Next Generation academy

[jo172]

http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2015-12-16/female-footy-ports-been-dong-it-nearly-100-years

Olympic and WNBA basketballer Erin Phillips will follow in her eight-time premiership winning father Greg by one day playing for Port Adelaide [pic: PAFC/Kane Chenoweth]

Once you get them in the guernsey people have a tendency of turning around pretty quickly.

"This announcement is pretty unbelievable ... since I was born I've wanted to play football for Port Adelaide like dad," Phillips said on Wednesday. "For this to happen now is quite incredible, quite surreal."

Given her family's ties to Port Adelaide, a club spokesman said that Phillips would most likely continue with her basketball career should the Power's bid be unsuccessful rather than link up with another women's AFL team.

 

[Apsaalooke]

They weren't eligible at the time due to the 20-year window rule. Graham played too many of his games before the window opened. They'd be eligible now, since the AFL introduced the Grandfather Rule in 2007, which did away with that 20 year window limitation.

The AFL also used to include games coached as an eligibility criteria. Kane & Chad would have been eligible under this rule too, if Adelaide had waited 1 more year before sacking Graham. Adelaide didn't wait, and the Cornes brothers missed on both eligibility criteria (SANFL & AFL games coached).

It wasn't just coaching. Any club committee position counted as well. Cornes has said that after his sacking he offered to be a non-voting member on a Crows committee (possibly the board but not sure) for a year to qualify his sons but the club declined the offer

 

[119others]

It wasn't just coaching. Any club committee position counted as well. Cornes has said that after his sacking he offered to be a non-voting member on a Crows committee (possibly the board but not sure) for a year to qualify his sons but the club declined the offer

One of the all time biggest **** ups by our club. A monumental **** up

 

[AFC3000]

More than happy for us to find a loophole or whatever and take any advantage from it. In some ways, it's not that different to us taking Tex as an NSW player when it takes well over twice as long to get to Sydney than it does Adelaide from Broken Hill.

That said, I do hope clubs aren't just looking to sneak in the players that have a relatively straight forward path to the AFL at the expense of those the program is intended for.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

It wasn't just coaching. Any club committee position counted as well. Cornes has said that after his sacking he offered to be a non-voting member on a Crows committee (possibly the board but not sure) for a year to qualify his sons but the club declined the offer

Yep, the way I understood it, Cornsey was basically going out of his way to help the Crows after they'd sacked him and we still turned him down. So dumb.

 

[119others]

When the AFL looked at this in 2001 they tried to do a smoothing exercise and came up with the average number of blokes who played 100 games for a VFL club = approx the number of blokes that played for 5 SANFL clubs who played 200 games for each of the 2 lots of SA clubs = aprox the number of guys who played for 4 WAFL clubs who played 150 games for 2 lots of WA clubs.

It wasn't the value a game in one league was worth more than an another. It was purely a numbers equalisation policy that had many holes in it because the AFL said there was a 20 year eligibility period to count the games of the father and then a 20 years sunset clause on drafting the son for the WA and SA clubs but not Vic clubs.

And stupidly no one picked up that Adelaide were disadvantaged by 1 year. The crows eligible father had to play their games before they entered the comp and Freo WCE and Port could count the first year they were in the comp that the fathers games in the local league counted ie Eagles 1987 was first year but 1987 WAFL games counted, Freo 1995 and Port 1997. The Crows couldn't count 1991 SANFL games for their potential fathers.

It was a ****en farce along with the SANFL not realising they counted night series/preseason games in their totals and the WAFL and VFL didn't.

Firstly, REH many thanks for your absolutely quality contributions. They are a class above, well researched and communicated, and extremely insightful. Please tell me your idea on the Power board about relocating the Borlase family 1km into Powers Academy zone isn’t possible though?! Eek

From what you have said this is a serious and monumental **** up by mainly the crows but also the power. Apologies to this board if these issues have been addressed previously but the 2 glaring issues are :

(1) when trying to equalise the amount of potential FS recruits the AFL looked at total possible players from each state and came up with WAFL 150, SANFL 200 and VFL 100 (initially 50) . BUT if the 200 game SANFL qualification criteria included these pre-season games that were then stripped out subsequently (see Gibbs, Borlase) then the 200 criteria is clearly overstated. Should be more like 150-180 games BOTH SA team have clearly been dudded by this and previous respective Mgt have made a truly shocking error.

