Position General Discussion

[Ben's Beasts]

I think it does.

Apart from Monfries all the players had suspensions hanging over there heads when other clubs took them. Port should get one for Monfries but that's it.

I don't see how that's relevant.

If one team has been allowed to recruit top up players then so should the others.

As a Dees supporter, I don't particularly care with regards to Melbourne missing out as it's going to have no impact on our season but it's still not right.

 

[freowho]

Just occurred to me that Crowley kept training at the club. Didn't he. Why is that?

 

[BigRuss]

Just to be technical Essendon lost 12 which have been replaced by 10 players. All 5 Clubs can upgrade rookies to the full 40, so Ess & Port end up 2 rookies down, Stk, Melb and Bulldogs one rookie down.

Even so it seems blatantly unfair that the team that did the "wrong"are allowed these liberties whereas the the teams that had nothing to do with it are punished. Fair enough clubs knew the risks of recruiting said players, but the afl have given the team that did wrong a fairer crack at it then the other 4 sides. Just seems to me the only fair way to do it is either deny all 5 clubs players or allow all 5 players. The inconsistency is what irks me the most.

 

[freowho]

Even so it seems blatantly unfair that the team that did the "wrong"are allowed these liberties whereas the the teams that had nothing to do with it are punished. Fair enough clubs knew the risks of recruiting said players, but the afl have given the team that did wrong a fairer crack at it then the other 4 sides. Just seems to me the only fair way to do it is either deny all 5 clubs players or allow all 5 players. The inconsistency is what irks me the most.

You would be setting a precedent for any future club to replace a suspended athlete. Essendon had to be allowed to replace players so the AFL could guarantee it's business partners 9 games every weekend.

Also the ruling wasn't against the club. It was against the players. Under the WADA code each player is solely responsible for what happens to their body.

 

[Bomber18]

Just to add on to Philzsays point, certain commentators have referred to how Essendon have one extra player on the list but that is Connor Mckenna who Essendon selected as a Category B rookie. Other clubs are entitled to sign Category B rookies too as extra rookies outside the list of 44.
Essendon were already entitled to an extra active player just like all other clubs who have Category B rookies.

Not saying I agree with the decision, but just saying it's not true that Essendon have more players than other affected clubs due to top ups.

 

[BigRuss]

You would be setting a precedent for any future club to replace a suspended athlete. Essendon had to be allowed to replace players so the AFL could guarantee it's business partners 9 games every weekend.

Also the ruling wasn't against the club. It was against the players. Under the WADA code each player is solely responsible for what happens to their body.

That doesn't explain why they've denied the other clubs/payers? It makes absolutely 0 sense. Doesn't matter in the end but the inconsistency just irritates me like nothing else.

 

[KLo30]

So, basically clubs other than Essendon are forced to use their rookies to fill their primary list, without the ability to replace those rookies. Essendon can replace replace their primary list with top-ups then two rookies, thus preserving those not suited to AFL level football.

Did not St Kilda elevate 4 rookies at one stage throughout the year to cover LTI. This would leave Port Adelaide one down on their list.

This analysis does not consider category B rookies, which are clearly not players AFL clubs won't to play in that season, or the fact that clubs have a primary list one player down in order to upgrade the best preseason performer to the primary list.

I'm confused to the logic of this decision.

 

[Rowsus]

You have these row?!?! What would it take to get my little nuts on a copy?

BUMP this one!

I think you may have misunderstood. I calculate them as I need them, I don't have a file of them!
You will find some of them here though, in a thread by vin.gill.

Top Ranked Players 2015 (SC 100% TOG Ranking)

 

[Zim^zuM]

I think it does.

Apart from Monfries all the players had suspensions hanging over there heads when other clubs took them. Port should get one for Monfries but that's it.

i would argue essendon has had enough time to trade players in danger of being suspended meaning they wouldnt need top ups.

 

[Darkie]

Does anyone know when we can get the electronic version of the prospectus?

The hard copy has been out for a while now, and you'd think the soft copy would be quicker, if anything!

 

[Zimmer]

i would argue essendon has had enough time to trade players in danger of being suspended meaning they wouldnt need top ups.

Seriously? You generally seem pretty switched on Zim, but you've let yourself down with this one. Why didn't they trade all of them then? Why, because they are not the epitome of evil they have been portrayed as.

On the other hand teams pursued those players - arguably exploiting the situation. There were none that Essendon wanted to trade. Even Monfries, who was traded before this debacle, was a player Essendon wanted to retain.

I would argue that no team thought they would be suspended - which is why they were so keen to use the situation to their (apparent) advantage. The idiocy of the CAS decision is available for everyone to read - the President of the Western Bulldogs has been quite vocal on this.

Also, how is there any advantage to the EFC to trade away players they think will be suspended when they will now have to pay the wages of top up players, as well as the wages and compensation for every player from the original 34 - whether they are still in the AFL system or not?

