St Kilda complain about priority draft access in Oct 2024; now set to gain priority access to a first / second round pick via their NGA access

[mighty_lions]

Untrue on both counts.

ok every minus st Kilda because its so not fair

 

[jumperfan]

I hate doing this, but I’ll do you a solid and give you the answer for free.

The lions aren’t stopping you from being successful. The other teams around you down in Melbourne who pay players millions outside the cap and prevent you from attracting any talent are.

Who said it was specifically the Lions? The Lions are just making use of an unfair system, it's not their fault. No one's saying that the Northern clubs are out to get St Kilda, just that the system is currently set up in a way that has disadvantaged us and other clubs, particularly the other 4 non-Victorian clubs.

TDK is about to choose Carlton over the Saints despite the Saints offering $5m more over the life of the deal. How do you think they’re going to make TDK whole?

If that's true then maybe Brisbane and the other Northern clubs could help us out by backing us up if we called that out? Would be nice.

 

[jumperfan]

ok every minus st Kilda because its so not fair

Hypothetically, if there was a clear no. 1 pick who was miles better than anyone else in the draft and Brisbane held pick 1 but missed out on him because he was tied to another club through father/son, would you say that would be fair? I wouldn't.

 

[mighty_lions]

Who said it was specifically the Lions? The Lions are just making use of an unfair system, it's not their fault. No one's saying that the Northern clubs are out to get St Kilda, just that the system is currently set up in a way that has disadvantaged us and other clubs, particularly the other 4 non-Victorian clubs.

If that's true then maybe Brisbane and the other Northern clubs could help us out by backing us up if we called that out? Would be nice.

your president who went on a ramble and took time on your best and fairest night to specifically complain about Brisbane

 

[mighty_lions]

Hypothetically, if there was a clear no. 1 pick who was miles better than anyone else in the draft and Brisbane held pick 1 but missed out on him because he was tied to another club through father/son, would you say that would be fair? I wouldn't.

I would say its fair, its father son we would have no right to them, they dont even come into the equation, effectively you still get the number 1 pick

 

[Elixuh]

If that's true then maybe Brisbane and the other Northern clubs could help us out by backing us up if we called that out? Would be nice.

1. You won't.
2. No. It is genuinely loser mentality stuff. I'm not having a go - I'd be happy if the Saints were firing - but your whole club reeks of loser mentality and has done so for a while. All we ever hear from the Saints is whining and why the entire world is against them and its all too hard.

 

[Elixuh]

Sometimes I wonder whether the Saints realise the season is still afoot. Seeing these articles must really pump up the membership base down at RSEA park.

 

[jumperfan]

1. You won't.
2. No. It is genuinely loser mentality stuff. I'm not having a go - I'd be happy if the Saints were firing - but your whole club reeks of loser mentality and has done so for a while. All we ever hear from the Saints is whining and why the entire world is against them and its all too hard.

Ok so it would be "loser mentality" for the Lions to call out this supposed salary cap cheating so St Kilda should just take one for the team then?

 

[jumperfan]

I would say its fair, its father son we would have no right to them, they dont even come into the equation, effectively you still get the number 1 pick

Why is it fair that certain players can only be drafted by the club that their father played an arbitrary amount of games for? Doesn't seem fair to me. Why should a club miss out on a F/S because the father only played 99 games for the club while another club gets a F/S through a 100 game father?

 

[Elixuh]

Ok so it would be "loser mentality" for the Lions to call out this supposed salary cap cheating so St Kilda should just take one for the team then?

Or you could ask yourself why is it that the Saints are the only team in the comp we constantly hear from on this stuff. And its not courage. Because you only pick fights with the likes of the Lions.