(2) re the crows specifically, you mention the other 3 expansion teams (Power, Freo, Weagles) were able to include state league players games played in their first year in the AFL but this did NOT happen for the Crows. I was never aware of this and and assuming I haven’t misinterpreted, surely this mean if Ross Gibbs played 9 games for Glenelg in 1991 (as he was 9 short of qualification by 1990) that the Crows would still have been entitled to Gibbs as a FS if we had the same consistent rules applied as the other 3 teams. If so, how in the **** did Trigg and Co not pick up on this . It’s hugely material, not overly complex and a massive error in hindsight. I have never bashed Trigg as much as others (believing he was the fall guy for Reid’s Tippett contract issues) but if above is true it’s truly damning

I hope I have actually misintpreted all or some of your post but otherwise it’s administrative incompetence that cost us Gibbs - not the AFL

 

[Bearded Clam]

Not sure how mate? If he loves Poort -and by logical default therefore isn’t overly enamoured by the Crows - he would be less inclined to be taken by us as part of the Academy in 3 years time. And even if he was taken by us, it could be another Ebert situation on our hands awaiting the first opportunity to jump ship.

Best hope is Dad has broken the Poort mound ie actually got himself a job (and a global Management role at that) and seen the light and hopes his kids are brought up in a more professional and successful football environment, with the added geographical bonus of lower incidence of car theft whilst parked at training

Really, after the carry on of the past few weeks by the club and it’s suppoters surrounding the SPP fiasco and all the other off field rot that goes on like the fights etc etc that’s occurred over the past couple of years... if you were James Borlase’s parents, would you want your son going to port. No thanks.

 

[Cleric]

Easy to create a fake profile on Facebook, especially one that only has generic pics, rather than personal ones, as their profile pics.

This one was a long time in the making considering the photos were posted a year ago.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Firstly, REH many thanks for your absolutely quality contributions. They are a class above, well researched and communicated, and extremely insightful. Please tell me your idea on the Power board about relocating the Borlase family 1km into Powers Academy zone isn’t possible though?! Eek

From what you have said this is a serious and monumental **** up by mainly the crows but also the power. Apologies to this board if these issues have been addressed previously but the 2 glaring issues are :

(1) when trying to equalise the amount of potential FS recruits the AFL looked at total possible players from each state and came up with WAFL 150, SANFL 200 and VFL 100 (initially 50) . BUT if the 200 game SANFL qualification criteria included these pre-season games that were then stripped out subsequently (see Gibbs, Borlase) then the 200 criteria is clearly overstated. Should be more like 150-180 games BOTH SA team should have been dudded by this and previous respective Mgt have made a shocking error

(2) re the crows specifically, you mention the other 3 expansion teams (Power, Freo, Weagles) were able to include state league players games played in their first year in the AFL but this did NOT happen for the Crows. I was never aware of this and and assuming I haven’t misinterpreted, surely this mean if Ross Gibbs played 9 games for Glenelg in 1991 (as he was 9 short of qualification by 1990) that the Crows would still have been entitled to Gibbs as a FS if we had the same consistent rules applied as the other 3 teams. If so, how in the **** did Trigg and Co not pick up on this . It’s hugely material, not overly complex and a massive error in hindsight. I have never bashed Trigg as much as others (believing he was the fall guy for Reid’s Tippett contract issues) but if above is true it’s truly damning

I hope I have actually misintpreted all or some of your post but otherwise it’s administrative incompetence that cost us Gibbs - not the AFL

The AFL changed the rules before Gibbs was drafted and correctly realigned the 4 clubs so that they only count state games to the season before they joined up ie like Adelaide, as well as removing the 20 year sunset clause.

You can read the rules as at May 2005 here where I typed them up from the AFL Record Season Guide
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/if-martin-leslie-junior.169391/#post-3219796

or here where someone on the main board had a copy of the AFL rules ie more than F/S and typed up the relevant sections in July 2005.
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...orks-for-wa-and-sa-clubs.182742/#post-3533297

and what they became after the 2006 amendment and before Gibbs was drafted. See pages 52 and 53 for the WA and SA clubs
http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/AFL Rules - May 2016.pdf

If I remember correctly, the changes, made Ebert retrospectively eligible, Gibbs wasn't eligible and the Morton family in WA, one son was taken under the old rules and the 1 year adjustment to WCE rules, made the other son ineligible.

 

[jo172]

If I remember correctly, the changes, made Ebert retrospectively eligible, Gibbs wasn't eligible and the Morton in WA family one son was taken under the old rules and the 1 year adjustment to WCE rules, made the other son ineligible.

I thought Cale missed out as the old rule only gave a 20 year window from the Club entering the AFL to draft WAFL father/sons (and the SA ones mirrored this)?

Bullet dodged for WC in retrospect

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I thought Cale missed out as the old rule only gave a 20 year window from the Club entering the AFL to draft WAFL father/sons (and the SA ones mirrored this)?

