AFL Players Qualification for SANFL Finals

[Jim05]

I asked the same a few weeks back when Rodan was dropped from Port but didnt play for Norwood. At the time a Norwood official told me that counts as a game but several people have also told me otherwise so not sure

[The Sleeping Giant]

Would only hurt Glenelg's chances of winning a final IMO. Play a kid.

[Grahaml]

Been trying to find rules regarding player qualification and so far come up with stuff all. A little irritating the SANFL see fit to keep these rules hidden, or at least so difficult to find.

Closest thing I can find is a small comment in the SA community footy rules, which reads as follows

" ‘Qualification For A Game Played’ means a player is in attendance at the venue, is
dressed in appropriate playing attire by half time and is entered on the team sheet. If the
player does not meet these requirements, the players name must be removed from the team
sheet and may not be replaced, and the player is deemed to not have played in the game;"

If this is indeed the interpretation used then Cornes missing a game altogether doesn't count as a game.

[Jim05]

Glenelg could enforce the "Cochrane Rule"

[Grahaml]

Glenelg could enforce the "Cochrane Rule"

I think the rules changed after that, and I'm not entirely sure what the technicality was there. But it's a shame that even after the confusion around Cochrane playing SANFL finals as to what the rules were that the SANFL haven't gone down the transparency path and published the relevant law for all to see.

[Jim05]

Glenelg could enforce the "Cochrane Rule"

I think the rules changed after that, and I'm not entirely sure what the technicality was there. But it's a shame that even after the confusion around Cochrane playing SANFL finals as to what the rules were that the SANFL haven't gone down the transparency path and published the relevant law for all to see.

Agreed its not too hard to publish the rules

[CUTTERMAN]

Is this the Bays just getting desperate or the Two Headed Port Monster waving the rules to rule the waves again?

[Dirko]

The sooner the SANFL stops all AFL players from playing finals the better.

Too many loop holes and rules in place.

[Jim05]

The sooner the SANFL stops all AFL players from playing finals the better.

Too many loop holes and rules in place.

Thats hardly fair. So you play SANFL all year and get 1 AFL game and you cant play finals!!
The minute we do that the AFL sides would be forced to field reserves sides and that is something we dont want

[atlantahawks]

[quote]The sooner the SANFL stops all AFL players from playing finals the better.

Too many loop holes and rules in place.

[/quote]

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. What if you're an AFL listed player, have played all 20 games in the SANFL, win the B&F, then have to sit idly during finals. Stupid.

[heater31]

The sooner the SANFL stops all AFL players from playing finals the better.

Too many loop holes and rules in place.

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. What if you're an AFL listed player, have played all 20 games in the SANFL, win the B&F, then have to sit idly during finals. Stupid.

Has an AFL listed player ever won a club Best and Fairest???


its a fine line, Sturt wanted Brent Rielly for finals a couple of years ago but he elected not to play because he had only played the bare minimum to qualify and they were his only games for Sturt in the previous few seasons.

Glenelg also had some AFL listed players some years ago wanted them for finals, players wanted to play but their AFL club said no.

[Grahaml]

The sooner the SANFL stops all AFL players from playing finals the better.

Too many loop holes and rules in place.

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. What if you're an AFL listed player, have played all 20 games in the SANFL, win the B&F, then have to sit idly during finals. Stupid.

Has an AFL listed player ever won a club Best and Fairest???


its a fine line, Sturt wanted Brent Rielly for finals a couple of years ago but he elected not to play because he had only played the bare minimum to qualify and they were his only games for Sturt in the previous few seasons.

Glenelg also had some AFL listed players some years ago wanted them for finals, players wanted to play but their AFL club said no.

Brett Ebert?

[mickey]

The AFL teams should all have a reserves team, made up of squad players and under 18s. Be played before AFL games and ran by the AFL. Leaving the sanfl and its clubs to not worry about relying on players loaned from clubs in another comp.

[Jim05]

The AFL teams should all have a reserves team, made up of squad players and under 18s. Be played before AFL games and ran by the AFL. Leaving the sanfl and its clubs to not worry about relying on players loaned from clubs in another comp.

Strongly disagree.
Where would they get their top ups from?
Would seriously rape the SANFL clubs.

[Grahaml]

The AFL teams should all have a reserves team, made up of squad players and under 18s. Be played before AFL games and ran by the AFL. Leaving the sanfl and its clubs to not worry about relying on players loaned from clubs in another comp.

Several issues with that. First off under 18s joining AFL reserves teams would be a disaster. AFL clubs aren't, and never should be, in charge of junior development unless they are going to get first rights to those kids. Second, look at Fremantle this week. They would have 3 blokes from their list playing reserves and would need to find 18 blokes from somewhere that are happy to be pushed around to suit the AFL listed players. You'd end up with a handful of blokes who were fringe AFL, a few more who are league standard then more than half the side would be reserves of amatuer league standard because the better state league standard guys won't want to join a club with no chance of playing finals or be moved around at the whim of the AFL coach. It would leave 2 clubs locked at the bottom of the ladder with no hope of ever being competetive. Great for the AFL clubs, terrible for the SANFL comp.

[bulldogproud2]

My personal solution would be that if a player has played more AFL games than SANFL games during the season he should be ineligible for SANFL finals. May sound simplistic but I think it could work.
Cheers

[Grahaml]

My personal solution would be that if a player has played more AFL games than SANFL games during the season he should be ineligible for SANFL finals. May sound simplistic but I think it could work.
Cheers

This idea, while not a new one, seems to be an option the SANFL never really acknowledges. In the interests of fairness I think this would be the ideal rule (with a minimum qualification still) but perhaps the wishes of the AFL sides to give some of their fringe players SANFL finals matches for improvement (someone like Jack Gunston for instance could benefit greatly from a couple of good finals) or whether the mere fact the SANFL will have some more high profile names is a boost to the finals themselves is a big enough incentive to ignore it is hard to say.

But a ban on any AFL listed player playing SANFL finals is folly. We'd have a situation where a guy like Matt Westhoff wouldn't be able to play despite only playing SANFL league and reserves matches. A club product, who has not got a whiff of AFL but has played all but a month of the season should be able to play finals, no question.

[JK]

Im hearing Kane Cornes has been listed by the Power as NOT being released for SANFL finals .. Others to fall into the same category I believe are Brodie Smith, Jack Gunston and Daniel Tahlia.

[Dutchy]

Gunston will not be released from the Crows to Centrals

[Big Phil]

Gunston will not be released from the Crows to Centrals

Correct, will have surgery at season's end on a hand / thumb injury from memory. Central were made aware of this about 3 or 4 weeks ago.