Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Demonland

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Magner and Couch

Featured Replies

These two guys deserve a shot in our midfield (if possible). Both are honest triers, and couldn't do any worse than our current blokes.

Don't have the information in front of me, but what's the go for us with nominated rookies? I know we can have up to two that can be available depending on the veterans, so are these guys able to be played or can they only play if someone's on the LTI?

 

Agree on magner, not on couch

Magner has done really well for us when played in the middle (not defensive forward)

 

Magner's grunt and honesty would be most welcomed. They need to find a way to promote him because his approach and attitude is one of the many qualities we're missing in the senior group.


Not sold on Couch but put Magner in the middle all day, it's where he belongs. Can't do any worse than anyone else

Magner will go hard all day, if not it's probably because he's come off bleeding after head butting someone - get him in there, what's to lose?

Mistakes don't matter, right...???

No one answered Stuie's initial question here.

The rules are that you can have up to two veterans on the list. If you don't have two, you can have rookies in their place ('nominated' to the senior list for the year).

I've checked, and I can't find anywhere any word of us having any veterans. At the worst, we'd only have the one (Jamar).

Does this not mean we have room to 'nominate' at least one rookie? And this could be Magner/Couch? And they could play?

 

Should've drafted Magner with the pick we used for Rodan.

No one answered Stuie's initial question here.

The rules are that you can have up to two veterans on the list. If you don't have two, you can have rookies in their place ('nominated' to the senior list for the year).

I've checked, and I can't find anywhere any word of us having any veterans. At the worst, we'd only have the one (Jamar).

Does this not mean we have room to 'nominate' at least one rookie? And this could be Magner/Couch? And they could play?

Davey?


Davey?

I don't think he qualifies; to be a veteran you have to have played for 10 years or more. Davey debuted in 2004, making 2013 his 10th year.

As far as I can tell, Jamar, who debuted in 2013, is the only player on our list who qualifies as a veteran, which means at the very least we should have one spot open for us to nominate a rookie.

I don't think he qualifies; to be a veteran you have to have played for 10 years or more. Davey debuted in 2004, making 2013 his 10th year.

As far as I can tell, Jamar, who debuted in 2013, is the only player on our list who qualifies as a veteran, which means at the very least we should have one spot open for us to nominate a rookie.

Wow feels like Davey has been around for ever

Anyway I would definitely go Magner ahead of Couch.

To me Couch is a waste of space on the list - should have been used on a young rookie with greater potential to improve. (Stark and Clisby)

Couch and Magner.

Slow and slower.

Does anyone really, truly think that these two would have kept up with Priddus, Shuey, Kerr, Ham, Gaff, Masten, Embley or Waters??

Anyway I would definitely go Magner ahead of Couch.

To me Couch is a waste of space on the list - should have been used on a young rookie with greater potential to improve. (Stark and Clisby)

I wouldn't go for either.


We already look like a VFL team trying to compete against AFL teams.

Why not give 2 established VFL players more of a go?

We need maturity inside. I'd have magner in asap.

A pity we didn't get Tuck from Richmond a couple of seasons back.

& don't mention Travis Boak.

& don't mention Travis Boak.

Mate you really think Boak would've come to us, when an offer was on the table from Geelong? Never. If he was coming back to Melbourne, it wasn't too our club.

Don't understand why people think every player is driven by money. Not everyone is like Clark.

  • Author

Couch and Magner.

Slow and slower.

Does anyone really, truly think that these two would have kept up with Priddus, Shuey, Kerr, Ham, Gaff, Masten, Embley or Waters??

Do you think we would have been much worse?!

Our lack of midfield structure already exposes the likes Trengove and Jones for pace. We don't need even slower mids. Magner tries hard, but shouldn't be AFL standard, while Couch certainly isn't AFL standard.


  • Author

Our lack of midfield structure already exposes the likes Trengove and Jones for pace. We don't need even slower mids. Magner tries hard, but shouldn't be AFL standard, while Couch certainly isn't AFL standard.

They may not be quick, but I'd back both of those guys to stick with their man, and we need that desperately.

I'm not sure why we kept Couch on if we weren't going to promote Magner to the senior list.

I'm not sure why we kept Couch on if we weren't going to promote Magner to the senior list.

I'm not sure why we kept Couch on full stop.

 

OK, the answer seems to be as follows (from http://www.aflpa.com.au/images/uploads/AFL_Rules_-_Feb_2013_FINAL.pdf):

The total primary list size is now 40 (potentially some exceptions for the new clubs). If you have 39 senior players, you can nominate one rookie to fill the gap; if you have 38, you can nominate two rookies. Our list having 40, we didn't have room for a rookie prior to Round 1.

The only other ways to get a rookie onto the senior list, then, are the Long Term Injury rule (promote a rookie in place of someone on the LTI), or, it seems, to nominate a rookie mid-season. The rules say that you can nominate a rookie after Round 11 of the season, and they are then eligible to play for the remainder of the year, provided you can fit their payment under the salary cap (Player Rule 21.11).

So, it seems that, unless and until we get a long term injury, neither Magner nor Couch, nor any other rookie, can get a game until Round 12 at the earliest.

Vets list has been abolished TMK.

Just a straight list now.

Indeed, thanks HFF.


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • TRAINING: Monday 10th November 2025

    Several Demonland Trackwatchers were on hand at Gosch’s Paddock to share their observations from the opening day of preseason training, featuring the club’s 1st to 4th year players along with a few veterans and some fresh faces.

    • 1 reply
  • AFLW REPORT: Brisbane

    Melbourne returned to its city citadel, IKON Park, boasting a 10–2 home record and celebrating its 100th AFLW matchwith 3,711 fans creating a finals atmosphere. But in a repeat of Round 11, Brisbane proved too strong, too fit, and too relentless.  They brought their kicking boots: 9 goals, 2 points.

      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
  • AFLW PREVIEW: Brisbane

    Forget the haunting of Round 11 — we’ve got this. Melbourne returns to its inner-city fortress for its milestone 100th AFLW match, carrying a formidable 10–2 record at IKON Stadium. Brisbane’s record at the venue is more balanced: 4 wins, 4 losses and a draw. 

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 11 replies
  • AFLW REPORT: Geelong

    Melbourne wrapped up the AFLW home and away season with a hard-fought 14-point win over Geelong at Kardinia Park. The result secured second place on the ladder with a 9–3 record and a home qualifying final against the Brisbane Lions next week.

      • Thanks
    • 2 replies
  • AFLW PREVIEW: Geelong

    It’s been a season of grit, growth, and glimpses of brilliance—mixed with a few tough interstate lessons. Now, with finals looming, the Dees head to Kardinia Park for one last tune-up before the real stuff begins.

      • Thanks
    • 3 replies
  • DRAFT: The Next Generation

    It was not long after the announcement that Melbourne's former number 1 draft pick Tom Scully was departing the club following 31 games and two relatively unremarkable seasons to join expansion team, the Greater Western Giants, on a six-year contract worth about $6 million, that a parody song based on Adele's hit "Someone Like You" surfaced on social media. The artist expressed lament over Scully's departure in song, culminating in the promise, "Never mind, we'll find someone like you," although I suspect that the undertone of bitterness in this version exceeded that of the original.

      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 9 replies

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.