AFL 2026

[wenchbarwer]

Yesterday

One minute to go

GWS player gets the ball in the back 50 / runs 6 steps and gets correctly tackled by the North forward.
The ball is not dislodged by the tackle.
No attempt to correctly dispose of the ball - he just let's the ball go
Play on

Hooray an AFL umpire applying the AdFL interpretation....

So, the wrong one?

[Dutchy]

Billion dollar industry and we have part time umpires who all live in different states, invest in it and we might see some improvements.

[wenchbarwer]

Lol

[gadj1976]

Yesterday

One minute to go

GWS player gets the ball in the back 50 / runs 6 steps and gets correctly tackled by the North forward.
The ball is not dislodged by the tackle.
No attempt to correctly dispose of the ball - he just let's the ball go
Play on

I saw that one. The funny part was Darling, who ended up with the ball via natural attrition, expected the whistle as did everyone else, as soon as he didn't hear it, he handballed it then threw his hands up and stared at the umpire as if to say "where's the free". Hilarious how bad the umpiring is at the moment.

I have said before, one way to alleviate this mess is to have four field umpires and have them two in each half. One on the inside (corridor) and one boundary side. As the play switches from side to side, one becomes the inside umpire, one becomes the outside umpire. So players who don't dispose of it on the boundary side, never get away with it. The TV picks it up and we see it but we also see the umpire in the middle of the corridor, completely blindsided, like the Darling one above.

Another way is to empower the boundary umps but after watching the boundary umpires, I doubt they can tie their shoelaces prior to the game, let alone make an effective decision.

[Jimmy_041]

Yesterday

One minute to go

GWS player gets the ball in the back 50 / runs 6 steps and gets correctly tackled by the North forward.
The ball is not dislodged by the tackle.
No attempt to correctly dispose of the ball - he just let's the ball go
Play on

Hooray an AFL umpire applying the AdFL interpretation....

We, obviously, watch different AdFL games

[dedja]

Dees have sacked their CEO.

[mighty_tiger_79]

Dees have sacked their CEO.

And Cookie takes over as the interim

[Booney]

Finish top 10. Good.

Finish bottom 5. Good. Don't tank though.

What a f*cken shit show.

[The Bedge]

I'm not sure how even if Butters wanted to stay, Port could manage to keep him and still access their FS / NGA players?

Who the f*ck is gonna want their 3rd / 4th round picks so they can move up into the 1st round?

[Booney]

I'm not sure how even if Butters wanted to stay, Port could manage to keep him and still access their FS / NGA players?

Who the f*ck is gonna want their 3rd / 4th round picks so they can move up into the 1st round?

Simply, we can't. We have our first rounder this year and that won't be enough for Cochrane so we'll need another one.

[Jim05]

I'm not sure how even if Butters wanted to stay, Port could manage to keep him and still access their FS / NGA players?

Who the f*ck is gonna want their 3rd / 4th round picks so they can move up into the 1st round?

Simply, we can't. We have our first rounder this year and that won't be enough for Cochrane so we'll need another one.

Not just any first either. Going to most likely require a top 10.
Next year also looks bad and not sure if you can get all 3.
Is Georgiades a chance to go?
Would get good value for him

We are in a similar boat, thanks AFL.

[wenchbarwer]

Swann reckons "nearly half" the AFL clubs were in favour of the changes.

Basic maths says that is 8 or less clubs, you'd assume the NSW & Qld clubs would have signed it off, given they've rorted the system for years. God only knows who the rest are, but I wouldn't put it past the AFL to assume that 4 of 18 clubs is "nearly half"...

I thought Swann was going to be a good, common sense appointment at AFL level. Years of club experience, would provide some relevance to the muppets that reside at AFL House.

Nope, he's an AFL stooge, plain and simple, another stain to the fabric of our once great game.

[Booney]

Swann reckons "nearly half" the AFL clubs were in favour of the changes.

Basic maths says that is 8 or less clubs, you'd assume the NSW & Qld clubs would have signed it off, given they've rorted the system for years. God only knows who the rest are, but I wouldn't put it past the AFL to assume that 4 of 18 clubs is "nearly half"...

I thought Swann was going to be a good, common sense appointment at AFL level. Years of club experience, would provide some relevance to the muppets that reside at AFL House.

Nope, he's an AFL stooge, plain and simple, another stain to the fabric of our once great game.

Clubs who don't have any father son or nga in the next 3 years I'd say.

[gadj1976]

Swann reckons "nearly half" the AFL clubs were in favour of the changes.

Basic maths says that is 8 or less clubs, you'd assume the NSW & Qld clubs would have signed it off, given they've rorted the system for years. God only knows who the rest are, but I wouldn't put it past the AFL to assume that 4 of 18 clubs is "nearly half"...

I thought Swann was going to be a good, common sense appointment at AFL level. Years of club experience, would provide some relevance to the muppets that reside at AFL House.

Nope, he's an AFL stooge, plain and simple, another stain to the fabric of our once great game.

Minority rules huh? Excellent. Let that be the precedent going forward! What a clusterfxxx of an organisation.

[wenchbarwer]

Swann reckons "nearly half" the AFL clubs were in favour of the changes.

Basic maths says that is 8 or less clubs, you'd assume the NSW & Qld clubs would have signed it off, given they've rorted the system for years. God only knows who the rest are, but I wouldn't put it past the AFL to assume that 4 of 18 clubs is "nearly half"...

