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

[Elixuh]

Most people can tell the difference.

It is difficult when both live in a world of fiction and fantasy.

 

[The Punter]

It is difficult when both live in a world of fiction and fantasy.

Well, Mr Bassat does own seek.com.au, so I can understand how gainful employment would be the stuff of make believe for you.

 

[Elixuh]

Well, Mr Bassat does own seek.com.au, so I can understand how gainful employment would be the stuff of make believe for you.

That joke was a bit contrived, it must be said.

I’ve been employed by Red Rooster for 9 years, so happily employed.

 

[Broski]

That joke was a bit contrived, it must be said.

I’ve been employed by Red Rooster for 9 years, so happily employed.

Where's my Rippa Roll mate? Ordered it an hour ago.

 

[Elixuh]

Where's my Rippa Roll mate? Ordered it an hour ago.

If you’ve had a bad experience at one of our restaurants I recommend you provide feedback on our website.

 

[paulige]

It used to work as a short-medium term measure. It doesn't any more, and we have proof in results. North have finished bottom two for five consecutive years. That used to be long enough, and it is not any more.

Year | Ladder Position | First Pick

2020 | 17th | 3
2021 | 18th | 1
2022 | 18th | 1
2023 | 17th | 2
2024 | 17th | 2

Bumped 1 spot in 2020. Bumped 1 spot in 2022 (but only because they traded out pick 1). North aren’t struggling because of the academies.

 

[The Punter]

Year | Ladder Position | First Pick

2020 | 17th | 3
2021 | 18th | 1
2022 | 18th | 1
2023 | 17th | 2
2024 | 17th | 2

Bumped 1 spot in 2020. Bumped 1 spot in 2022 (but only because they traded out pick 1). North aren’t struggling because of the academies.

I mean, that 2021 number is doing a lot of work for you. Because of the financial bonus given to the #1 pick, clubs won't bid on anyone they know they cannot get at #1. So no Darcy, no Daicos and after a year, no Horne-Francis. But at least they were compensated for Horne-Francis.

And I never said North were struggling because of the academies. I said they're not bouncing back because the system is broken. I've stated many times I'd keep some level of academy access because it has some league benefit. The father-son rule provides no benefit to the league and should be abolished immediately.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

you mean complying to the rules, you are a joke

They AFL also came up with bullshit to make Sydney pay every cent even if Buddy retired because they thought the contract was bullshit, he signed another contract after it!

I’m a joke because I point out some of the large advantages some clubs have gotten over others , I’m not blaming the clubs themselves they took advantage of the situations the afl created and continue to create. Sydney didn’t technically break any rules but they didn’t use there cost of living allowance for what it was intended for did they? And your saying Brisbane having a extra 10% in salary cap was not a pretty decent advantage to have over competition you had three Brownlow medalists in your midfield has that ever happened in history

Uncompromised? What nonsense. Your team was gifted extra top 5 picks in 2000 and 2001, then lucked out in 2002 to get the #1 pick again after Carlton's salary cap rorting penalties. And the AFL gave you Riewoldt by severely cutting back Brisbane's zone.

What right should Brisbane have had over Riewoldt he lived on Gold Coast never spent any time at the club ,came from Tasmania and a football playing family and it’s not really st kilda fault Carlton rorted the salary cap

 

[mighty_lions]

I’m a joke because I point out some of the large advantages some clubs have gotten over others , I’m not blaming the clubs themselves they took advantage of the situations the afl created and continue to create. Sydney didn’t technically break any rules but they didn’t use there cost of living allowance for what it was intended for did they? And your saying Brisbane having a extra 10% in salary cap was not a pretty decent advantage to have over competition you had three Brownlow medalists in your midfield has that ever happened in history

What right should Brisbane have had over Riewoldt he lived on Gold Coast never spent any time at the club ,came from Tasmania and a football playing family and it’s not really st kilda fault Carlton rorted the salary cap

Geelong had bartel Ablett and Dangerfield so yes it's possible, so if Sydney didnt technically didnt break any rules why did they get banned from trading?

you equate teams success to there advantages its absolute bullshit, every time a victorian team win the grand final should we all just say oh yeah its because they get an mcg grand final? they travelled less so they won? they have less retention issues? oh no daicos plays for Collingwood?

your club is just making constant excuses, oh its academies oh its rich clubs oh its father sons, bulldogs won in 2016 and a grand final in 2021, and in the mix for this year also, they have exactly the same situation as st Kilda

 

[The Punter]

Geelong had bartel Ablett and Dangerfield so yes it's possible, so if Sydney didnt technically didnt break any rules why did they get banned from trading?

you equate teams success to there advantages its absolute bullshit, every time a victorian team win the grand final should we all just say oh yeah its because they get an mcg grand final? they travelled less so they won? they have less retention issues? oh no daicos plays for Collingwood?

your club is just making constant excuses, oh its academies oh its rich clubs oh its father sons, bulldogs won in 2016 and a grand final in 2021, and in the mix for this year also, they have exactly the same situation as st Kilda

It's only (and not really) the same situation if, in the first instance, our past players have sons and not daughters.

