Can anybody please tell me if Hughes, Valenti & Spencer are still eligible for our Rookie list.

I'm pretty sure its 3 years ... assuming you get player agreement

So my understanding would be ...

Spencer - Rookie Draft 2007

Valenti - Rookie Draft 2007

Hughes - Rookie Draft 2008

However, doesn't Hughes miss out like by 5 days on the under 23 rule ... DOB being 10.12.86

With Valenti making it by 6 weeks with a DOB being 29.01.87

Pretty sure it's two years mate.

Valenti and Spencer need to be promoted or let go by my understanding.

We received special circumstances for Hughes to be kept on the list for two years as a mature age rookie under the proviso that he didn't play a match in his first year (otherwise he'd need to be promoted).

We can keep Hughes on for next year and I'm very confident he'll get a game.

Pretty sure it's two years mate.

Valenti and Spencer need to be promoted or let go by my understanding.

We received special circumstances for Hughes to be kept on the list for two years as a mature age rookie under the proviso that he didn't play a match in his first year (otherwise he'd need to be promoted).

We can keep Hughes on for next year and I'm very confident he'll get a game.

Yeah, Hughes is a special case and will stay on the rookie list for 2010.

Valenti & Spencer must both be upgraded to keep them next season.

Zomer too.

Healey and McKenzie can remain for 2010.

Edited September 27, 200916 yr by Enforcer25

I think 45hg's got it right here. Valenti and Spencer (and Zomer) have to either get promotions to the senior list or be delisted. Spencer probably will get a promotion, Valenti I doubt.

I liked what I saw of Hughes this year at Casey. Hopefully next year we get to see a bit more of him.

Spencer probably will get a promotion, Valenti I doubt.

Disagree on Valenti, given we're going to trade McLean, I think that makes space for Valents on the senior list...

Ok Thanks Guys ... I wasn't 100% sure

Disagree on Valenti, given we're going to trade McLean, I think that makes space for Valents on the senior list...

Yeah, it's a tough one to call I reckon. It's probably going to depend on who else gets chopped. If we go into next year with Bartram and Dunn still on the list then there mightn't be room for Valenti. Then again, they may see more in Valenti than in those others.

Disagree on Valenti, given we're going to trade McLean, I think that makes space for Valents on the senior list...

Rookies can also be traded now, so there may well be interest in Valenti from other clubs.

Also, McLean going increases his chances of staying at MFC.

Nice to see he got a Brownlow vote as well.

I'm absolutely convinced, just on the basis that it makes so much sense, that Valenti will be traded out under the new 'rookies can be traded onto the senior list of another club' arrangements. I don't think he'll get great opportunities at Melbourne behind Moloney, Jones and Scully in that kind of role, and there are other clubs who would see him as a worthy acquisition for a very late pick or slight downgrade, particularly one with a large turnover of players, an interest in inside mids and a culture of getting the most out of players who give everything (subtly hinting Sydney there, did you spot it?)

Spencer I've fallen out of love with. That kicking... makes Jamar look like Davey. Re-rookie, use the 'trade a rookie' rule again, or just accept it if someone else decides to collect him before he slips through to our rookie list picks. I guess what I'm syaing is that I don't see great potential improvement and see more value in the player's which would be in the delist gun in order to make space for him.

Rookies can also be traded now, so there may well be interest in Valenti from other clubs.

Also, McLean going increases his chances of staying at MFC.

Nice to see he got a Brownlow vote as well.

Valenit is a friend of mines good mate, and apparently he has offers from Sydney and North

Valenit is a friend of mines good mate, and apparently he has offers from Sydney and North

Hopefully they are willing to trade with us.

Hopefully they are willing to trade with us.

Well there's a thread saying we're trading our 11th pick and a player to North for Daniel Wells....who knows.

Would it be possible that out of contract project players like Meesen can be delisted then rookied, freeing up a place for our prize draft picks?

Valenit is a friend of mines good mate, and apparently he has offers from Sydney and North

Valenti and pick 11 for pick 6. Good trade for both teams i'd say

Would it be possible that out of contract project players like Meesen can be delisted then rookied, freeing up a place for our prize draft picks?

Pretty sure Meesen has another year of his contract to go.

Valenti and pick 11 for pick 6. Good trade for both teams i'd say

If MFC doesn't want Valenti, swans would get him for pick 50 to 70 or whatever, and still have pick 6 for a top juniour.

Doubt they'd give up 6.

Would it be possible that out of contract project players like Meesen can be delisted then rookied, freeing up a place for our prize draft picks?

Yeah, you could do it to Buckley.

We will lose Cheney or McNamara though as you have to go through the draft again.

Buckley is the only one who wouldn't get picked up with his OP issues.

Valenit is a friend of mines good mate, and apparently he has offers from Sydney and North

Very interesting .... wonder assuming we cant get Valenti to stay if we could package

Valenti plus 3rd round pick ie pick 34 and target North or Sydney 2nd round picks ie 21 or 22

Then with those picks look to pick up either Bastinac Or Melcksham or possible outside chance at getting a big slider

In 2007 I gained a copy of the AFL rules. Whilst their have been changes, and I realise to the rookie list I do not believe,this part has been changed.if so correct me. If it hasn't then the rookie players can stay as is:no need to make any upgraded to senior list, unless they want to.

Player Rules – June 2007

(ii) the Player is eligible to be selected by any Club at the next

National Draft Selection Meeting if he has previously or again

nominates himself for the National Draft Selection Meeting.

