Not about us but the next Ashcroft going to lions for almost nothing.  (He also had a go at the academies) 

med don’t want the afl to screw us over with the sons we have coming.  Like the nga decision. 
 

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2024-st-kilda-president-andrew-bassat-takes-shot-at-afl-over-fatherson-and-academy-picks-levi-ashcroft-afl-draft-brisbane-lions-latest-news/news-story/2a2050be15dee2318e7f29d0034f1d3b

St Kilda are spot on. Of course, the AFL will change the rules just in time for us to pay top trade dollar for Kalani White.

It’s always topical. We could have potentially had all of the following; Woewodin, Yze, White, Brown, Smith & Viney all on the list as Father Son selections. Smith is clearly not going to be retained and not sure if Yze will make it, or White will chose us. It’s not about quantity of picks, but quality. Brisbane are getting quality, as have Geelong and Collingwood. We are a mixed bag. Viney was a free kick to us. 
NGA we have an argument, but father son we have done okay. 

The current system disadvantages clubs like Melbourne and St Kilda. The changes will be good for us in the long run, albeit they come in at the time we are trying to get Kalani White.

I wholeheartedly agree with him that the NGA are a complete rort, but couldn't he have waited until next year to have his little sook up?

 

Edited October 1, 2024Oct 1 by YesitwasaWin4theAges

Potentially shooting themselves in the foot with Rievoldt's three sons.

Of course he's right on FS.  The solution is so simple. Instead of getting a 20 percent discount on FS players you should be paying a 20 percent premium to get access to that player.  For a number 1 pick that equates to a late 2nd rounder.  

If he's a 2nd rounder then you're 'only' paying a 4th rounder, so it would help elite talent be 'paid for' appropriately.  

It’s become too problematic at the very top end. You can’t have the best junior player in the country going for the equivalent of 4 x third rounders to a club. They just need to make the system cost more to the club that’s going to get them - and everything I’ve read says the AFL is going to do it after this year.

 

I agree the NGA needs a shake-up for the advantage they give some clubs.

What as interesting is that the saints have only had 3 FS in their existence! Maybe that is why they aren't happy.  Does anyone have stats of FS to the different clubs.  

As for the Ashcroft's so good, that just luck of the genetics and the effort they have put in in their junior careers. I can accept it and its luck of the draw. 

 

The whole thing should be binned

In a system devoted to trying to generate equality, why should clubs get access to father/sons at all? 

I bet they do considering they've been in no man's land for so long.

31 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

The whole thing should be binned

In a system devoted to trying to generate equality, why should clubs get access to father/sons at all? 

I love the romanticism of father son and can accept the luck of the draw from it. What I don't agree with is double dipping like Brisbane getting FS and a shot at top academy prospects. The academy's need to go and development of all talent needs to be a natural duty of the clubs.

I agree somewhat with St. Kilda.

It is an unfair system.

Especially with the Academies for GWS, Sydney, Brisbane and Gold Coast.

As for NGA academies for other AFL Clubs. They either need to scrap them and everyone has equal opportunity to draft players from all over Australia or they give the Clubs that develop those players exclusive rights to them.

The Mac Andrew fiasco was a disgrace and I am still bitterly disappointed the Melbourne Football Club didn't complain more about it at the time.

The AFL is definitely not consistent and the big Clubs and the Northern Clubs DO get preferential treatment!

 

Edited October 1, 2024Oct 1 by Supreme_Demon

The father-son rule was nice and quaint in the semi-professional league but in a fully professional competition with equalisation measures like the draft, salary cap etc there should be no father son or academy selections. It just gives free hits to clubs for no reason other than luck. Just because Marcus Ashcroft played for the Lions why should they get first dibs on his kids who may both end up being the best players in their draft? The team on the bottom of the ladder with #1 draft pick should have the choice of all available players and if he wants to go to the Lions/they want him then let them trade up to #1 to get him. If they can't satisfy a trade then it is bad luck.

They probably should've changed the FS rules after the Cats got the Abletts, Scarlett and Hawkins.

Edited October 1, 2024Oct 1 by Dr. Gonzo

I saw Heeney in the media last week parroting the line that he would have been lost to rugby without Sydney academy intervention. Seriously, what have the Swans or Lions got anything to do with that? Why do they need a leg-up? Is it about player retention, or junior talent knowing they have a smooth path to a list and can stay in their home-state?

Absolute nonsense. I see no good reason why the AFL can't just invest in their own academies in Brisbane and Sydney, and every other state, to try and lure athletes from other sports. ? The clubs can chip in cash. Why should that be incentivised with some draft freebies? It seems so counter to equalisation and common sense that I truly don't understand it. 

2 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

The whole thing should be binned

In a system devoted to trying to generate equality, why should clubs get access to father/sons at all? 

Why not ? It’s just logical and correct. The value is what is going to be decided depending upon the quality of player available.?

Growing the game in the northern states means shafting the southern states. If WA had academy access in the same fashion they’d never leave the top 4. The growth has came now, the talent pathways are clearly strong. It is time for a rejig regarding access. These kids can enter the draft and claim homesickness after the first contract like everybody else. I hope the academies always remain in place, but just because you got to use the weights room at a club doesn’t mean you’ll play there. 

I agree with those saying scrap father/son.  With players swapping clubs and the professionalism of the game it distorts equalization attempts to make a competitive league. 

If a club wants a son for stratigic/romantic reasons, let them choose them at a higher pick than they are worth, or trade picks similarly.

What annoys me about the AFL and their nonsense, knee-jerk rule changes is that they have them take effect yesterday. 

If they carefully consider a rule change, socialise effectively and come to broad consensus that it makes sense, why not have it take effect in 2 or 3 years time so as the work put into academys and father/son or (eventually) mother/daughter planning that's in train isn't blown up in seconds. 

Amateur hour stuff! 

In my opinion the Saints are simply trying to put pressure on the AFL to make sure the Battle compensation is pick 8. 

26 minutes ago, Dee*ceiving said:

What annoys me about the AFL and their nonsense, knee-jerk rule changes is that they have them take effect yesterday. 

If they carefully consider a rule change, socialise effectively and come to broad consensus that it makes sense, why not have it take effect in 2 or 3 years time so as the work put into academys and father/son or (eventually) mother/daughter planning that's in train isn't blown up in seconds. 

Amateur hour stuff! 

This was my biggest issue with the Mac Andrew situation, we weren't the only ones impacted. Clubs had put money and time into players, such changes should be grandfathered in

2 minutes ago, roy11 said:

This was my biggest issue with the Mac Andrew situation, we weren't the only ones impacted. Clubs had put money and time into players, such changes should be grandfathered in

Clubs really hadn’t.

If we were spending vast resources on NGA they’d be employees, training sessions, sponsorships, frequent social content. There’s nothing to say it’s more than a training session a week and the occasional special squad game.
 

They’re a nice idea to foster talent from different backgrounds but in terms of gaining draft assistance it’s a rort, it always was. 

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

Clubs really hadn’t.

If we were spending vast resources on NGA they’d be employees, training sessions, sponsorships, frequent social content. There’s nothing to say it’s more than a training session a week and the occasional special squad game.
 

They’re a nice idea to foster talent from different backgrounds but in terms of gaining draft assistance it’s a rort, it always was. 

Well they've put some resources in that may have been directed elsewhere whether major or minor. 

I do share your opinions on academies and the rort and what not though.

 

13 hours ago, Left Foot Snap said:

I love the romanticism of father son and can accept the luck of the draw from it. What I don't agree with is double dipping like Brisbane getting FS and a shot at top academy prospects. The academy's need to go and development of all talent needs to be a natural duty of the clubs.

Except it's not luck of the draw. Big clubs such as Carlton and Collingwood conveniently forget that they originally extorted a barely operational system in the first place in obtaining the Peter Daicos' of this world. 

Much like the bloodlines of a horse, they have inherited a superior gene pool in respect to the sport. 

Peter Daicos was recruited from Collingwood's Metropolitan Zone, as was Peter Moore.

It's sheer good luck for the Magpies that their sons are excellent footballers.  Luck of the draw.

Contrast this with Alwyn Davey's two underwhelming sons at Essendon.  Luck of the draw.

Melbourne could possibly have Jeff White's and Aaron Davey's sons playing for us.  Luck of the draw.

Edited October 2, 2024Oct 2 by Demonstone