https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/07/29/how-melbourne-could-lose-scary-nga-prospect/

Crazy that we've been working with him since 13 and will likely lose him because of a rule change last year. If that happens, is there any way we can appeal to the AFL?

Up to pick 20 doesn't make sense.

In the first round ie pick 18 with no F/S or whatever seems fairer (or whatever it ends up being with F/S.

Pick 20 is just another way giving the bottom 2 teams priority over top talent.

18 minutes ago, Luther said:

Crazy that we've been working with him since 13 and will likely lose him because of a rule change last year. If that happens, is there any way we can appeal to the AFL?

Doubtful 

https://www.afl.com.au/video/655053/draft-watch-melbourne-nga-prospect-mac-andrew?videoId=655053&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1627588800001

Some nice long kicks and a very nimble 2m there.

Sigh.

I've heard this song before - "Other club gets huge advantage from badly implemented rule, AFL knee-jerk changes the rule without notice and without considering effective implementation, Melbourne misses out on the benefits after following the exact intentions of the original rule."

So we put years of development into him and we won't even get to draft him. What a waste of time and money this NGA thing is now, if the only players you can get with it are mediocre ones. Surely clubs will just scrap it.

Great timing when we're just about to get the first decent prospect from our academy and they change the rule. 

Well we could still get him, keep in touch with him and tell him after his two year stint at which ever club picks him, to come on over?

Oh well at least everyone's second team in the Doggies got to pick up their NGA talent (Ugle-Hagen) last year with a minimum of fuss. We should all be happy about that....

1 hour ago, Little Goffy said:

https://www.afl.com.au/video/655053/draft-watch-melbourne-nga-prospect-mac-andrew?videoId=655053&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1627588800001

Some nice long kicks and a very nimble 2m there.

Sigh.

I've heard this song before - "Other club gets huge advantage from badly implemented rule, AFL knee-jerk changes the rule without notice and without considering effective implementation, Melbourne misses out on the benefits after following the exact intentions of the original rule."

His athleticism is through the roof.

Easily a top 15 draft prospect. 

 

Extract from the Article.. “The AFL have moved quickly to implement the ‘How can we shaft Melbourne’ rule. Whilst also confirming that umpires head quarters and training facilities will now move to Whitten Oval.. to closely aligned their adjudication to suit the Bulldogs style of ducking”. 

Pass.

Anyone heard about this bloke before this?

MFCSS to the fore.

If there was a club in the AFL this would happen of course it's us.

Put 5 years into a kid who could be whisked away.

At the same time, this rule doesn't apply to a 2020 Preliminary final team.

Yes all is fair in the AFL.

Killed Jesus. I rest my case.

10 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Anyone heard about this bloke before this?

Jamarra, yes he was gifted to the Bulldogs, together with countless dodgy umpiring decisions over the last 5 or so years.

If he is any good could we not just execute a trade which gets us a top 20 pick?

Let’s just see what pans out. This kid has a lot of work still to be done

Is this the guy with the alcohol, heroin and gambling addictions that refuses to train because he's busy playing computer games and eating pizza with Bikie gangs?

13 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Jamarra, yes he was gifted to the Bulldogs, together with countless dodgy umpiring decisions over the last 5 or so years.

And the get to add Darcy as FS this year that is tipped to be top 5-10.  Means you can trade off first round pick as long as you have enough points to cover.

25 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Anyone heard about this bloke before this?

I assume so, because we've been working with him since he was 13.

18 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Jamarra, yes he was gifted to the Bulldogs, together with countless dodgy umpiring decisions over the last 5 or so years.

I said to a mate that he's kidding himself if he doesn't think the AFL has a say in which teams seriously contend and which don't. i have no doubt the Umpires have been instructed to look after the dogs in some way, shape or form. but for me it's the fact they're allowed to throw the ball openly. 

I get the angst if he is a generational talent, but do we desperately need a speculative ruck forward at this point in our development?

If it's going to cost us a top 20 pick, I'd rather use that on a quality midfielder.

That said, it is frustrating that the Bulldogs continue to benefit from these concessions, only for the rules get changed after the horse has already bolted.

22 minutes ago, Dwight Schrute said:

I said to a mate that he's kidding himself if he doesn't think the AFL has a say in which teams seriously contend and which don't. i have no doubt the Umpires have been instructed to look after the dogs in some way, shape or form. but for me it's the fact they're allowed to throw the ball openly. 

It's sports entertainment, so not a lot happens through free will.

2 hours ago, TheoX said:

So we put years of development into him and we won't even get to draft him. What a waste of time and money this NGA thing is now, if the only players you can get with it are mediocre ones. Surely clubs will just scrap it.

Great timing when we're just about to get the first decent prospect from our academy and they change the rule. 

Agree - what is the point of putting any time, effort or money into these - and of course the NSW and Q clubs still get their special considerations. YUK!