Well they are both free agents next OOC so it will still be a discussion next year and after.Not gonna lie I was really hoping I was going to be able to enjoy seeing him and Butters leave in a short space of time of each other.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Well they are both free agents next OOC so it will still be a discussion next year and after.Not gonna lie I was really hoping I was going to be able to enjoy seeing him and Butters leave in a short space of time of each other.
Yuk. No thanks. Not much better than Crouch
I thought Port were in a bit of strife only a couple of weeks ago but all of a sudden they have a pretty handy core of younger players in Bergman, JHF, Butters and Rozee in the midfield and Georgiadis up forward, also a big fan of Visentini.Well they are both free agents next OOC so it will still be a discussion next year and after.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
The most logical thing would be to count him against his original draft year (2021). However, that doesn't help Port, as it falls outside the AFL's mandated rolling 4-year window.
Rather not, we don't need ball burners, he finds it but kicking is very very average.Highly unlikely as he is a Vic lad , but is a FA next year would we have a crack at Sam Walsh?
Tops off our midfield
I don't have a problem with that, provided their original draft date was inside the AFL's rolling 4-year window.The even more sensible thing would be to end this ridiculous farce where trading in a former first-round selection gets to count as taking a first-round pick in the draft.
By that logic, clubs could just get around it by finding any first-round selection who hasn't worked out after a couple years, and offering peanuts to bring them in for a year.
I don't have a problem with that, provided their original draft date was inside the AFL's rolling 4-year window.
I thought Port were in a bit of strife only a couple of weeks ago but all of a sudden they have a pretty handy core of younger players in Bergman, JHF, Butters and Rozee in the midfield and Georgiadis up forward, also a big fan of Visentini.
Gross.
How many times has Walsh actually done that?What ? He's 10 x the player that Crouch is
Crouch would never produce a 37 possession 3 goal game
The even more sensible thing would be to end this ridiculous farce where trading in a former first-round selection gets to count as taking a first-round pick in the draft.
By that logic, clubs could just get around it by finding any first-round selection who hasn't worked out after a couple years, and offering peanuts to bring them in for a year.
We're talking about 1st, 2nd or 3rd year players here. At this point in their careers their underage performances, which were good enough to see them drafted in the 1st round, are still relevant to how they are perceived. They are still rated largely on potential, rather than historic achievements at the senior level.At that point, why even have the rule at all?
It would be neglectful not to.
Also I believe it's still not 'official' that he would qualify as indigenous? Certainly that was a point of debate a few months ago.
At that point, why even have the rule at all?
It’s to make sure that clubs are refreshing their lists with a minimum of 2 first rounders every 4 years. Trading in first rounders from recent drafts meets the objective.
What ? He's 10 x the player that Crouch is
Crouch would never produce a 37 possession 3 goal game
At what point though are they judged to be "failed first round selections"? McAsey is an exceptional case, but rarely would this judgement be made inside a player's first 3 years in the system. It's only players in years 1-3 who are eligible for the rolling 4-year window.Let's be sensible, though. Clubs aren't going to just avoid drafting players from the first round for the sake of it. They're not stupid. If they're not using their first-round selections at the draft, it's because they're trading them for established players. The point is, the AFL wants to dissuade clubs from trading away all of their first round picks over a period time for established players.
That can easily be gotten around by doing exactly that - future trading away all of your first round selections for established players - and then using chicken feed to bring in failed first round selections from previous years to meet the requirement.
At that point... why have the requirement at all?
Yeah but has Sam Walsh ever had 45 and 1 goal?
No. And Crouch has done it twice
Couple of the ‘missing pieces’ are going not too bad as well. Think they need Marshall to come back and be as good as he’s looked at times and they could return back up the ladder.
Let's be sensible, though. Clubs aren't going to just avoid drafting players from the first round for the sake of it. They're not stupid. If they're not using their first-round selections at the draft, it's because they're trading them for established players. The point is, the AFL wants to dissuade clubs from trading away all of their first round picks over a period time for established players.
That can easily be gotten around by doing exactly that - future trading away all of your first round selections for established players - and then using chicken feed to bring in failed first round selections from previous years to meet the requirement.
At that point... why have the requirement at all?
They may go up the ladder but not a premiership threat.
Losing 1st round picks the last few years will bite them in the arse.
I don’t think clubs are going to be wasting 2nd and 3rd rounders every picks on past first round players that they don’t rate just to meet the requirements of the rule. And if they do, what’s the big deal, they’re only handicapping themselves.
...then, why bother having the rule?
The rule is either worth having, or it's not. If it's worth having, then it should be enforced properly without allowing loopholes to get around the entire point of the rule. And if it's not worth having, then don't have it.
I guarantee you, if a club has the option to trade in a gun player for a first round selection, but are unable to do so because of the AFL rules... if they are given the option to get around the requirement by also trading in a failed first round selection for a late pick, they're going to take it.
Because for the 17 other clubs that don’t, it’s serving its purpose. Noting there’s still not a single instance of this happening.
Yeah but has Sam Walsh ever had 45 and 1 goal?
No. And Crouch has done it twice