 

[mighty_lions]

Why is it fair that certain players can only be drafted by the club that their father played an arbitrary amount of games for? Doesn't seem fair to me. Why should a club miss out on a F/S because the father only played 99 games for the club while another club gets a F/S through a 100 game father?

im happy to change the rule to 1 game I dont mind, but you want to have fathers sons who have made a significant impact, if the. number was 99 that would be rather odd...they have to have some number and its currently 100 for everyone, its the same rules for everyone so its irrelevant anyway

 

[Coolangatta]

Relevant to this thread. Move to Canberra, St Kilda, and get your pick of the cherries. Or, stop whining, but to be fair, it’s just Ross the grumpy moss doing that.

Tough shit when it comes to the small Vic clubs. They had 150 years to be relevant when it was just 12 teams in the VFL but didn’t.

This crap from Ross Lyon about getting rid of the northern academies is short sighted.

The AFL are doing the right thing by growing the game, the northern clubs need to be good. The academies also grow the talent pool which we need if we are to keep expanding.

The solution is to change the bidding points rules but we’re not at a point yet where the QLD clubs are dominating with five flags between them yet.

Alternatively, just let all clubs have their own academy instead of relying on the state leagues for talent, but St Kilda wouldn’t like that because they can’t afford a tin shed let alone an academy.

Personally, while you can argue perhaps that Melbourne is not an over saturated market because of the history and level of support there, 9 clubs in one city is a damn competitive market.

There’s always going to be winners and losers and the strong and the weak there. Hell, even big clubs like Carlton and Essendon aren’t guaranteed shit if they don’t draft and trade well.

You mentioned the small Vic clubs might fade into obscurity. To me that is their own problem if they do.

Now personally, I don’t want to see anyone fold or merge. I still think the AFL should’ve let Fitzroy move to Canberra, then bring in Tassie as team 18 in the 90s, then Gold Coast and GWS as team 19 and 20.

If the AFL can grow the game in NSW and QLD big enough and I think they’re on the right track in QLD, it’d be lunacy for the small Vic clubs not to look at relocating there in the future if they want to stay relevant.

If the Saints want talent, they should move to Canberra. The locals would get behind them, they’d get better crowds at Manuka and they could have their own ACT/Riverina academy.

Would be stronger on and off the field and I don’t think the TV ratings would suffer as Saints fans would still have their club and colours and song in the league, they just wouldn’t see them as much live.

 

[jumperfan]

im happy to change the rule to 1 game I dont mind, but you want to have fathers sons who have made a significant impact, if the. number was 99 that would be rather odd...they have to have some number and its currently 100 for everyone, its the same rules for everyone so its irrelevant anyway

Well you misunderstood the hypothetical I posted anyway so not much point arguing further.

 

[Mat Mann]

why would the clubs run them for no benefit wtf are you on about

and therein lies the rub. You use "grow the game" as a moral ground for unhindered access, a discount, and being able to bundle 3rd round picks for top 5 talent.

But if the access is taken away, it's not worth your time?

 

[jumperfan]

Or you could ask yourself why is it that the Saints are the only team in the comp we constantly hear from on this stuff. And its not courage. Because you only pick fights with the likes of the Lions.

Because it makes the margin of error for our mistakes so little. If we muck up one or two drafts it sets us back years. There's not a fallback for us in the way that there is for other clubs. From my perspective we've been told for years to go to the draft and rebuild "the right" way - OK, fair enough - yet when we get there clubs that have been finishing higher on the ladder than us for years get to pick before us at a discount. I doubt you would think that was fair if Brisbane was in our position.

 

[mighty_lions]

and therein lies the rub. You use "grow the game" as a moral ground for unhindered access, a discount, and being able to bundle 3rd round picks for top 5 talent.

But if the access is taken away, it's not worth your time?

the grow the game is a fact, the facts are more are getting drafted as a result of the academies, and of course its benefits us, so it should, just like all the advantages melbourne clubs have

 

[mighty_lions]

Well you misunderstood the hypothetical I posted anyway so not much point arguing further.

no I didnt, if we finished last and had pick 1, and st Kilda had Riewoldt-mclaughlan touted as pick 1, I would think its entirely fair st Kilda get the father son, and we would still get the number 1 pick available

 

[jumperfan]

no I didnt, if we finished last and had pick 1, and st Kilda had Riewoldt-mclaughlan touted as pick 1, I would think its entirely fair st Kilda get the father son, and we would still get the number 1 pick available

Ok but you're missing the point by considering father/sons as "outside" the pool of draftable players. Why should that be? Why should they off-limits to other clubs?

