It is absurd that Pasifika kids aren't covered by the NGA academies. A very big and growing immigrant demographic in Australia and a culture that gravitates to Rugby Union (and Rugby League by default).

25 minutes ago, No. 31 said:

It is absurd that Pasifika kids aren't covered by the NGA academies. A very big and growing immigrant demographic in Australia and a culture that gravitates to Rugby Union (and Rugby League by default).

It will come in the following draft year … don’t worry. 

Edited September 12, 20241 yr by Sir Windsor

It's frustrating, but I think most here would agree with a general tightening of the rules on eligibility based on background, or better yet - finding a way to refine them to align with common sense while maintaining strict parameters. Should one of Ah-Mu's parents have been born in Melbourne, and the other migrated as a child, then he is equivalent to Nathan Jones.  

Not having access to an NGA young talent like Tairon Ah-Mu for the Melbourne Football Club is actually a disgrace!

Especially after missing out on Mac Andrew! Who is now the $12 million(?) dollar man at the Golf Coast Suns.

Why should we even bother with the NGA at all?! There is no benefit for the Melbourne Football Club to do so if we cannot have access to the players we develop. It's literally a waste of time and money.

I would strongly suggest either Brad Green or the next Melbourne Football Club President to make a formal complaint and heavily lobby the AFL asking why we cannot have access to the NGA talent we develop?! This is grossly unfair! We need to kick up a big stink about this!

49 minutes ago, Sir Windsor said:

It will come in the following draft year … don’t worry. 

Nah, I don't agree.

They will just award the entire Pacific Islands zone to the Suns!

14 minutes ago, Left Foot Snap said:

Nah, I don't agree.

They will just award the entire Pacific Islands zone to the Suns!

Tasmania more likely. 

I'm gonna break some stuff.

PS: Would have said this 24 hours ago

In my best shrill accent

”please explain”

Edited September 12, 20241 yr by Roost it far

19 hours ago, 58er said:

Nothing we can do unfortunately. 

Defeatist attitude.

What would Blues, Pies and Cats do?

Start the lobbying with Kane and Dillon immediately and maybe given our woke new world, threaten litigation from him for being racially disadvantaged.

Gary Lyon is furious at Andrew situation so use him in the media to push for it.

The AFL changes rules on a whim as we well know.

 

Edited September 13, 20241 yr by Redleg

41 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Defeatist attitude.

What would Blues, Pies and Cats do?

Start the lobbying with Kane and Dillon immediately and maybe given our woke new world, threaten litigation from him for being racially disadvantaged.

Gary Lyon is furious at Andrew situation so use him in the media to push for it.

The AFL changes rules on a whim as we well know.

 

 Don't just roll over and get ceremoniously [censored] by the AFL .

Even if that doesn't help now but for the future.

18 hours ago, Supreme_Demon said:

Not having access to an NGA young talent like Tairon Ah-Mu for the Melbourne Football Club is actually a disgrace!

Especially after missing out on Mac Andrew! Who is now the $12 million(?) dollar man at the Golf Coast Suns.

Why should we even bother with the NGA at all?! There is no benefit for the Melbourne Football Club to do so if we cannot have access to the players we develop. It's literally a waste of time and money.

I would strongly suggest either Brad Green or the next Melbourne Football Club President to make a formal complaint and heavily lobby the AFL asking why we cannot have access to the NGA talent we develop?! This is grossly unfair! We need to kick up a big stink about this!

Agree. Put the cash back into our talent scouts to find players we can actually draft. 

I think given the circumstances of it all, the AFL should credit us in some regard. Reimbursement of our investment, perhaps? I know that helps little for the club but if the league wants us to continue doing the service we are doing, it shouldn’t come out of our pocket. 

More players in these academies benefits the growth of the game (as well as our kids in the program, provided it’s not overfilled to the point of less training to those it’s intended for)

Cash back for anyone drafted to another club. Can reinvest into the program, happily have it backpaid for those taken in the period of overreaction to JUH too. 

To many kids with crayons working at the AFL.

Why wouldn't the AFL be trying to pry talent from a Rugby Heartland of the Pacific Islands.

Crazy, crazy.

We are just about to embark on a huge talent squeeze with Tassy coming in and the AFL are turning their back on a huge pot of talent.

It's embarrassing.

24 minutes ago, manny100 said:

To many kids with crayons working at the AFL.

