Yes, I can't argue with that. He had missed a lot of footy the season before and only played a couple of games before the championships.
I'd be happy if we could get him as a rookie, but I'm sure he'll be gone by then.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
2024 Draft Thread
- Thread starter Mr T.
- Start date
I'd be happy if we could get him as a rookie, but I'm sure he'll be gone by then.
I still can’t see how FOS makes it to our pick 6. But all of a sudden there is a pulse. The other factor is what happens with pick 2? For this to become a bigger reality then Norf will have to take Tauru at 2.
But let’s assume they do
1. Lalor
2. Ashcroft
3. Tauru
4. Draper
5. Smith
6. Langford
7. FOS
I still think it’s pipe dream stuff. But
Not from me. And we are getting whispers he could be there at 6 or even 10. Good grief things change fast.
I guess even if he felt absolutely nothing after each one, it still counts to a cumulative total which eventually has to rule you out of competitive sport
This is definitely not a criticism just an observation.
There are plenty on here that are against us looking at Hotten because he has an ACL injury and also concerns about Lalor’s torn hammy off the bone. In the context of injury risks I would be taking both of those boys before I would look at Trainor.
The reason is at least we know something about ACLs and hammies , we know players recover and come back and have good careers. Concussion is still in the discovery phase and for that reason to me it is just too much of a risk.
With an ACL we have stats …x% of players do them and don’t do another one etc but we don’t have that with concussion. We don’t even know what the rules will be.
I feel for the kid but someone will take him because they are willing to risk whatever pick it is.
There are plenty on here that are against us looking at Hotten because he has an ACL injury and also concerns about Lalor’s torn hammy off the bone. In the context of injury risks I would be taking both of those boys before I would look at Trainor.
The reason is at least we know something about ACLs and hammies , we know players recover and come back and have good careers. Concussion is still in the discovery phase and for that reason to me it is just too much of a risk.
With an ACL we have stats …x% of players do them and don’t do another one etc but we don’t have that with concussion. We don’t even know what the rules will be.
I feel for the kid but someone will take him because they are willing to risk whatever pick it is.
Whlist its perhaps not the highest probability, it is very possible for 6. All it takes is for North to take Tauru and then Carlton, Adelaide and Melbourne to favour Draper, Jagga and Langford. All three are going to be great mids - FOS could slide.
It won’t be long before players diagnosed with repeat concussions will have to take a mandatory year away from the game. It is harsh but Trainor should be encouraged to pull out of the draft and wait till next year.
Maybe future picks will one day be used to secure players in these situations? Perhaps clubs might bid with future second round picks and the player can be on their list and train but can’t play for 12 months and not allowed to take part in contact training or boxing or whatever?
Listed players could be treated the same way.
Maybe future picks will one day be used to secure players in these situations? Perhaps clubs might bid with future second round picks and the player can be on their list and train but can’t play for 12 months and not allowed to take part in contact training or boxing or whatever?
Listed players could be treated the same way.
If the AFL believes a player should not play due to possible risk, it’s their competition and they should make the call. They are gutless and try to avoid responsibility passing it back to the clubs.
Litigation may be worse if a player is stopped from playing. Yes the AFL IS trying to reduce the risk of concussions occurring but will not make a call either way. It should just be a case that a player should be medically assessed and if deemed to be affected badly by concussions then he should be deregistered. No argument.
I had a nasty concussion at school, when I was chasing someone through the yard, and ran past a kid who was throwing a lump of wood at someone. He missed the other person.
I don't know whether that hurt the most (it knocked me out) or when my head hit the ground. I kinda remember the wood hitting me, although i remember it hitting me in the front/face - everyone else said it hit the back of my head. I wasn't conscious for the ground.
I had a subsequent concussion when I top edged a pull shot playing cricket, because I wasn't aware not stretching out the mats made the ball kick...The ball hit me in the side of the head.
I played the rest of that day, hurt and angry and took 6 for, but the following week I wasn't the best and bowled donuts. Didn't get another wicket that match.
I haven't had another concussion, but I've had an adult life with a lot of migraines. I don't know if it's related, and wouldn't have made the links until recently.
I got unlucky twice. Non-contact sport and wrong place at wrong time. There's no way I'd exacerbate that risk playing contact sport.
Someone should be in Trainor's ear and asking him how he wants to feel in 30 yrs. I'm not taking the kid.
Rubbish. How are you going to convince a kid he should forgo being drafted? Medical assessment is the only way and if approved to play then he’s there to be drafted. I don’t know for sure but the AFL should insist on medical approval in relation to all kids.
I have passed out in public 3 times, literally collapsed to the floor without rhmye or reason. I'm not going to assume this is all concussion related because there were other factors at play, dehydration being one, excessive heat being another factor. Beer drinking was involved but I know my limitations and I was well under what I consider to be responsible drinking. I'm not a specialist in this area but I'm not discounting my head injuries as playing a part.
I hear you Bully, but I did enjoy my time kicking cricketers around the park.
So here's the crux of the matter..
If we stick with 1 and 6 < ignoring Lions matching>...and assume Nth keep pick 2 and take Tauru...then we will get..
Lalor plus...either Smith.FOS.Langford or Draper.
Thats great. No need to trade up.
Perfect for us.
But..Still possible Nth trade down...if they do to Dees Saints or Suns...then we lose this chance...a mid will be taken....unless Dees take Tauru with 2 in place of Nth.
Fascinating.
I think Nth have to trade with us if they want 2 picks of value...but nothing guarantees them Tauru other than pick 2.
As Willo says..they should trade for 2 talls ...but maybe stop chasing Tauru.
We’ve sent eggy smith back to local league and will redraft him through our academy probably next yearDo we even have an academyit has been a very barren hunting ground.
If nth trade with Adelaide or Melbourne that would be good. Tauru goes at 4 or 5 then great. Gives us another mid to choose from.
If North go for a mid then Tauru is ours at 6 or if Melb go Tauru then we get a mid. either way we get the best mid and either another great mid or the best tall with massive upside.
As long as Tauru is taken before 6 it would be perfect.
