Do you support Player Loaning in the AFL?

[Sojourner]

Going on from the other Poll, do you support player loaning in the AFL?

There are various takes on how it works in the EPL, essentially it can go two ways, a side like Chelsea with surplus good players loans them for a fee to other sides and makes money out of it, more often than not the sides are in the Championship Division. Alternatively sides can loan players to better sides to make money if they should so wish. Players can be loaned from or to other competitions.

Hence in theory a player at Geelong that cant get a game could be loaned to Richmond and so on - for a fee so that it makes money for the club doing the lending. In theory that same player could be loaned to an SANFL club again for a fee.

Clearly the issue is the injury risk, yet it also seems a pretty popular practice in the EPL where salary's paid to players make the AFL look like a miniscule pissant competition, will it ever happen here?

[JK]

Many of the clubs wouldn't benefit from the minimal income it would produce for them, in the same way Soccer clubs can.

I think the culture is too different also - Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals .. The clubs also wouldnt want some of their methods, processes and intel being shared elsewhere.

I don't think it would work and I can't see it ever happening (although predicting the amount and type of changes likely to occur in the next 50 years is near impossible)

[the big bang]

Many of the clubs wouldn't benefit from the minimal income it would produce for them, in the same way Soccer clubs can.

I think the culture is too different also - Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals .. The clubs also would want some of their methods, processes and intel being shared elsewhere.

I don't think it would work and I can't see it ever happening (although predicting the amount and type of changes likely to occur in the next 50 years is near impossible)

i can see where you're coming from with the line "Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals", but i couldn't give two hoots if Collingwood loaned Cam Wood to Port Adelaide. he's not exactly a star player, and if collingwood happened to play port while he was on loan, i guess the powers that be at collingwood would be confident that our selected ruckmen would get the job done against Wood*, hence why he couldn't get a regular game with the pies.

[JK]

Many of the clubs wouldn't benefit from the minimal income it would produce for them, in the same way Soccer clubs can.

I think the culture is too different also - Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals .. The clubs also would want some of their methods, processes and intel being shared elsewhere.

I don't think it would work and I can't see it ever happening (although predicting the amount and type of changes likely to occur in the next 50 years is near impossible)

i can see where you're coming from with the line "Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals", but i couldn't give two hoots if Collingwood loaned Cam Wood to Port Adelaide. he's not exactly a star player, and if collingwood happened to play port while he was on loan, i guess the powers that be at collingwood would be confident that our selected ruckmen would get the job done against Wood*, hence why he couldn't get a regular game with the pies.

Thats a pretty fair example actually mate .. Although Wood was selected as recently as last round by the Pies, so the club obviously felt he is/was a required player.

As for Wood playing aginst the club that owns him, Im pretty sure it were based on the EPL model, that Wood would be ineligible to play against the the club who owns the rights to him.

It's not to say of course that it couldn't be tweaked, but I think that other changes (increased keep, increased list size, additional draft or trading period) would probably be looked at and/or implemented first.

[Trader]

Many of the clubs wouldn't benefit from the minimal income it would produce for them, in the same way Soccer clubs can.

I think the culture is too different also - Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals .. The clubs also would want some of their methods, processes and intel being shared elsewhere.

I don't think it would work and I can't see it ever happening (although predicting the amount and type of changes likely to occur in the next 50 years is near impossible)

i can see where you're coming from with the line "Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals", but i couldn't give two hoots if Collingwood loaned Cam Wood to Port Adelaide. he's not exactly a star player, and if collingwood happened to play port while he was on loan, i guess the powers that be at collingwood would be confident that our selected ruckmen would get the job done against Wood*, hence why he couldn't get a regular game with the pies.

Or, going into Rd 22, Geelong and pies are equal on wins, with the Cats a better percentage. Pies play some easy beats, cats have a semi-tough one against say the hawks. Pies could easily lend the hawks some guns, strengthening the hawks, not so much to help the hawks, but to encourage the cats to lose, pies then finish top as even the half side they put on the park can win easy.

[CoverKing]

Many of the clubs wouldn't benefit from the minimal income it would produce for them, in the same way Soccer clubs can.

I think the culture is too different also - Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals .. The clubs also would want some of their methods, processes and intel being shared elsewhere.

