 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Mr Miyagi wrote: | | Checkers given two years, but dunno what the details are. |
2019 and 2020, I hope.  |
|
|
|
 |
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| inxs88 wrote: |
don't forget the exalted pick 93 |
We only have 5 vacant spots so we will only take 5 picks in. That's the rule that was brought in to stop the stockpiling of picks for points purposes.
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
woods_the_best 
AFL Premiers 2010
Joined: 29 Aug 2003
Location: Warradale, Adelaide
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MightyMagpie wrote: | | inxs88 wrote: |
don't forget the exalted pick 93 |
We only have 5 vacant spots so we will only take 5 picks in. That's the rule that was brought in to stop the stockpiling of picks for points purposes. |
Don't we have 43 on our playing list? Max allowed is 47.
_________________
Collingwood - 2010 AFL Premiers - God that sounds good !!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MightyMagpie wrote: | | inxs88 wrote: |
don't forget the exalted pick 93 |
We only have 5 vacant spots so we will only take 5 picks in. That's the rule that was brought in to stop the stockpiling of picks for points purposes. |
I thought the rule is you can only use as many picks for points as list spots available.
So if we had 6 selections all worth points this season (93 obviously doesn't) we could only exhaust the points for the first 5 selections but the 6th pick could still be used as a live selection as long as it wasn't needed to match a bid that cost us points.
As an example if Atu is bid on from pick 57 onwards or not at all we could use pick 93 on him on draft night.
If you're right then we must be hoping pick 60 will only be pushed back to the end of the draft after matching for Quaynor or Kelly or we don't intend to take anyone outside them and an upgraded rookie.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | | MightyMagpie wrote: | | inxs88 wrote: |
don't forget the exalted pick 93 |
We only have 5 vacant spots so we will only take 5 picks in. That's the rule that was brought in to stop the stockpiling of picks for points purposes. |
I thought the rule is you can only use as many picks for points as list spots available.
So if we had 6 selections all worth points this season (93 obviously doesn't) we could only exhaust the points for the first 5 selections but the 6th pick could still be used as a live selection as long as it wasn't needed to match a bid that cost us points.
As an example if Atu is bid on from pick 57 onwards or not at all we could use pick 93 on him on draft night.
If you're right then we must be hoping pick 60 will only be pushed back to the end of the draft after matching for Quaynor or Kelly or we don't intend to take anyone outside them and an upgraded rookie. |
Here you go Swoop: https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-abolishes-draft-loophole-that-allowed-clubs-to-gain-an-advantage-by-stockpiling-backend-picks/news-story/112f1b7e18eda1f3127038e1a48a1477
Picks used for points don't disappear they just get moved down the draft order - according to the Father Son Bidding document linked in the OP. Even if we match bids we can theoretically take up to 5 (in reality likely 4 because of commitments we have made to players re Cat A rookie list) draftees including those we match bids on.
AFL Rule 6.2 (d):
Number of Draft Selections
(i) At a National Draft Selection Meeting:
(A) each Club shall exercise a minimum of 3 Draft selections (including selections forfeited under Rules 8.7, 10.11(a), 13.4(b), 14.4(d) and 15.8(b)); and
(B) no Club may exercise more than 3 Draft selections if the consequence would be that it would exceed the number of Players which it is entitled to include on its Primary List pursuant to these Rules.
(ii) If a Club, prior to the National Draft Selection Meeting, has committed to draft a Player at the Pre-Season Draft Selection Meeting that Player will be deemed to be included on the Club’s Primary List when determining how many Draft selections a Club is entitled to exercise at the National Draft Selection Meeting.
_________________
All We Can Be
Last edited by MightyMagpie on Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:54 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| woods_the_best wrote: | | MightyMagpie wrote: | | inxs88 wrote: |
don't forget the exalted pick 93 |
We only have 5 vacant spots so we will only take 5 picks in. That's the rule that was brought in to stop the stockpiling of picks for points purposes. |
Don't we have 43 on our playing list? Max allowed is 47. |
Primary 38-40
Cat A 4-6
Primary plus Cat A = 44
We have 35 on the Primary (by my count previously posted) so 5 open Primary spots. Therefore a max of 5 National draftees. In practice we are probably limited to 4 as we have committed to 5 on our Cat A Rookie list and Primary + Cat A = 44.
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
58pie
Joined: 28 Jun 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Thanks Blairy for 2010 & beyond . Hope you get a gig. Great draw with big games so we will need the backups with 6 day breaks. Go Beamsy - Go Pies |
|
|
|
|
On the March
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
|
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| On the March wrote: | http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-11-02/trading-firstround-picks-afls-most-misunderstood-rule-explained
This explains the rule pertaining to using your first round pick twice in four years. My take if we select Quaynor in the first round using what meagre picks we have - we have exercised a first round pick and meet the rule. How bazaar!
It would mean we could trade out our 2020 first round pick next year if we wanted to (I didn't say we would) |
They need to release the written determination by Andrew Dillon which is the actual rule. This article isn’t particularly helpful in that it makes no reference to the written determination and does not state who the source is.
There was never any doubt about matching a first round bid being a use of a first rounder (even if no first rounder is used for points). The main thing this article brings into doubt (contrary to the HS article linked in the OP which refers to the written determination) is whether you can always trade a current year 1st rounder.
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
How to forcibly retire (or clear from the list) injury-prone expensively contracted players, Sydney-style:
Swans reach rookie-list deal with Tippett
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/swans-reach-rookie-list-deal-with-tippett-20181109-p50ezm.html
"Sydney will retain Kurt Tippett on the club's rookie list in 2019 after reaching a deal with the forward/ruckman, who effectively retired from AFL football before the 2018 season.