This is a ridiculous thing to base a rule on. The draft, invented for one purpose, unable to do its one job because past players (of a arbitrarily decided games limit BTW) had sons and not daughters. It's preposterous.

 

[mighty_lions]

It's only (and not really) the same situation if, in the first instance, our past players have sons and not daughters.

This is a ridiculous thing to base a rule on. The draft, invented for one purpose, unable to do its one job because past players (of a arbitrarily decided games limit BTW) had sons and not daughters. It's preposterous.

There is also a father daughter rule so if they have had more daughters then that would just advantage st Kilda in the aflw

If st Kilda had fathers sons playing currently your club wouldn't be saying this, I highly doubt if you had a couple of good father sons on the list bassat gets up there and starts crying, your complaint isn't about the rule - its about the fact you have not advantaged from it yet

 

[The Punter]

There is also a father daughter rule so if they have had more daughters then that would just advantage st Kilda in the aflw

If st Kilda had fathers sons playing currently your club wouldn't be saying this, I highly doubt if you had a couple of good father sons on the list bassat gets up there and starts crying, your complaint isn't about the rule - its about the fact you have not advantaged from it yet

I can tell you what my complaint is because I am the one making it. It's an unfair rule, and if we were benefitting from it, it would still be an unfair rule.

I wouldn't enjoy a St Kilda premiership any more because the son of a past player played in it.
I wouldn't support a St Kilda player more because his dad also played for the club.

It's an anachronistic unfair rule than entrenches disadvantage (because successful clubs are more likely to have 100 game players). I want it gone now, I want it gone when the Riewoldt boys are 18, and I will still want it gone in 20 years time.

 

[mighty_lions]

I can tell you what my complaint is because I am the one making it. It's an unfair rule, and if we were benefitting from it, it would still be an unfair rule.

I wouldn't enjoy a St Kilda premiership any more because the son of a past player played in it.
I wouldn't support a St Kilda player more because his dad also played for the club.

It's an anachronistic unfair rule than entrenches disadvantage (because successful clubs are more likely to have 100 game players). I want it gone now, I want it gone when the Riewoldt boys are 18, and I will still want it gone in 20 years time.

lol sure, guarantee you if you had father sons that were good and on the list you and bassat would not be complaining

 

[The Punter]

lol sure, guarantee you if you had father sons that were good and on the list you and bassat would not be complaining

I can't speak for Bassat. You can call me a liar to my face if you want and not from a keyboard. There is no reason for anyone not to take me at my word.

 

[mighty_lions]

I can't speak for Bassat. You can call me a liar to my face if you want and not from a keyboard. There is no reason for anyone not to take me at my word.

yeah and I dont want Will Levi and jaspa get rid of them lololol

Do you want me to come to your place to tell you? generally people on a Bigfooty use a keyboard to communicate

 

[The Punter]

yeah and I dont want Will Levi and jasper get rid of them lololol

Do you want me to come to your place to tell you? generally people on a Bigfooty use a keyboard to communicate

I'm not paying for your first plane trip, but I hazard a guess you wouldn't be as forthright with your allegations in person.

Of course you want the Ashcrofts and the Fletchers. Brisbane don't deserve them though, and if they really wanted them, they should have had to trade for them or the draft picks needed to acquire them.

As I said earlier, hard to win a flag without one now. Doesn't happen very often. More confirmation of a ridiculous rule.

 

[StevoJenkins]

I'm not paying for your first plane trip, but I hazard a guess you wouldn't be as forthright with your allegations in person.

Of course you want the Ashcrofts and the Fletchers. Brisbane don't deserve them though, and if they really wanted them, they should have had to trade for them or the draft picks needed to acquire them.

As I said earlier, hard to win a flag without one now. Doesn't happen very often. More confirmation of a ridiculous rule.

Dramatic much?

Of recent premiers, Richmond and West Coast have both won without a granny without a F/S on the ground.
Melbourne had 1, Geelong had 2, Brisbane had 2 and Collywobble had 3. Didn't go as far back as Hawthorne, but I'm pretty sure they didn't have one either.