I don't think it would work and I can't see it ever happening (although predicting the amount and type of changes likely to occur in the next 50 years is near impossible)

i can see where you're coming from with the line "Clubs would only entertain a loanee if he improved their team and none of the other clubs I wouldnt think, would be looking to help improve their rivals", but i couldn't give two hoots if Collingwood loaned Cam Wood to Port Adelaide. he's not exactly a star player, and if collingwood happened to play port while he was on loan, i guess the powers that be at collingwood would be confident that our selected ruckmen would get the job done against Wood*, hence why he couldn't get a regular game with the pies.

Or, going into Rd 22, Geelong and pies are equal on wins, with the Cats a better percentage. Pies play some easy beats, cats have a semi-tough one against say the hawks. Pies could easily lend the hawks some guns, strengthening the hawks, not so much to help the hawks, but to encourage the cats to lose, pies then finish top as even the half side they put on the park can win easy.

yeah and the hawks would play those pies players at the expense of getting a game into a young gun or farewelling a long servant?

[X Runna]

Going on from the other Poll, do you support player loaning in the AFL?

There are various takes on how it works in the EPL, essentially it can go two ways, a side like Chelsea with surplus good players loans them for a fee to other sides and makes money out of it, more often than not the sides are in the Championship Division. Alternatively sides can loan players to better sides to make money if they should so wish. Players can be loaned from or to other competitions.

Hence in theory a player at Geelong that cant get a game could be loaned to Richmond and so on - for a fee so that it makes money for the club doing the lending. In theory that same player could be loaned to an SANFL club again for a fee.

Clearly the issue is the injury risk, yet it also seems a pretty popular practice in the EPL where salary's paid to players make the AFL look like a miniscule pissant competition, will it ever happen here?

I think the idea has a lot of merit, the 2 stipulations being the borrower has to pay the same wages to the player that the lender club does, and there would have to be a cut off period, ie no new loaning of players after say round 15.

[FootyWiz81]

Clubs sit down all week for every round and even in preseason and go over there structure why
Would they let some blow Jo from another club come in and take them back to there club and also it would take them weeks even months to understand the structure and everything, never will happen, the only way it could work is loaning players for seasons not months, but the afl better not go there because then it turns into money money money not skills and best teams playing all there best players etc

Do you really think a player who has played say 8 seasons at a club then get loaned out to power or Melbourne or something, doubt it!

[gadj1976]

Do I support it, no.

Things to consider;

Player welfare - having to move states potentially
Medical assessments - would need to be taken into account before any 'loan' was made (also consider ongoing medical treatment and liability)
Game plan - Collingwood recently said they'd been practising the press for 2 years, so how is a 'new' player going to fit into the press/game plan and have an impact immediately?
IP - intellectual property of the club he's going to and coming from

And lastly, why would we want to model ourselves on a competition that's clearly THE most lopsided in the world?

[mighty_tiger_79]

i think if you have player loaning you only have a small window of opportunity for that to happen so the games integrity isnt compromised

so i would have it open during pre-season up until the pre-season comp starts and then open it up again at the split round

[LMA]

Do I support it, no.

Things to consider;

Player welfare - having to move states potentially
Medical assessments - would need to be taken into account before any 'loan' was made (also consider ongoing medical treatment and liability)
Game plan - Collingwood recently said they'd been practising the press for 2 years, so how is a 'new' player going to fit into the press/game plan and have an impact immediately?
IP - intellectual property of the club he's going to and coming from

And lastly, why would we want to model ourselves on a competition that's clearly THE most lopsided in the world?

In saying lopsided I assume you are not talking about fixtures because we the AFL have that one covered

[westozfalcon]

I support the idea. One frustrating thing about football is that if a club cops an injury to a key player you can't source a fill-in player from outside your club if your stocks are thin. For example when Brisbane lost Jonathan Brown for 8 weeks it would've been handy for them to be able to loan in a temporary big forward not needed by his club to step in.

As in English football, the loan player should be ineligible to take the field against his own side.

A couple of obstacles spring to mind though:

- Effect on the salary cap of the club that takes a player on loan (normally the club that loans a player in has to pay all or at least a portion of the players wages)

- The effect on SANFL, WAFL, VFL host clubs who may lose access to an AFL listed player