21.3.8 Passing on a Draft selection

A Club that passes on any Draft selection at a Rookie Draft Selection

Meeting shall be excluded from exercising any further Draft

selection(s) at that Rookie Draft Selection Meeting.

21.4 Retention of Rookie List Players

(a) A Club may retain a Player on its Rookie List for a second season

provided it nominates such Player or Players prior to advising the

AFL of its Primary List under Rule 4.1.1 and such Player consents to

being nominated on the Rookie List for a second season.

(B) A Club may retain a Player on its Rookie List for a third season

provided that the Player has nominated himself for and was not

selected at the National Draft Selection Meeting prior to the Rookie

Draft Selection Meeting and prior to the Pre-Season Draft Selection

Meeting the Club provides the AFL with written evidence of the

Club’s and Player’s agreement to be retained as a Rookie for a third

season which agreement must specify that the Player can and only

will be retained as a Rookie for a third season if he is not selected by

any Club at the Pre-Season Draft Selection Meeting.

© A Club may retain a Player included on a Club’s Rookie List under

Rule 21.3.4(a)(i) and (ii) for a third season provided it nominates

such Player prior to advising the AFL of its Primary List under Rule

4.1.1 and such Player consents to being nominated on the Rookie

List for a third season.

21.5 Inclusion of Rookie List Player onto Primary List

21.5.1 Prohibition

In 2007 I gained a copy of the AFL rules. Whilst their have been changes, and I realise to the rookie list I do not believe,this part has been changed.if so correct me. If it hasn't then the rookie players can stay as is:no need to make any upgraded to senior list, unless they want to.

Player Rules – June 2007

(ii) the Player is eligible to be selected by any Club at the next

National Draft Selection Meeting if he has previously or again

nominates himself for the National Draft Selection Meeting.

21.3.8 Passing on a Draft selection

A Club that passes on any Draft selection at a Rookie Draft Selection

Meeting shall be excluded from exercising any further Draft

selection(s) at that Rookie Draft Selection Meeting.

21.4 Retention of Rookie List Players

(a) A Club may retain a Player on its Rookie List for a second season

provided it nominates such Player or Players prior to advising the

AFL of its Primary List under Rule 4.1.1 and such Player consents to

being nominated on the Rookie List for a second season.

(B) A Club may retain a Player on its Rookie List for a third season

provided that the Player has nominated himself for and was not

selected at the National Draft Selection Meeting prior to the Rookie

Draft Selection Meeting and prior to the Pre-Season Draft Selection

Meeting the Club provides the AFL with written evidence of the

Club’s and Player’s agreement to be retained as a Rookie for a third

season which agreement must specify that the Player can and only

will be retained as a Rookie for a third season if he is not selected by

any Club at the Pre-Season Draft Selection Meeting.

© A Club may retain a Player included on a Club’s Rookie List under

Rule 21.3.4(a)(i) and (ii) for a third season provided it nominates

such Player prior to advising the AFL of its Primary List under Rule

4.1.1 and such Player consents to being nominated on the Rookie

List for a third season.

21.5 Inclusion of Rookie List Player onto Primary List

21.5.1 Prohibition

Valenti or Spencer still must go through the ND without being picked up.

I would think it's unlikely that they wouldn't be picked up, especially by teams like Richmond that are going to clear out a lot of players in a shallow draft.

Yeah, you could do it to Buckley.

We will lose Cheney or McNamara though as you have to go through the draft again.

Buckley is the only one who wouldn't get picked up with his OP issues.

I think someone would have a crack at Buckley.

Valenti or Spencer still must go through the ND without being picked up.

I would think it's unlikely that they wouldn't be picked up, especially by teams like Richmond that are going to clear out a lot of players in a shallow draft.

Why do they have to go through ND,it states 3 years is allowable

Why do they have to go through ND,it states 3 years is allowable

This is an excerpt from the rule that you pulled of the net.

A Club may retain a Player on its Rookie List for a third season

provided that the Player has nominated himself for and was not

selected at the National Draft Selection Meeting prior to the Rookie

Draft Selection Meeting and prior to the Pre-Season Draft Selection

Meeting the Club provides the AFL with written evidence of the

Club’s and Player’s agreement to be retained as a Rookie for a third

season which agreement must specify that the Player can and only

will be retained as a Rookie for a third season if he is not selected by

any Club at the Pre-Season Draft Selection Meeting.

I was wrong, any second year rookie must go through the ND and the PSD to get a third year on a clubs RL.

It would be unrealistic to expect that either of Valenti or Spencer would get though the ND and the PSD - if we rate them, other clubs might too.

Personally, I don't think Valenti will be given a spot, and I think that Spencer will be an elevation in the last list lodgement before the ND.

I think someone would have a crack at Buckley.

Not with his OP issues.

Maybe Richmond if they are going for a huge cleanout.

Valenit is a friend of mines good mate, and apparently he has offers from Sydney and North

Cheers for that mate. Keep us informed if you can.

I like Valents and with McLean gone and once we clean out some more crap, there should be a spot for him.

I'll be disappointed if he isnt retained.

He really started to show great form late in the season and was 3rd best on ground in our demolition of Freo, which was our biggest win in ages..

Got plenty of time for good, hard-nosed, honest clubmen like Valents.. and Moloney for eg. (McLean too, obviously before a week ago)

Edited September 28, 200916 yr by DemonDan...