I assume you’re talking about John Beveridge (father of).
-
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.
Matthew Clarke
- Thread starter Harry
- Start date
Wells is very good, but Cats during his time were also blessed to have 3 of the greatest father sons ever.
Mentions a fair bit about it in Sam Landsberger's article from today in the Journo section.
Then what if a bid is made with the last pick of a round?
The simplest and most logical first step is to remove the 20% discount. But this is the AFL.
Also not harvesting more pics than you have list spots , that’s simple
Agree on the discount, but regarding you point on the last pick, who cares? If you've traded down, for example, to pick 17, expecting a bid at 10 but it comes at 18, so what? This is the key point, the system shouldn't be a guarantee you get it all your own way. You still have last right or refusal, which is the key.
What if you haven't traded at all? You took your pick at 15 or whatever; your boy's predicted to attract a bid in the 20s, then the premiers bid at 18. Tough titties? If they consider that possibility they won't do it. (So you can bet they'll have no idea until someone does it, unless someone at clubland points it out to them.)
The key part is LRoR, that is the benefit in market terms. There will be a few scenarios where a club may overpay a bit, and plenty where they underpay. Thats footy. Its essentially the same as the current trading situation, and what picks are possible or available. Clubs are pragmatic to a certain extent on that front. For example if a club wants to trade player X for a 'first rounder'. His value may be, say, pick 8. But the club he is getting traded-to has pick 6, or pick 10. The trade will get done, a few pundits or fans might criticise or praise, everyone moves on.
Rules must be introduced to stop the farce. At the moment its a compounding discount, a gift, a freebee.. New rules may, and should, mean clubs don't get every aspect of every deal in their favour, so what? That's how it should be.
The scenario you present, yes, tough titties. the club should make sure they have a late first and a second. But its really not that tough, thats the key point. Its about extent. I'd much rather the possibility of that than the current situation. Clubs will need to think long and hard about if they want a player, how much, and what they have to do to get them, which is how it should be.
Last edited:
Won't happen though.
They'll ditch the discount, and maybe they'll devalue later picks, with the added benefit of *smile* ing us over yet again.
You're probably right. Of course the AFL has to balance fixing something with potentially losing face because the thing they are fixing was their own stupid fault. Putting that aside, from a pure policy analysis perspective, if your goal is to enable northern clubs to secure their best academy boys.
If the discount is the only thing they alter, yes ditch it. But what should be done, or at least what I'd do:
You can match on any bid for your academy players
* 10% first player, then no discount
* must use a pick in the same round, this would effectively mean you can still game and trade down picks, but nowhere near the extent you can now.
* Tighten up the picks value, eg currently they have value down to 75, it should be 60 max.
If the AFL was to be fair, they should implement any changes in 2025, but announce them next year, before any trade / draft periods. That would ensure that clubs are making informed decisions next year when deciding whether to trade into or out of 2025. We traded into next year’s draft assuming the rules would be the same. The reasonable thing for the AFL to do would be to give clubs adequate lead time to adjust strategy. Now I know this NEVER happened under The Cheating Gil. Perhaps Dillon will be better (although the gifts handed to the kangaroos this year don’t bode well). Sheesh I just made myself mad. Sometimes I wonder why I don’t just walk away from the game.
What if they changed it to say "At least 1 pick used to match a bid must be a minimum 70% (for example, or within a certain number of points) of the value of the selection you are moving up to"? Or even just a pick within the next X number of selections.
That would mean a bid at the end of the first round could still be matched by an early 2nd round plus extra picks, but would eliminate using picks in the 30s for a top 10
Not to kill the buzz but for the record, I think Clarke has no history of drafting skinny flankers in the ND. Seven drafts for three(?) of them. Only Juddy will stay skinny and if he makes it he's a mid IMO. Let's have a look at Clarke's history with mids.
NB the club classed these players as at least part time mid at the time of drafting-
2017 Jack Higgins
2018 Riley Collier Dawkins, Jack Ross, Fraser Turner, Luke English
2019 Thomson Dow, Will Martyn, Noah Cumberland, Hugo Ralphsmith
2020 Nil
Note the frequency of selection of midfielder. None except Ross plays senior midfield as at this time and many are just delisted or otherwise punted. Note the lack of any football IQ in some of the players. The lack of athleticism in others. 2017-20 was Richmond's Great Potato Glut. Skinny flankers? No. Dumb/pudgy mids? That's been Clarke's default. And hopefully that's behind us.
2021 marked the big change. No dumb players. All but perhaps Sonsie good movers. And for all his weaknesses Sonsie profiles as a footballer. NB this year two "defender" labelled players in Brown and Banks were added. Both very smart.
2021 Tyler Sonsie, Judson Clarke
2022 Kaleb Smith, Steely Green
Steely reminds me of Luke English. Smith is an unknown at this stage. Smith shapes as a footballer and I have hopes for him.
If I had to clinically categorise the Clarke period until 2020 I would note with alarm the regular lack of BWA (getting a kick) at elite junior level. That means the Championships. And I'd say he massively underrated football IQ and athleticism, as if a prospect only needed to profile in one of those fields. And there was no going after the freak. I think Clarke got that wrong but we seem to have largely addressed the weakness in profiling in 2021-2.
2023 Kane McAuliffe
I've only seen a few games so far but I can say that even though McAuliffe tested at the very brisk 2.92/20m there are times when he looks quicker than that. A lot quicker. No doubt about his athleticism. Looks a freak to me. We'll soon see whether he can get the football and if so we'll observe his football IQ.
NB the club classed these players as at least part time mid at the time of drafting-
2017 Jack Higgins
2018 Riley Collier Dawkins, Jack Ross, Fraser Turner, Luke English
2019 Thomson Dow, Will Martyn, Noah Cumberland, Hugo Ralphsmith
2020 Nil
Note the frequency of selection of midfielder. None except Ross plays senior midfield as at this time and many are just delisted or otherwise punted. Note the lack of any football IQ in some of the players. The lack of athleticism in others. 2017-20 was Richmond's Great Potato Glut. Skinny flankers? No. Dumb/pudgy mids? That's been Clarke's default. And hopefully that's behind us.
2021 marked the big change. No dumb players. All but perhaps Sonsie good movers. And for all his weaknesses Sonsie profiles as a footballer. NB this year two "defender" labelled players in Brown and Banks were added. Both very smart.
2021 Tyler Sonsie, Judson Clarke
2022 Kaleb Smith, Steely Green
Steely reminds me of Luke English. Smith is an unknown at this stage. Smith shapes as a footballer and I have hopes for him.
If I had to clinically categorise the Clarke period until 2020 I would note with alarm the regular lack of BWA (getting a kick) at elite junior level. That means the Championships. And I'd say he massively underrated football IQ and athleticism, as if a prospect only needed to profile in one of those fields. And there was no going after the freak. I think Clarke got that wrong but we seem to have largely addressed the weakness in profiling in 2021-2.
2023 Kane McAuliffe
I've only seen a few games so far but I can say that even though McAuliffe tested at the very brisk 2.92/20m there are times when he looks quicker than that. A lot quicker. No doubt about his athleticism. Looks a freak to me. We'll soon see whether he can get the football and if so we'll observe his football IQ.
Last edited:
Good assessment.
FWIW, I think Clarke’s legacy (and future) hinge on the outcome of the 2021 draft. Up to that point, he didn’t have much in the way of draft picks to play with and it shows in the results. However, 5 picks inside the top 30 in the 2021 draft is a decent hand in anyone’s view and we need at least three of them to become very good players. On results to date, Clarke should be at the very least, a little nervous.