 

[mighty_lions]

Ok but you're missing the point by considering father/sons as "outside" the pool of draftable players. Why should that be? Why should they off-limits to other clubs?

so you dont want Nicks kids to play for st Kilda, you don't think that would be good??? Like ive said so many times its great rule and everyone seems to agree thats why the afl brought it in except for st Kilda apparently

you gave me an example and I answered it honestly, it would be entirely fair if st Kilda have a touted number 1 father son and we did not have access to them, I would not care at all

 

[jumperfan]

so you dont want Nicks kids to play for st Kilda, you don't think that would be good??? Like ive said so many times its great rule and everyone seems to agree thats why the afl brought it in except for st Kilda apparently

you gave me an example and I answered it honestly, it would be entirely fair if st Kilda have a touted number 1 father son and we did not have access to them, I would not care at all

I'd love to see them play for us but not at the expense of the fairness of the draft. Also you can't keep trying to justify it by just saying it's a "great rule" - that means nothing on its own. Neither does "everyone" agree with you, otherwise we wouldn't be having this argument.

 

[mighty_lions]

I'd love to see them play for us but not at the expense of the fairness of the draft. Also you can't keep trying to justify it by just saying it's a "great rule" - that means nothing on its own. Neither does "everyone" agree with you, otherwise we wouldn't be having this argument.

lol guarantee you the father son rule wont be changing anytime soon, and bigger lol you would be crying if they scrapped it and then the riewoldts were playing at another club and yes I can say its a great rule because it is, also there's a part of me that doesn't want champions of other clubs kids playing for us, I dont want daicos coming to us in the draft fair chance he leaves after 2-3 years anyway

 

[jwint43]

What was your club's excuse prior to free agency, FS and NGA?
100 years with 1 premiership and plenty of wooden spoons.

The simple fact is that it's easy for St Kilda to cling on to excuses as to why they are an unsuccessful club.
It's always been a poor club and it always will be.

I'd actually like to argue this in good faith without potshots or nastiness. Firstly, I am a vocal critic of the current zoning/NGA/academy/draft system, but what we have now is still far better than the absolute pisstake that existed in the VFL before the draft system was introduced. From 1955-1960 the only teams that competed in the grand final were Collingwood, Essendon and Melbourne.

I am not making excuses as I wasn't alive to witness most of the Saints history, but I am hoping to give some context as to why they were such a rabble. I am 30 so wasn't around when it was the VFL and the draft didn't exist, but from what I have read and can understand, there were zones that were allocated to each team and the Saints had arguably one of the worst, and also had a crucial area reallocated to Hawthorn at some stage? This era seems particularly bleak but it was a time of blatant cheating and money under the table deals before the full professionalisation of the league. I'm happy to be proven wrong, and there could have been plenty of other reasons why the Saints were a joke at this time.

Once the VFL became the AFL and a proper national draft was brought in, I would argue that the Saints can be seen as a great example of being able to access talent via the draft and build a side capable of winning a premiership. In the 90's and 2000's the draft was the single best method to build a list. The Saints were able to sort themselves out once the playing field was levelled out and created a strong list via methods that were never available to them previously. I always see people point to the priority pick given to the Saints, but this rule was universal across the league - 5 wins or less. It wasn't a one off gift like the AFL giving Gold Coast the no.2 pick because Rowell and Anderson are good mates.


The Saints modern history looks much better if they pinched a flag or two.The 09 loss and 2010 draw are as close as you can come to winning a flag. While they fell short, the 2000's was a stable decade of success for the club, and the grand finals were a direct result of accessing the draft. Since the VFL became the AFL the Saints have only had 2 wooden spoons. Carlton have had 5 spoons in this time, and they were once a powerhouse.


