Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
St Kilda: Inner southern Melbourne (Sandringham Dragons), Frankston LGA
AFL football operations boss Mark Evans said the academies would “enable AFL clubs to be actively involved in introducing kids of all backgrounds to the game and provide aspirational pathways for coaches, umpires and administrators”.
Evans said the final talent concession details were likely to take a similar path to the academy bidding system used for northern clubs, where they can draft academy-based players using a 20 per cent discount.
“It is important we provide clubs with an incentive to develop a presence in these communities, and help attract talented indigenous and multicultural players who would not otherwise play AFL, or are under-represented,” Evans said.
“The allocation of regions has been based on a range of factors — aligning to existing Under-18 talent regions, minimising player travel and access issues, aligning AFL clubs to current or historical relationships with certain communities and balanced access to 5-18 year-olds from diverse backgrounds.
Last edited by saintbrat on Wed 03 Feb 2016 8:59pm, edited 1 time in total.
We got jammed. Very disappointing.
Know its only indigenous and multi-cultural kids to begin with but when you listen to Mark Evans it is clear the intent is for clubs to be developing talent across the community.
It's only on these kids that the 20% discount can be applied initially but my guess is this will change over time and it will be very difficult for us to expand our zone.
rigged to provide higher drawing clubs more talent? Why isn't there more NT areas or WA area?
I mean
“The allocation of regions has been based on a range of factors — , minimising player travel and access issues" if their coming from NT what factor is their between dingley and seaford?
Just another way for clubs like the hawks and Collingwood can spend money the saints, bulldogs ect can't match and increase the gap
Interesting...it's certainly nice to have first crack at players in your area, especially given they've likely had direct contact with the club as they've developed, but I agree with plugger that I'm not sure it will have a massive effect on us overall. Would still love to see us traditionally affiliated with Ballarat again, boy did we get some great players from that region.
Interested to see clubs I've never really traditionally related with indigenous development getting primary access to indigenous recruiting zones...you'd expect clubs like Melbourne and Essendon have well established networks up there and this would have been at the forethought of establishing club recruiting zones in the NT. Hawthorn and Collingwood look especially out of place IMO.
ausfatcat wrote:
“The allocation of regions has been based on a range of factors — , minimising player travel and access issues" if their coming from NT what factor is their between dingley and seaford?
Just another way for clubs like the hawks and Collingwood can spend money the saints, bulldogs ect can't match and increase the gap
The locals in Dingley Village, who basically want a 5km development exclusion zone around the suburb (surprisingly, the Dingley Village Residents Association has a lot of pull, don't ask why) , are most unimpressed with your comments
USELESS FACT: The WADA case against Essendon (in Sydney as well) is exactly 10 years to the day that Australia qualified for the 2006 FIFA World Cup.
I'm trying to get my head around this. So its indigenous and multi-cultural children such as Asian's and Africans. Do we have many of them in our catchments? Whats the definition of "multi-cultural" as stacks of kids will have different heritage? Kind of seems weird to have to say "Hey whats your race? 60% Caucasian, oh sorry see ya later good luck with everything" I guess you will have to submit it to the Kremlin for approval for each kid you want in your "Academy".
It strikes me that the clubs that have access to the where the Indigenous players are such as NT will have a big advantage out of this program as the good ones would have gone into the AFL program anyway. Or are they only the ones in really out of the way places or can't speak English? Seems very messy to me and I can see a lot of manipulation opportunities to get s*** hot kids in your academy program as "multi-cultural" or "Indigenous". And why don't we have New Zealand? That's ours now. We own them. We could be stacking our team in the future with monster Maori's doing the in and under work.
And it won't come close to the way Sydney has replenished their midfield for the next decade by getting a player with pick 3 this year and even better before that eg. Heeney. Where is the research to support the fairness of these zones? It seems typical AFL off the cuff bulls*** to me and a way to let the Northern clubs keep their decidedly unfair advantage with what is basically old fashioned recruiting zones for them as well as the rest of the country through the draft.
This is the biggest beat up of all time. This is for young kids, both boys and girls up to about 15 years of age. It doesn't include about 95% of the footy population and each club has been given a mammoth 35K to help them with the zones. I cant see it really achieving much at all. It doesn't hurt to do this but I doubt it will have much bearing on any side for many years. Hardly worth worrying about.
This is just a trial ballon. The first test of the academy system here in Victoria.
They have the ability to see what works, what doesn't work and then adjust it accordingly.
But be under no illusions, the end game is zoned academies across Vic which in the long term will include all kids.
That's why you want to start where you want to end coz once clubs are servicing a particular zone and when funds are deployed to those geographical areas it is going to be near on impossible to re-zone to another club.