The Swans have delisted Tippett and have committed to re-drafting him on the club's rookie list, in a move that will save Sydney some money in the club 's salary cap, although Tippett will still receive a significant payment for 2019.
Tippett had been contracted until the end of 2020 - in effect, having a further three years to run on the contract when he decided not to continue playing with the Swans as a result of injuries.
Clearly, Tippett has accepted a deal in which he will be paid only a portion of that contract. Tippett was understood to have a contract that would have paid him more than $2 million over those three years, but the Swans will not have to pay him for 2020 and will wipe the slate clean after retaining him on the rookie list in 2019.
The Swans felt it was preferable to keep Tippett on the rookie list. Typically a club saves about $80,000 from their salary cap when re-drafting an expensive player on to their rookie list.
Under the AFL rules, a player must remain on one of the lists - senior or rookie - if he is being paid.
The Swans could not reach a settlement and pay Tippett, who joined the club after the 2012 flag on a huge contract, without keeping him on the list, despite the reality that he will not play for them again." |
|
|
|
|
35forever
"I feel sick - dada dada dada da"
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Location: Physical=Sunshine Coast -- Mental=Vic Park
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| inxs88 wrote: | 2019 delistings and retirements:
1. Ben Reid: retired
2. Tyson Goldsack: retired
3. Daniel Wells: retired
4. Lynden Dunn: retired
5. Levi Greenwood: retired
6. Ben Crocker: delisted
7. Rupert W: delisted |
Tell me this isn't true. Surely this isn't factual. If Dunn & Greenwod have retired we're morons. Dunny was incredibly keen to play on, as were Goldy & Greenwood, one of the most effective taggers in the game.
But Wills & Crocks delisted? That is SHEER insanity. Our dumbest decision since the bloody idiotic succession. Croc took mark of the year late in the VFL season & took a huge leap to become twice the player he was, being among the best in the incredible games we played near the end of the season.
But WILLS?! God I hope you're wrong. Rupert Wills might be the best player in the AFL who DIDNT get a game in 2018, & could easily be a top 5 player. One of the longest kicks in the AFL, he's huge & has piles of skill, but is not one of 'Buckley's favourites'. Hence being emergency half a dozen times, but no games. Losing him would be the biggest cock-up since Kyle Martin, a brilliant young player, his numbers in his 5 Senior games show that, but again Buckley squashed his AFL dream & he gave up to play suburban footy, where he's still killing it.
Bucks has obviously improved, (though many think it's actually Justin Longmuir who made the difference, but at least Buckley has allowed others to take a bigger role) but his habit of having 'favourites' & his awful match committee cock ups cost us games & players, & almost certainly played a part in the GF loss.
Perhaps there's already a thread I missed, but I just found out that Tom Jok is training with StKilda. What the HELL IS wrong with us? Did we look at grabbing him? He could be a real gun with the right staff, why the HELL are we letting the bloody SAINTS pinch him?! If you've seen him play you KNOW what I mean.
God I hate delisting time. If we don't get Quaynor & Kelly (and hopefully Bosanavenalagi & Jok), I will bloody well spit chips!!
(I'll probably do that anyway)
_________________
"If at first you dont succeed...
... oh who cares, we did it!!!!!"
-me, 2010
"The pies are going to the big dance!"-P.Daicos 2010
Visit My Website! |
|
|
|
|
dalyc 
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 35forever wrote: | | inxs88 wrote: | 2019 delistings and retirements:
1. Ben Reid: retired
2. Tyson Goldsack: retired
3. Daniel Wells: retired
4. Lynden Dunn: retired
5. Levi Greenwood: retired
6. Ben Crocker: delisted
7. Rupert W: delisted |
Tell me this isn't true. Surely this isn't factual. If Dunn & Greenwod have retired we're morons. Dunny was incredibly keen to play on, as were Goldy & Greenwood, one of the most effective taggers in the game.
But Wills & Crocks delisted? That is SHEER insanity. Our dumbest decision since the bloody idiotic succession. Croc took mark of the year late in the VFL season & took a huge leap to become twice the player he was, being among the best in the incredible games we played near the end of the season.
But WILLS?! God I hope you're wrong. Rupert Wills might be the best player in the AFL who DIDNT get a game in 2018, & could easily be a top 5 player. One of the longest kicks in the AFL, he's huge & has piles of skill, but is not one of 'Buckley's favourites'. Hence being emergency half a dozen times, but no games. Losing him would be the biggest cock-up since Kyle Martin, a brilliant young player, his numbers in his 5 Senior games show that, but again Buckley squashed his AFL dream & he gave up to play suburban footy, where he's still killing it.
Bucks has obviously improved, (though many think it's actually Justin Longmuir who made the difference, but at least Buckley has allowed others to take a bigger role) but his habit of having 'favourites' & his awful match committee cock ups cost us games & players, & almost certainly played a part in the GF loss.
Perhaps there's already a thread I missed, but I just found out that Tom Jok is training with StKilda. What the HELL IS wrong with us? Did we look at grabbing him? He could be a real gun with the right staff, why the HELL are we letting the bloody SAINTS pinch him?! If you've seen him play you KNOW what I mean.
God I hate delisting time. If we don't get Quaynor & Kelly (and hopefully Bosanavenalagi & Jok), I will bloody well spit chips!!
(I'll probably do that anyway) |
Relax. These “delistings” are 88’s predictions for NEXT year.
_________________
Four legged animals good, two legged animals better |
|
|
|
|
4everpies
Joined: 13 Aug 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Geez 35forever chill. It's not healthy to be so angry all the time.
Too eager to rant rather than take the time to read the post properly. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 4everpies wrote: | Geez 35forever chill. It's not healthy to be so angry all the time.
Too eager to rant rather than take the time to read the post properly. |
He should go on Twitter as plenty of those on there
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