Sorry if I've gone overboard, but there's so much misinformation out there about this thing that it's hard not to respond - even though I'm sure it won't make any difference.

 

[Rowsus]

Seriously? You generally seem pretty switched on Zim, but you've let yourself down with this one. Why didn't they trade all of them then? Why, because they are not the epitome of evil they have been portrayed as.

On the other hand teams pursued those players - arguably exploiting the situation. There were none that Essendon wanted to trade. Even Monfries, who was traded before this debacle, was a player Essendon wanted to retain.

I would argue that no team thought they would be suspended - which is why they were so keen to use the situation to their (apparent) advantage. The idiocy of the CAS decision is available for everyone to read.

Sorry if I've gone overboard, but there's so much misinformation out there about this thing that it's hard not to respond - even though I'm sure it won't make any difference.

The are many other problems with trading all the players out. The main one I see is trying to find Clubs to take them all. If you have a "fire sale" like that you get seriously diminished returns, and probably end up with a list not much better than they are looking at in 2016 anyway. But then they have lost all their base. At least there will be good players returning in 2017 now.

 

[Goodie's Guns]

Not sure how if mentioned. But I saw a screenshot today on FB where someone messaged the SuperCoach's FB page run by the Herald Sun, and asked when the app was being released. The reply was, the 15th of Feb

 

[THCLT]

Not sure how if mentioned. But I saw a screenshot today on FB where someone messaged the SuperCoach's FB page run by the Herald Sun, and asked when the app was being released. The reply was, the 15th of Feb

I was able to get into the Android app once SC was open for a few days, it was very cumbersome to navigate through and use and thought to myself, 'this looks like it's incomplete'. Now when I go into the App, it has the message, ' A brand new SC app is coming soon for season 2016 - you'll receive the update as soon as it's available!'

I guess that in the excitement of launching the new SC platform on the web, they neglected about updating the App!

 

[Darkie]

Not sure how if mentioned. But I saw a screenshot today on FB where someone messaged the SuperCoach's FB page run by the Herald Sun, and asked when the app was being released. The reply was, the 15th of Feb

I was able to get into the Android app once SC was open for a few days, it was very cumbersome to navigate through and use and thought to myself, 'this looks like it's incomplete'. Now when I go into the App, it has the message, ' A brand new SC app is coming soon for season 2016 - you'll receive the update as soon as it's available!'

I guess that in the excitement of launching the new SC platform on the web, they neglected about updating the App!

Thanks guys, good stuff!

 

[Goodie's Guns]

Just wanting to check a couple of things, SC Gold gives you live scores right???

And does anyone know if the HS are running the 52 week digital pass subscription including SC Gold and Live Scores??
As I know last year I signed up to this for only $25 through the university student offer.

 

[Tamuhawk]

Just wanting to check a couple of things, SC Gold gives you live scores right???

And does anyone know if the HS are running the 52 week digital pass subscription including SC Gold and Live Scores??
As I know last year I signed up to this for only $25 through the university student offer.

From what I saw last year SC GOLD only showed me scores from players from my team but it refreshes every now and then. It seems like now the Heraldsun is making people pay more. It's $1 for the first 28 days... and then $7 a week after that.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Just wanting to check a couple of things, SC Gold gives you live scores right???

And does anyone know if the HS are running the 52 week digital pass subscription including SC Gold and Live Scores??
As I know last year I signed up to this for only $25 through the university student offer.

SC Gold doesn't give you live scores. You need the Digital Pass in order to get this.
I am also hoping for the Uni Offer of $25 for SC Gold & Digital pass combined - I hope they do it again this year (but I'm not sure when that gets announced)

 

[Goodie's Guns]

SC Gold doesn't give you live scores. You need the Digital Pass in order to get this.
I am also hoping for the Uni Offer of $25 for SC Gold & Digital pass combined - I hope they do it again this year (but I'm not sure when that gets announced)

Hmmm. Just seems so stupid that Gold doesn't include the live scores.

Yeah hanging out for that uni offer, it might be advertised closer to the time that the current yearly subscriptions come to an end in March.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Hmmm. Just seems so stupid that Gold doesn't include the live scores.

Yeah hanging out for that uni offer, it might be advertised closer to the time that the current yearly subscriptions come to an end in March.

I found a link in last year’s 2015 General Thread at post #88 by Damoz. I can’t copy it across, but it looks like it is linking to the current 2016 offer and includes SC Gold in the bundle for $25 total. I'm just not sure that the Digital Pass includes the Live Scores, so best to check that out before signing up. (I'm going to look into it further also).

The offer seems to include the following:

Unrestricted Digital Access Features

•Offer available until 30 June 2016.
•52 weeks of Unrestricted digital access on desktop and mobile, which starts on sign up.
•The Herald Sun iPad app.
•Subscription to foxsports.com.au.
•SuperCoach Gold · AFL.
•The Herald Sun Digital Print Edition.