Bullet dodged for WC in retrospect

You maybe right. I just remember the change meant one son was taken as F/S and the other one couldn't be.

 

[Vader]

Firstly, REH many thanks for your absolutely quality contributions. They are a class above, well researched and communicated, and extremely insightful. Please tell me your idea on the Power board about relocating the Borlase family 1km into Powers Academy zone isn’t possible though?! Eek

From what you have said this is a serious and monumental **** up by mainly the crows but also the power. Apologies to this board if these issues have been addressed previously but the 2 glaring issues are :

(1) when trying to equalise the amount of potential FS recruits the AFL looked at total possible players from each state and came up with WAFL 150, SANFL 200 and VFL 100 (initially 50) . BUT if the 200 game SANFL qualification criteria included these pre-season games that were then stripped out subsequently (see Gibbs, Borlase) then the 200 criteria is clearly overstated. Should be more like 150-180 games BOTH SA team have clearly been dudded by this and previous respective Mgt have made a truly shocking error.

(2) re the crows specifically, you mention the other 3 expansion teams (Power, Freo, Weagles) were able to include state league players games played in their first year in the AFL but this did NOT happen for the Crows. I was never aware of this and and assuming I haven’t misinterpreted, surely this mean if Ross Gibbs played 9 games for Glenelg in 1991 (as he was 9 short of qualification by 1990) that the Crows would still have been entitled to Gibbs as a FS if we had the same consistent rules applied as the other 3 teams. If so, how in the **** did Trigg and Co not pick up on this . It’s hugely material, not overly complex and a massive error in hindsight. I have never bashed Trigg as much as others (believing he was the fall guy for Reid’s Tippett contract issues) but if above is true it’s truly damning

I hope I have actually misintpreted all or some of your post but otherwise it’s administrative incompetence that cost us Gibbs - not the AFL

The AFC appealed the Gibbs decision in 2007. The AFL formed a committee, which came back with a recommendation that the AFL move the SANFL eligibility dates. This would have made Gibbs eligible. The Victorian clubs rebelled - couldn't have Adelaide picking up a #1 draft pick with #48!

The end result was the Grandfather rule. This removed Adelaide's 10-year time limit on signing SANFL F/S players, and eliminated the 20-year window in which they had to have played their 200 games. By eliminating the 20-year window, the AFL were effectively adding players who had started their careers in the 1950s and 1960s, and whose careers continued into the 1970s. What they should have done was adding players who finished in 1991-1994. The AFL cleverly chose to add players whose Grandsons were likely to be of drafting age - hence the rule's moniker. It still left Gibbs ineligible, and Adelaide (effectively) with a smaller pool of qualified fathers.

Trigg had nothing to do with the date discrepancy. The decision pre-dated him by a long time. He also fought hard for us to get access to Gibbs, only for the Victorian clubs to overrule the AFL's committee recommendations. There are many things he can be blamed for, losing Gibbs is not one of them.

 

[jo172]

You maybe right. I just remember the change meant one son was taken as F/S and the other one couldn't be.

I'm trying to remember what happened with Jarryd Morton. He might be in the same boat?

 

[119others]

The AFL changed the rules before Gibbs was drafted and correctly realigned the 4 clubs so that they only count state games to the season before they joined up ie like Adelaide, as well as removing the 20 year sunset clause.

You can read the rules as at May 2005 here where I typed them up from the AFL Record Season Guide
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/if-martin-leslie-junior.169391/#post-3219796

or here where someone on the main board had a copy of the AFL rules ie more than F/S and type up the relevant sections in July 2005.
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...orks-for-wa-and-sa-clubs.182742/#post-3533297

and what they became after the 2006 amendment and before Gibbs was drafted. See pages 52 and 53 for the WA and SA clubs
http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/AFL Rules - May 2016.pdf

If I remember correctly, the changes, made Ebert retrospectively eligible, Gibbs wasn't eligible and the Morton in WA family one son was taken under the old rules and the 1 year adjustment to WCE rules, made the other son ineligible.

Ok thanks mate. So that applies to my 2nd point re Crows inconsistencies vs other 3. More AFL policy on the run..

But what about the 200 game total -did the initial calculations trying to equalise all potential FS for each state include the pre-season games of SA players that were then stripped out? ie it was over stated from the start and should have had a lower threshold? Thoughts?

 

[jo172]

-did the initial calculations trying to equalise all potential FS for each state include the pre-season games of SA players that were the stripped out? ie it was over stated from the start and should have had a lower threshold? Thoughts?

Yes.

One suspects that if this hadn't all happened in the immediate context of Gibbs eligibility for that draft the threshold may have been lowered to something like 175 games.

AFL though.