I am rambling here, but my general point is asking if a true build through the draft can be achieved under the current system? Since the 2010's (when the Saints fell off and started a rebuild) there has been the introduction of Free Agency, the NGA's, the NSW and QLD academies, two new AFL teams with massive draft concessions over multiple years and the introduction of a convoluted points system for drafting. Richmond were able to win a premiership and add Tom Lynch to their team. This wasn't possible in 2005. A simple but poignant example.

When you consider all of the above plays a factor and you combine it with poor drafting, list management, list development, and poor general club management (Seaford move) it creates the situation we have today.

The thing that annoys me the most with the NGA's is the flip flopping and constant rule changes. Just like the AFL panicking and introducing new rules to change the game, they also overreacted and changed the NGA rules yearly. The loopholes to access players because of location of birth and not actual heritage are also just stupid.

The Saints are the loudest on this and are being made fun of because of their history, but every other club is saying the same things behind closed doors. I don't mind the Saints being called whingers and perennial losers if it actually causes change.

 

[GC2015]

Why should it matter how would have "gone down?" If it makes the competition more equitable then the AFL should have the balls to go through with it regardless of what certain clubs think.

If you're gonna go there then why should it matter how St Kilda feel? If 95% of the teams in the league are happy with the father-son rule, then why should it change? Just because the Saints don't like it? That's coming from someone who supports a club that won't have a single F/S pick for at least another decade. I've already pointed out St Kilda's suggestions would mean Carlton lose L.Camporeale, Collingwood lose J.Daicos, Essendon lose J.Davey, Hawthorn lose C.Dear and the Dogs lose T.Liberatore... but I've got another example for you with a different rule change that the Saints have pushed.

Do you think it would be right for the Bulldogs to have missed out on drafting Sam Darcy because they finished top 4 in his draft year, but Collingwood are allowed to draft Nick Daicos two selections later because they didn't finish inside the top 4? Because that's what would have happened in 2021 if St Kilda's suggestions were in place.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

How is it the same? No one can pick your guys. They’re completely cut off from the free draft

Yes they can, if we don't match.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/149267

Oh look, one of yours was in there too.

 

[jwint43]

Let's talk about Owens and Windhager

both taken in a non-restricted era of drafts, NGA kids in 2021 were unprotected until pick 20, pick 40 the following year. meaning any bid before then meant that we lost exclusive access to them, Owens was pick 33 and Windy pick 47, that's mid-2nd and mid-3rd rounds, paid for with picks 48 and 54 (Owens) and 57 (Windy), almost as much as the Pies paid for with Nick.





funny how once again this topic has become a kick St Kilda topic, rather than sticking to the subject matter.
Fincher has not been mentioned as a possible 1st round pick anywhere but this article.

They haven't even put an authors name to the article!
They list Hoffman and Cole as Saints NGA's we didn't draft for some reason??, remind where in the draft they were drafted at? are we supposed to draft them regardless? what about the 6 GCS kids that didn't get drafted, should they be held against CG in the same manner?

Essendon, Carlton, Pies, Cats all have NGA kids, yet the articles only bags St Kilda, nonetheless, the article also excludes the Northern clubs having multiple kids almost certain to be picked before Kye.

seems to me the article is just another in a series of piss poor articles by the media to discredit and belittle my club.

doesn't even mention Geelong's skulduggery in securing Steinfort and the club they take him from

It is hilarious seeing the revisionist history being applied to Owens and Windy without people understanding how it worked. Both have turned into good players so now the narrative is we got two first round level players for free, despite not a single club bidding on them in the top 20. This is after the rules got changed because the Dogs finished 7th and got JUH for essentially nothing, so the AFL panicked and changed everything for 2021. But it gets better, we are now back to the rules from when it started! The AFL's inconsistency year to year is honestly impressive.

And now, with all that information, we are being mocked for our one decent NGA prospect this year by a Gold Coast supporter with an incredibly misleading headline.