I thought Swann was going to be a good, common sense appointment at AFL level. Years of club experience, would provide some relevance to the muppets that reside at AFL House.

Nope, he's an AFL stooge, plain and simple, another stain to the fabric of our once great game.

Minority rules huh? Excellent. Let that be the precedent going forward! What a clusterfxxx of an organisation.

That's the one thing the AFL have been consistent in recently, ignoring the majority.

Opening round, wildcards, now this.

[Zelezny Chucks]

I've said it before but they need to do away with all FS and NGA. It f***s up the equalisation aspect that the draft is predominantly supposed to be used for.

NGAs lock away cash that is used to develop a small handful of chosen kids that are given a leg up to make it already and gives incentives to those clubs to double down on taking those players because until now they could use picks they were never planning on using anyway.

The AFL would be better off developing state based programs that don't tie to any club and create a stronger pool of draftees coming through, players would be more likely to move in and out of this setup based on talent and development rather than having to have them locked in at 15 to be able to access them later on as they are now with the NGAs.

Speaking with people involved in the SANFL underage programs it feels like it has become all about showcasing the talents of those involved in the academies at the detriment of true development of all players in the squad. Watching the level of the players that come back into local footy that have been in these systems it is hard to argue with that.

As for FS if the player is good enough and the club wants them then they can trade up to get whatever pick they need and actually pay what they think they are worth.

An uncompromised draft that is fair for all and has the most equalisation effect on the league and removes the need for all these ridiculous rules would be best for all.

But of course the AFL half arses something trying to please everyone while pleasing no one.

[wenchbarwer]

I've said it before but they need to do away with all FS and NGA. It f***s up the equalisation aspect that the draft is predominantly supposed to be used for.

NGAs lock away cash that is used to develop a small handful of chosen kids that are given a leg up to make it already and gives incentives to those clubs to double down on taking those players because until now they could use picks they were never planning on using anyway.

The AFL would be better off developing state based programs that don't tie to any club and create a stronger pool of draftees coming through, players would be more likely to move in and out of this setup based on talent and development rather than having to have them locked in at 15 to be able to access them later on as they are now with the NGAs.

Speaking with people involved in the SANFL underage programs it feels like it has become all about showcasing the talents of those involved in the academies at the detriment of true development of all players in the squad. Watching the level of the players that come back into local footy that have been in these systems it is hard to argue with that.

As for FS if the player is good enough and the club wants them then they can trade up to get whatever pick they need and actually pay what they think they are worth.

An uncompromised draft that is fair for all and has the most equalisation effect on the league and removes the need for all these ridiculous rules would be best for all.

But of course the AFL half arses something trying to please everyone while pleasing no one.

Been like that for at least the last 10 years, probably more

[Sharksta]

I've said it before but they need to do away with all FS and NGA. It f***s up the equalisation aspect that the draft is predominantly supposed to be used for.

NGAs lock away cash that is used to develop a small handful of chosen kids that are given a leg up to make it already and gives incentives to those clubs to double down on taking those players because until now they could use picks they were never planning on using anyway.

The AFL would be better off developing state based programs that don't tie to any club and create a stronger pool of draftees coming through, players would be more likely to move in and out of this setup based on talent and development rather than having to have them locked in at 15 to be able to access them later on as they are now with the NGAs.

Speaking with people involved in the SANFL underage programs it feels like it has become all about showcasing the talents of those involved in the academies at the detriment of true development of all players in the squad. Watching the level of the players that come back into local footy that have been in these systems it is hard to argue with that.

As for FS if the player is good enough and the club wants them then they can trade up to get whatever pick they need and actually pay what they think they are worth.

An uncompromised draft that is fair for all and has the most equalisation effect on the league and removes the need for all these ridiculous rules would be best for all.

But of course the AFL half arses something trying to please everyone while pleasing no one.

The NGAs have become about trying to find out the heritage of talented players to try to loop hole them into their academies. How many years has port put into Cochrane whose father only just uncovered his indigenous heritage in the past 12 months to make him eligible. The northern academies at least have had kids that they have been developing since their early teens


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gadj1976]

Swann reckons "nearly half" the AFL clubs were in favour of the changes.

Basic maths says that is 8 or less clubs, you'd assume the NSW & Qld clubs would have signed it off, given they've rorted the system for years. God only knows who the rest are, but I wouldn't put it past the AFL to assume that 4 of 18 clubs is "nearly half"...

I thought Swann was going to be a good, common sense appointment at AFL level. Years of club experience, would provide some relevance to the muppets that reside at AFL House.

Nope, he's an AFL stooge, plain and simple, another stain to the fabric of our once great game.

Minority rules huh? Excellent. Let that be the precedent going forward! What a clusterfxxx of an organisation.

That's the one thing the AFL have been consistent in recently, ignoring the majority.

Opening round, wildcards, now this.

Had a think about this overnight. I'm actually ok with the AFL making hard decisions, and ones that are not in the majority of teams immediate interests, but grandfather those changes in, especially when it means that clubs that have spent years planning around existing rules and regulations, get thrown into disarray pretty much immediately.

[Dutchy]

Speaking with people involved in the SANFL underage programs it feels like it has become all about showcasing the talents of those involved in the academies at the detriment of true development of all players in the squad. Watching the level of the players that come back into local footy that have been in these systems it is hard to argue with that.

Hit nail on head, selection each week is mostly determined by how many phone calls clubs get about players, so naturally the clubs feel they need to give them their best opportunity to showcase their talent.