 

[119others]

That was the real PAFC which was a successful well run club.

Now you have the Powah who have what? One flag in 21+ years and lurches from one disaster to the next.

Do you reckon Daisy and his cohort would enjoy the 80's love song before each home game and a breakfast buffoon as their chairman who makes them play a game in China?

They would say get farked.

It is only the hipster doofuses that hold their scarves up (when the ground announcer tells them to) who think the current Powah are in anyway the same as the great Magpies were.

$20 tickets to their games are leagues cheapest from my understanding which also inflates crowd numbers.

Normalisation of ticket prices would likely see 10-20% falls in crowd numbers back to the the good ol Tarp days

 

[Vader]

But what about the 200 game total -did the initial calculations trying to equalise all potential FS for each state include the pre-season games of SA players that were the stripped out? ie it was over stated from the start and should have had a lower threshold? Thoughts?

Yes to both questions.

 

[119others]

Yes to both questions.

So a big admin **** up from both crows and power at the time for not clarifying this ambiguity

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Ok thanks mate. So that applies to my 2 point re Crows inconsistencies vs other 3. More AFL policy on the run..

But what about the 200 game total -did the initial calculations trying to equalise all potential FS for each state include the pre-season games of SA players that were the stripped out? ie it was over stated from the start and should have had a lower threshold? Thoughts?

Yeah that was the whole idea, a smoothing, number equalisation exercise in 2001. The wrong figures were presented and the AFL calculated the equivalent games over 3 leagues to get similar number of eligible fathers.

When it was discovered in 2005, I doubt the SANFL re did their figures, otherwise they would have said, with the adjusted figures to get the same numbers as with the 200 gamers as we presented before, if we now counted premiership seasongames only, we think 180 should be the figure used.

It was all too hard and all too embarrassing, so they stayed with the 200 being the figure and that any father in that 200-250 sanfl game range would have to be individually checked when time came that his son was a chance.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

This one was a long time in the making considering the photos were posted a year ago.

Who knows, it could have been that a year ago he told a mate that the Crows had shown interest in picking him up in their academy, so his mate created the Port Facebook profile for him as a prank.

 

[119others]

Yeah that was the whole idea, a smoothing, number equalisation exercise in 2001. The wrong figures were presented and the AFL calculated the equivalent games over 3 leagues to get similar number of eligible fathers.

When it was discovered in 2005, I doubt the SANFL re did their figures, otherwise they would have said, with the adjusted figures to get the same numbers as with the 200 gamers as we presented before, if we now counted premiership seasongames only, we think 180 should be the figure used.

It was all too hard and all too embarrassing, so they stayed with the 200 being the figure and that any father in that 200-250 sanfl game range would have to be individually checked when time came that his son was a chance.

Cheers REH, an absolute joke all round though.

Crows never gained any FS from SANFL affiliations, Borlase potentially ending up (incorrectly) at Crows rather than his clearly rightful home and even Ebert not technically qualifying for Port despite his Dad being one of the greatest ever players in SANFL history.

 

[jo172]

Also note our NGA player Daniel Sladojevic has been picked as an under ager for the SA U18s team.

Appears to have ripped the SANFL U16s comp a new one

 

[Vader]

Cheers REH, an absolute joke all round though.

Crows never gained any FS from SANFL affiliations, Borlase potentially ending up (incorrectly) at Crows rather than his clearly rightful home and even Ebert not technically qualifying for Port despite his Dad being one of the greatest ever players in SANFL history.

While the Crows never selected any FS players from SANFL affiliations, there were a few who they looked at and ultimately rejected.

We would have had a lot more FS players if the Grandfather rule had been introduced in 1990, not 2007. We would have had Luke Darcy, Chad & Kane Cornes, and several others as well.

 

[Crow till I die]

$20 tickets to their games are leagues cheapest from my understanding which also inflates crowd numbers.

Normalisation of ticket prices would likely see 10-20% falls in crowd numbers back to the the good ol Tarp days

well you live and learn..I thought it was hard enough to GIVE AWAY powa tickets

 

[119others]

While the Crows never selected any FS players from SANFL affiliations, there were a few who they looked at and ultimately rejected.

We would have had a lot more FS players if the Grandfather rule had been introduced in 1990, not 2007. We would have had Luke Darcy, Chad & Kane Cornes, and several others as well.

Oh please don’t - too painful. Darcy really is a pain though and absolutely hates the crows for some reason (perhaps he played 97 PF - can’t remember).

It’s up there behind the new much harder to qualify for and mostly watered down priority pick. In 2004 Crows finished 12th which these days would have given us pick 5 in the ND that year. Pick 5 in the 2004 ND = Lance Buddy Franklin....