AFL clubs face $20,000 fines for conducting medical tests on potential draftees

Quite frankly Im annoyed and bemused. wtf does the AFL think any club going into the draft ought to do . Don blinkers or worse an ey mask and go into this blindly ?? ffs

Its actually incumbent upon clubs I would have thought to be prudent and diligent about their potential picks. Knowledge is everything or does Vlad prefer us ignorant of all things.

Though we arent specifically mentioned in the article this must be some thinly veiled swipe at us upsetting the boat by questioning the fitness of Scharenberg. Im glad the club were proactive in this.

Glad to see we dont want to be bunnies anymore.

go Dees

Bloody control freaks!

Due diligence would surely say that we should test especially anyone who may have any doubt.

Calm down. They are just saying that any test will be done once by AFL approved medicos and will be released to all clubs.

Kids should not have to go through 18 different scans and nor should clubs waste money.

The alternative would be Collingwood testing 25 players that we wouldn't afford and hoarding the information.

There is little to complain about here.

AFL clubs face $20,000 fines for conducting medical tests on potential draftees

Quite frankly Im annoyed and bemused. wtf does the AFL think any club going into the draft ought to do . Don blinkers or worse an ey mask and go into this blindly ?? ffs

Its actually incumbent upon clubs I would have thought to be prudent and diligent about their potential picks. Knowledge is everything or does Vlad prefer us ignorant of all things.

Though we arent specifically mentioned in the article this must be some thinly veiled swipe at us upsetting the boat by questioning the fitness of Scharenberg. Im glad the club were proactive in this.

Glad to see we dont want to be bunnies anymore.

go Dees

Hang on a sec 'bub ........ your approach is far too logical!

No, I think this is good.

Draftees shouldn't be subjected to repeated individual testing by each club.

The AFL should do one lot of testing that all clubs has access to.

I don't think this is aimed at MFC.

We applied for permission to have further testing done.

We went through the right channels.

But did another club have insight into his injuries that we didn't? If so, how?

I imagine this applies to other clubs who may have done testing, maybe not this year, but that have them an added edge at the draft table.

It endeavours to avoid situations where there was obviously a lot of scuttlebutt about Dyson Heppel's groins, or Jack Darling's nightclub injuries.

Obviously Essendon had an advantage with their doctor having treated Heppell, but if those medical records were made available to all clubs, maybe a better informed decision would have been made & he'd be playing at GoldCoast or Brisbane.

Hang on a sec 'bub ........ your approach is far too logical!

sorry...mea culpa

The motivation is fine - a draftee would be anaemic if every club took their own sample for a blood test. As long as the results of any extra test have to be distributed to all clubs, there is no problem. So what if the point of the AFL reminding clubs of the rules just now? Has some club been hoarding a test result?

This is in no way aimed at us. As we sought approval from the AFL to fly Scharenberg over for testing and for the AFL to fund said testing and provide all other clubs with the medical reports if needed.

We sought their permission before acting, asked for them to pay. So it seems we played well and truly by the rules.

This is in no way aimed at us. As we sought approval from the AFL to fly Scharenberg over for testing and for the AFL to fund said testing and provide all other clubs with the medical reports if needed.

We sought their permission before acting, asked for them to pay. So it seems we played well and truly by the rules.

if Thats right then what are Vlad on about.

Im curious.

Cheers DDI

Vlad is about other clubs that may have done private testing on Scharenberg prior to our application, leading to them possibly passing on him. Leading to rumours of foot issues.

That's GWS (likely), St Kilda, Bulldogs, GCS, Collingwood (likely) and Brisbane.

Maybe even WestCoast before they traded pick 6.

Vlad is about other clubs that may have done private testing on Scharenberg prior to our application, leading to them possibly passing on him. Leading to rumours of foot issues.

That's GWS (likely), St Kilda, Bulldogs, GCS, Collingwood (likely) and Brisbane.

Maybe even WestCoast before they traded pick 6.

well if they did, then all vlad had to do was fine them

if they did and he doesn't fine them he is playing favourites (what's new)

well if they did, then all vlad had to do was fine them

if they did and he doesn't fine them he is playing favourites (what's new)

It's probably clear that someone has inside knowledge somehow but it can't be proven how.

There's many ways to skin a cat.

But obviously somebody knows something that has lead to these rumours of serious foot issues, and consequently got other clubs with later picks getting the feeling he'll be available and asking themselves how that could possibly happen.

What don't we know?

Thanks to all for clarifying .

Scharenberg has foot injuries. Feet injuries are very specific and very important as they can have huge impact on careers. And interpretation of foot injuries are also variable.

So I'm all for clubs getting their own opinion.

But I see why the kids should be protected from 18 different medical exams.

So if the AFL system mandates sharing of information and permission prior to doing it then that's a logical policy. Just needs to be inforced

$20K eh? Could be worth it if it means avoiding a dud.

The article says the AFL has already been made aware of several instances, so when can we expect the fines to be handed out?

if Thats right then what are Vlad on about.

Im curious.

Cheers DDI

Did you read the article? It says Ken Wood wrote to the clubs, not Demetriou.

Did you read the article? It says Ken Wood wrote to the clubs, not Demetriou.

on behalf of Vlad inc... youre waxing semantically

on behalf of Vlad inc... youre waxing semantically

Well not really - Demetriou is not the AFL and the AFL is not Demetriou. This was Ken Wood operating under his own mandate so I think it's a proper distinction - but anyway, carry on.