Why wouldn't the AFL be trying to pry talent from a Rugby Heartland of the Pacific Islands.

Crazy, crazy.

We are just about to embark on a huge talent squeeze with Tassy coming in and the AFL are turning their back on a huge pot of talent.

It's embarrassing.

They do want to get that talent, they just don't want it to be wearing the red and blue Guernsey.

Incumbent on pert and the board to kick up a stink here

We play too nice

it stinks

On 11/09/2024 at 22:43, Redleg said:

Well we should be seeking compo over rule changes that cost us a number 5 pick in Mac Andrea a year after Dogs got JUH and then the rules changed back again. 

Is it possible the AFL changed the rule just enough to get him to Gold Coast?

Absolutely not something I would typically suggest , but should we put the heat on the club by flooding them with emails ?

The supporters are passionate and we’ve been screwed with Mac and also the AFL retiring Gus with no compensation . 

Edited September 14, 20241 yr by Melonmonster

5 hours ago, Superunknown said:

Incumbent on pert and the board to kick up a stink here

We play too nice

it stinks

I obviously meant encumbent

behoves probably would have been more apt

On 12/09/2024 at 06:59, Ungarieboy said:

Having more good players in the academy lifts the standards and the quality of the academy (other participants) - so there's still benefits of him being there.

That seems like us putting years into players and then letting them leave to me. As in not really a win.

6 hours ago, Superunknown said:

I obviously meant encumbent

I don't think you did. 

5 minutes ago, Skuit said:

I don't think you did. 

You are of course correct

I’ve a broken thumb - an avulsion - checking posts out for rails and missed the chisel instead hitting my thumb joint at Mach 2 -  and been pruning lemon myrtle up a ladder with one arm so my brain is fried

Coupled with a 5 week ban on running cycling weights surfing and golf whilst my thumb is in a cast…

You’ll have to excuse me - brain is running like an average home boy 

I sent the club an email saying that it would be appropriate to ask the AFL to review these rules.

The issue is whether players of a multicultural background but are not 'draft' eligible should be allowed to be part of the Academy?

Members and supporters in a way can 'pin their hopes' on some of these players and naturally feel deflated when it all goes 'belly up'. 

The other issue is that the club invests $$$ and time which end up benefitting another club. We have already been bent over in this regard via Mac Andrew. Its a sure thing the AFL did not reimburse our development costs.

Also the Pacific islands are a rugby heartland and Samoa has its own language. Then there is the talent squeeze with Tassy coming in.

 

 

I seem to be flip flopping a bit on this issue personally. Whilst I would have loved access to match bids to obtain Ah Mu cheaper (which I assumed was the case when I first heard he was NGA), there’s nothing to say we can’t just draft the kid. If we rate him (and whilst scouts are thorough we’ve seen him closer than most) then just pick him. He’s touted as a top 20 type, not a number one pick. 
If any rules are changed likely it won’t be us but someone like collingwood or Carlton who benefit and bring in a number one pick because their half sisters twice removed cousin once ate a curry in their aligned zone. 
Best of luck to the kid, hope he has a good year and our program is serving him well. 

24 minutes ago, The end is nigh said:

I seem to be flip flopping a bit on this issue personally. Whilst I would have loved access to match bids to obtain Ah Mu cheaper (which I assumed was the case when I first heard he was NGA), there’s nothing to say we can’t just draft the kid. If we rate him (and whilst scouts are thorough we’ve seen him closer than most) then just pick him. He’s touted as a top 20 type, not a number one pick. 
If any rules are changed likely it won’t be us but someone like collingwood or Carlton who benefit and bring in a number one pick because their half sisters twice removed cousin once ate a curry in their aligned zone. 
Best of luck to the kid, hope he has a good year and our program is serving him well. 

Its the strategic advantage that comes with Father/sons and NGA picks that is part of the deal.

For example if we know we are getting 2 talls in 2025 via those avenues we can go 'hell for leather' recruiting/drafting mid type players in earlier drafts.

The Swans played this very well. They knew they had gun Academy type players coming through and that enabled them to go for a few 'riskier' taller types in the draft.

Edited September 15, 20241 yr by manny100

I don't understand this at all.

Firstly, why are there players within NGAs who are ineligible to be drafted under the NGA rules? How does that happen?

Secondly, why is this only being reported now, as if it's a new thing when the journalist, Cal Twomey, said on X that it's not new at all? If it's not new, why did he just write about it? If it is new, why?