If you're going to claim that you can't win a premiership without one, how did West Coast or Richmond win in the first place? One or two kids don't raise you up the ladder, you combine trading with drafting, hope there's no injuries and pray to god that the coach's plan works.

Vinny didn't raise Melbourne from the bottom because he existed, the same way Schache didn't for Brisbane.

 

[mighty_lions]

I'm not paying for your first plane trip, but I hazard a guess you wouldn't be as forthright with your allegations in person.

Of course you want the Ashcrofts and the Fletchers. Brisbane don't deserve them though, and if they really wanted them, they should have had to trade for them or the draft picks needed to acquire them.

As I said earlier, hard to win a flag without one now. Doesn't happen very often. More confirmation of a ridiculous rule.

we did trade for them and happy to come see you grand final week if you like

 

[The Punter]

Dramatic much?

Of recent premiers, Richmond and West Coast have both won without a granny without a F/S on the ground.
Melbourne had 1, Geelong had 2, Brisbane had 2 and Collywobble had 3. Didn't go as far back as Hawthorne, but I'm pretty sure they didn't have one either.

If you're going to claim that you can't win a premiership without one, how did West Coast or Richmond win in the first place? One or two kids don't raise you up the ladder, you combine trading with drafting, hope there's no injuries and pray to god that the coach's plan works.

Vinny didn't raise Melbourne from the bottom because he existed, the same way Schache didn't for Brisbane.

Reading comprehension for the win! Never said can't, said it was hard. Also, Schache was drafted in the usual way.

All three of Collingwood's in 2023 were also All-Australian. One of Brisbane's was BOG. Hawkins (my memory tells me he was the prospect in the 2006 draft) dominated the GF while it was still there to be won. The three most recent examples.

It's very hard now to win one without one.

 

[mighty_lions]

Reading comprehension for the win! Never said can't, said it was hard. Also, Schache was drafted in the usual way.

All three of Collingwood's in 2023 were also All-Australian. One of Brisbane's was BOG. Hawkins (my memory tells me he was the prospect in the 2006 draft) dominated the GF while it was still there to be won. The three most recent examples.

It's very hard now to win one without one.

if we had of won in 23 our only father son would of been fletcher who was fringe at best that year.......you are dismissing everything the club has done and just going ohh yeah father son is the reason

its not hard to win if you draft and trade well, everyone has had father sons so it appears harder because you just look to that....oh how many fathers sons did they have and then you are equating that as to the reason

 

[The Punter]

if we had of won in 23 our only father son would of been fletcher who was fringe at best that year.......you are dismissing everything the club has done and just going ohh yeah father son is the reason

its not hard to win if you draft and trade well, everyone has had father sons so it appears harder because you just look to that....oh how many fathers sons did they have and then you are equating that as to the reason

So the team that had the greater contribution from its father-sons in the 2023 Grand Final (objectively adjudged to be their three best players that season) won the game. Understood.

Collingwood have had 17 in the draft era. St Kilda and Fremantle have had two. Not due to any need, or merit. Just former players lucky enough to have had sons instead of daughters. Preposterous.

 

[mighty_lions]

So the team that had the greater contribution from its father-sons in the 2023 Grand Final (objectively adjudged to be their three best players that season) won the game. Understood.

Collingwood have had 17 in the draft era. St Kilda and Fremantle have had two. Not due to any need, or merit. Just former players lucky enough to have had sons instead of daughters. Preposterous.

if you think Collingwood won the grand final because they had more father sons shows you know nothing about football

 

[The Punter]

if you think Collingwood won the grand final because they had more father sons shows you know nothing about football

I don't think of things in such a reductive way, but I recognise a stupid rule that provides no benefit to the league while undermining one of it's key equity planks when I see it. It was absolutely a contributing factor.

 

[botts]

Can the mighty Sainters pitch in to cover some of the costs of running it?

The afl pays for it anyway

 

[mighty_lions]

I don't think of things in such a reductive way, but I recognise a stupid rule that provides no benefit to the league while undermining one of it's key equity planks when I see it. It was absolutely a contributing factor.

It was not a contributing factor, the actual game itself how many father sons were irrelevant and had 0 bearing on the result

This is the loser mentality Bassat has and his words in his speech reflect that.
We did not win the grand final because of our inability to play the final minutes of the first and second quarters, nothing to do with father sons such a loser mentality

Your point its hard to do is wrong, we would of won that grand final with only jaspa a fringe player if we had of played those moments better, you basically are just jumping to fathers sons looking at they have more and going ahh so they won because they have more fathers sons actually embarassing