to Collingwood under the AFL's father-son rule. Williams played 135 games for Collingwood from 1981 to 1986. The AFL father-son rule has an eligibility requirement of 100 games with a Victorian-based club.
Williams played 66 games with Brisbane from 1987 to 1990 - 34 short of making his sons eligible for the Lions as well.
This saves the AFL from making a ruling on which club - Collingwood or Brisbane - gets first bidding rights for Williams' sons if they are capable of playing in the AFL.
By contrast, Sydney and Essendon - where Anthony Daniher played 100 games for each of the Swans and Bombers - still do not know who gets first say on 17-year-old Darcy Daniher, who is currently playing as a key defender with the Calder Cannons under-18 team.

Anyone know who the Williams kids are playing junior footy for now?
 
Anyone know who the Williams kids are playing junior footy for now?

Couldn't really find out anything about them. I'm not that familiar with SA junior footy. I assume they are playing though. Marcus is the oldest (not sure how old), Isaac is 8 years old and I assume Louis is younger than that. So realistically, it might not happen for 4-5 years depending on how old Marcus is. The rules may change by then.

But, as always, happy to have a look at any talent that we can get via F/S.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Correct but i think the point is that neither of these gets Williams' sons to Port where he think they should be able to go

I was referring to this part of the article....

The AFL father-son rule has an eligibility requirement of 100 games with a Victorian-based club.
Williams played 66 games with Brisbane from 1987 to 1990 - 34 short of making his sons eligible for the Lions as well.
This saves the AFL from making a ruling on which club - Collingwood or Brisbane - gets first bidding rights for Williams' sons if they are capable of playing in the AFL.
By contrast, Sydney and Essendon - where Anthony Daniher played 100 games for each of the Swans and Bombers - still do not know who gets first say on 17-year-old Darcy Daniher, who is currently playing as a key defender with the Calder Cannons under-18 team.

This doesn't make sense, either the rules have changed or the author has no idea.

As far as I'm aware, its up to the kid being drafted. Trav Cloke for example could have gone to Richmond or Collingwood under the Father/Son or he could have told them both to get stuffed and nominated for the draft like any other kid.
 
Thems the rules pal. Apart from them being away from SA, I don't think Mark would have any problem with them playing for us. He was a Collingwood player and loved his time at Collingwood and gave us great service. He has always spoken highly of Collingwood even when him and Eddie exchanged words over the media (which was pretty light hearted and only really meant to create interest for the game).
 
I was referring to this part of the article....



This doesn't make sense, either the rules have changed or the author has no idea.

As far as I'm aware, its up to the kid being drafted. Trav Cloke for example could have gone to Richmond or Collingwood under the Father/Son or he could have told them both to get stuffed and nominated for the draft like any other kid.

The rules have changed effective this year. There is some pretty complex bidding system. However your point still remains that it's up to the kid to decide, you cannot nominate for both.
 
I'm aware of the rules changing in regards to other clubs being able to up the value of a father son selection, but not the rules governing whether a kid has the choice to knock back a father son or choose whcih club his father played for.

Interesting changes though, you'd be pissed off if you ran 16th then the best prospect in years came along and was eligible for father/son!
 
The article clearly states that Collingwood is the only team that his kids could go to under the F/S rule, because he only played > 100 games for us.

On the Port board they're telling me that Marcus is 17, but not up to AFL standard.
 
We could argue forever and a day about what the appropriate minimum number of SANFL games should be to qualify, just like last year with the Gibbs debate.

However the coaching issue is a complete crock. Father-son does not and should not include games coached.


Carlton supporters probably wish Bryce did go to Adelaide under the f/s rule. That way they may have chosen better. :D :D
 
I wish the new F/S bidding system came in last year. If it had, Joel Selwood would be in a Collingwood jumper right now.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom