Lord Travis

He's an inflammatory shock jockey, but in this case he's 100% right. We're seeing rule changes to counter-act the failure of previous rule changes. These rules are basically all objectively bad and will cause further confusion to an already over-officiated sport with too many interpretations on what should just be clear rules. It's a sad state of affairs when games are deciding by unclear umpiring decisions on a weekly basis, and the media wind up discussing poor umpiring more than the sport itself. Well said by Kane. Sucks having to agree with him when he's right!

Agree with this and have been saying he's a smokey for us. He looks more dynamic and versatile than Lindsay for mine and really came on as the year progressed. Lindsay is a better pure kick, but Oskar seems to have a better balance for taking the game on with both run and carry, kicking and hand balling forward. Lindsay stops, props, and looks for kick every time. Oskar was also the fastest over 20m at the combine, and second behind Dovaston for agility, so he's got an incredible athletic profile. Can see us calling him out with one of our two picks for sure. Questions marks over his contested ability, like Lindsay, but seems to have more scope for positional versatility and to fit the model game.

They're nearly all bad rules changes and continue a long line of the AFL changing the rules every year at the detriment of the sport. The average football watcher can no longer watch a match and understand all the rules. They should be removing rules, not further complicating them. My thoughts on the 2026 rule changes below. Goal square starting position - Will make no difference on matches. We already have 6-6-6 in place, which disarms coaches of strategic options and increases congestion as it essentially forces player to man up and causes clustering. 6-6-6 sucks. This doesn't change or improve that. Last disposal - This will be an unpopular rule and the average football watcher will not understand how this gets officiated. I can see this going a few different ways. It could encourage teams to play more attacking through the corridor and avoid risk of handing ball over via free kick. The AFL want this and are trying to force this. On the flip side, and IMO more likely, teams will play slower and go more keeping off. Coaches are more about limiting risk than taking risk. I believe this rule will have the opposite effect than intended (as always) for this reason. Centre ball contests - Removing the bounce removed the unpredictable nature of a bouncing oval ball. Couple it with this rule change and you get the rise of athletic jumping ruckman again. I don't ind this rule change, but would've preferred the bounce remain. Align kick-in time - Will have no difference on the game other than causing minor confusion with a perceived early play-on call a few times a year. Ruck nominations - Good rule change in theory, but of course they stuffed it up by adding the "ball must hit the ground before play on called" bit. Ruck nominations are stupid, but if there is no big ruckman at the contest and a player takes it out of the air they are penalised with a free kick. We'll have this scenario where a bunch of players stand there watching the ball just get thrown up and fall to the ground before they can pounce on it. Stupid. Should've just left it as no nomination required. Shrugging in tackle as prior opportunity - This one is horrific going to ruin matches. Umpires can't even officiate holding the ball, insufficient attempt to dispose etc. Why add another layer to the confusion, and also one that is even harder to see? A player could get tackled immediately, the force of the tackle moves their arm/shoulder, and the umpire sees the movement and deem they tried to shrug and pay a free kick against. This rule change will be discussed every week in the media as it ruins games. They need to simplify, not further complicate, holding the ball. Stand - Bad change. Being firmer with the stand zone and rule will cause more stupid looking free kicks where the offending player is not impacting the contest at all. They should get rid of the stand rule, not double down on it. It has not aided cleaner ball movement, and as always coaches work to exploit it because it's a bad rule specifically designed to disarm players instead of enforce a smart of fair contest.

They agreed to be delisted so they can be re-listed on the rookie list of their respective teams. They already have arrangements in place. It's a stupid system which allows the club to get $100,000 of their contract off the books and free up a list spot for the draft. Unless we have engaged them and played sneaky buggers like a Hugh Greenwood scenario, there's no chance we'll get them.

Couldn’t make the transition to midfield this year, so appears limited to a half back rebounder role. Struggles with contest. Great kick but very outside. Limits his scope compared to others as he’ll have less time to get those nice kicks off and be under more physical pressure.

Not at pick 7-8 we wouldn't. He was part of Port Adelaide's NGA last year. They passed on him and he went undrafted. He's kicked a few goals recently, but he's a mature ager now and wouldn't be near a top 20 pick if it wasn't such a weak draft. If he's there at 37 maybe, but zero chance at pick 7 or 8. Oskar Taylor looks a smokey to me.

My thoughts also. The ability to win enough of your own contested ball is one of the most accurate measures of success at AFL level. There used to be a magic statistic that you needed to be above 30% contested possession rate or you could not make it at AFL level. Even outside running wingmen like Ed Langdon are above this mark. Highly rated players like Toumpas, Morton, O'Rourke, Tsatas etc were taken right at the top of the draft due to their skill and accumulation at an underage level. They all had low contested possession and tackle rate and won nearly all their disposals uncontested on the outside. When they took the step to AFL level, they were no longer afforded the same time or lack of physical pressure and therefore did not become the projected stars or even average AFL players. Lindsey looks like this to me. His game is described as "friendly". He's a brilliant kick, has great vision, but is very outside. He's fed the ball in the backline and not shown at ability to adjust through the midfield to a more 360 degree game and to handle pressure and physicality. His weaknesses are listed as contest, leg speed, defensive work. Those are some glaring attributes required to make it at AFL level. Leg speed you can compensate for. Inability to handle and apply physical pressure you cannot. Even with the more free flowing modern game, contest and clearances dictated the outcome of this finals series yet again. When the pressure ramps up, you need to be able to handle it. For mine, I'd be hoping we draft someone who can become an elite midfielder, not a designated kick out player. For this reason, I'm hopeful of players like Grlj, Oskar Taylor, and others similar.

He won't make it to our pick. He won't get past Essendon and Richmond. We'll need to trade up to get him and IMO the price to trade up is too high. Better taking two good kids with 7+8 than taking one great and one average.

I reckon this is pretty bang on too. Keen on Dovaston especially. Small forwards are the most important part of any forward line in the modern game, and the previous few premierships have been won by teams with elite small forwards. Dovaston has elite agility, will apply pressure and be a pest, and hit the scoreboard. He's a bit of a Nick Watson and Kozzie hybrid, though less mercurial than Kozzie. Very similar to Watson who we were keen on. If we can draft him, he'd form a dangerous partnership with Kozzie. Over time they could rotate midfield and forward, which Kozzie more midfield and Dovaston more forward. Grilj's speed appeals. Great 2km time too, so has the endurance to keep doing it all game.

I'd hope for another gun midfielder and a small forward. Gun midfielders dictate games and win flags. Small forwards influence finals games more than key position forwards. With the modern game being about speed, gun small forward are game changers. Brisbane are the perfect example of that. Their two key forwards were basically worthless come finals, but Cameron, Bailey, Rayner, Lowman etc. just won them two flags in a row. With that in mind, Robey and Dovaston sound perfect, but not sure Robey will be available at our pick. That would be like drafting another Petracca and Kozzie essentially.

We're no chance for Humphrey now. He wanted to come home to Victoria and we were the only option due to having capital to get him home. There are other clubs he'd prefer to play at though. He's been talking to Hawks and Pies also, and dropped hints on social media he's keen on the Pies. F1 is now ammo for either hitting the draft next year or filling other needs. Taking two first rounders to draft this year and next year would be fantastic. That would give us 8 first round draftees across four drafts. Get those right and we'll be top tier in the league for talent coming through together and setup for a decade.

He's played predominantly key defender anyway, with a few stints as a key forward and ruck. I expect him to develop as a key position player at either end, possibly forward since we have less quality depth there than defence.

This. He's still playing good tough footy. His clearance and tackle numbers are better than any of our mids, including Clarry in his current form. He's durable, reliable, and a leader. I've really come around to this trade. Stoked!

He's still pretty good! 2024 was his second best season. The reason he's been pushed out is St Kilda just went berserk and have [censored] up their salary cap. They've just paid: Nas 2 million DeKoning 1.8 million Flanders 1 million Jack Silvagni 900k Steele is on 900k, so has been pushed out. We've added one year onto his contract to smooth it down. Saints are also paying a chunk of his wage. For a future third rounder and wage contributed, this is one of the best trades by any club in recent memory. I was against it given he's an aging inside mid, but seeing how cheap we got him it's hard not to be pumped. He's a better leader than anyone we've got at the club bar Gawn. Great to have some experience and leadership for the youngsters. Welcome man of Steele!

While that's true, it still means you're getting the 11th and 12th best rated players. Even if you didn't have access to some of those, you're getting lesser players in theory. Unavoidable with the current drafting rules, but can still understand the frustration. It will be magnified further when Tassie enter the league.

For those who haven't seen him play properly: CJ Vs Carlton He's not perfect, but when fit he's a pretty good intercept and dashing defender. Could play HBF or wing for us. If played across half back, it would free up Rivers or Salem or others to shift into the midfield more. He's best 23 ahead of Sharp and Sparrow and a few others IMO. Good trade for a late pick in a weak draft. Ready to go.

But we've got Viney contracted for another 3-4 years also. It feels like the balance will still be too slow and inside heavy... I like Steele as a person and player, and I think he'd be a good player for us. It just doesn't fit with moving away from old slow inside and mids. Won't be disappointed if he comes. He's an upgrade on Viney IMO

Paying someone 800-900k to play at Casey is madness. He's into our AFL midfield every week for the next two years on that coin. That's why I said pass despite him being a good character and decent player.

Good deal. CJ can have an impact. We need another pick around that mark to get Kalani White as father son though, so keep an eye on other upcoming trades where we pinch a late pick.

King has said he wants to inject speed and skill into the team to take on a new game style. While I like Jack Steele and think he'd be good for culture, he doesn't match up to what King said he wanted. He's also on 800-900k. Given we're going to be paying chunks of other players wages such as Brayshaw, Oliver, May, Trac, that's a large salary to take on for someone who isn't a key pillar in our longer term future like a Kossie or Langford etc. It's a no from me for those reasons.

Should get done for a late pick. He's not been given a game consistently and was starting sub 6 times this year. It might need to be a future pick as we need to keep a pick in the 40s for Kalani White. CJ is a good pickup for the cheap price. At worst, he gives us run and depth. At best, he becomes an absolute speed demon who plays a central role in Kings attacking new vision.

Yep. He'll request trade there next off season.

His manager basically said he wanted to come back to Victoria for family reasons. GC not allowing it this year. Humphrey will try again next off season and push harder for a club he'd want to play at (Hawks or Pies).

Won't get done. He'll wind up at Collingwood or Hawthorn next off season.

Fair play to him squeezing a five year deal out of them. Five years is a long time for a player of his caliber. I'd wager he's not in their best 22 in five years time... He'll be playing as a lockdown defender at Peel in the WAFL by then 😉