Have to keep your eye on the long term strategy here and on that score we just got shafted. Bigger catchment = bigger chance of securing top end talent.
We may not see the effect for a few years but mark my words, we have just seen the openning salvo in a broader long term strategy.
I like the idea of zoning in theory. But in practice it is bound to be unfair. For whatever varying reasons, some zones are going to produce many more good players than others.
The decent kids in Alice will be looking at moving to Ketherine and Darwin pronto.
Melbourne have support in just one community - and that's diminishing fast.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
Originally the zones were brought in as a temp trial but the clubs with the strong zones would not give them up so they stayed with little adjustment.
St Kilda had far and away the worse zone and thats why they started going interstate.
If clubs start gaining talented players from these zones and other clubs because of their zone areas do not we will find it hard to get some of the cream
stjay wrote:This is just a trial ballon. The first test of the academy system here in Victoria.
They have the ability to see what works, what doesn't work and then adjust it accordingly.
But be under no illusions, the end game is zoned academies across Vic which in the long term will include all kids.
That's why you want to start where you want to end coz once clubs are servicing a particular zone and when funds are deployed to those geographical areas it is going to be near on impossible to re-zone to another club.
Have to keep your eye on the long term strategy here and on that score we just got shafted. Bigger catchment = bigger chance of securing top end talent.
We may not see the effect for a few years but mark my words, we have just seen the openning salvo in a broader long term strategy.
It wont lead to fully blown zones, mark my words. I'm still worried about Hawthorn getting our zone with their new headquarters in Dingley. They did get Dingley I take it?
Zero credibility on this issue. Surprise, surprise, the Hawks have pushed up hard against our zone and have virtually taken 25% of Victoria and a large part of metro Melb not to mention a large part of NT.
As it happens their development has seemingly pushed MFC into part of the zone that we could have rightly thought was ours.
Perhaps console your damaged little ego elsewhere. Not interested in your blatherings. Some of us can see past what we are going to have for lunch.
stjay wrote:Zero credibility on this issue. Surprise, surprise, the Hawks have pushed up hard against our zone and have virtually taken 25% of Victoria and a large part of metro Melb not to mention a large part of NT.
As it happens their development has seemingly pushed MFC into part of the zone that we could have rightly thought was ours.
Perhaps console your damaged little ego elsewhere. Not interested in your blatherings. Some of us can see past what we are going to have for lunch.
Us? Cant comment by yourself. I stand by what I said. These zones mean nothing and will lead to nothing. Gangham style dancing. And trying to link where Hawthorn may train to Melbourne getting our zone is a huge guess. Do Port Adelaide have a zone? I don't think so.
The AFL gave the clubs 35K for this. How would we go if we got an interstate zone? We couldn't do anything with it because we don't have the money. We get the closest zone to our club so if we do fluke one player in the next 5 years we have a very good zone to manage. This zone stuff might actually get more girls than boys. Its going to struggle to get many if any AFL footballers in the next 5 years.
i agree in some respects with Plugger - certainly in regards to the Victorian divy, but that all indigenous talent in the NT has been divided between just five teams is blatantly unfair - still scratching my head how geelong, hawthorn, and of course collingwood and were chosen and the doggies ignored despite playing home games in Darwin for a few years. Essendon and Melbourne have some link, but neither more so than the Dogs. And Melbourne has support in just one small community.
Guaranteed from ten to twenty players in AFL lists every year will come from this pool currently - with extra support this number will grow. And the greatest opportunity to grab this talent is given to a select five clubs? Here is a list from 2013 - some gone, replaced by others, which gives you an idea of NT involvement. How this is fair completely eludes me.
Shaun Burgoyne (209 games) PA/HAW
Jared Brennan (162) BL/GC
Aaron Davey (161) MELB
Matthew Stokes (135) GEEL
Richard Tambling (119) RI/AD
Cyril Rioli (109) HAW
Tom Logan (104) BL/PA
Alwyn Davey (90) ESS
Steven Motlop (31) GEEL
Curtly Hampton (20) GWS
Steven May (13) GC
Liam Patrick (11) GC
Shaun Edwards (10) GWS
Jed Anderson (3) HAW
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
desertsaint wrote:i agree in some respects with Plugger - certainly in regards to the Victorian divy, but that all indigenous talent in the NT has been divided between just five teams is blatantly unfair - still scratching my head how geelong, hawthorn, and of course collingwood and were chosen and the doggies ignored despite playing home games in Darwin for a few years. Essendon and Melbourne have some link, but neither more so than the Dogs. And Melbourne has support in just one small community.
Guaranteed from ten to twenty players in AFL lists every year will come from this pool currently - with extra support this number will grow. And the greatest opportunity to grab this talent is given to a select five clubs? Here is a list from 2013 - some gone, replaced by others, which gives you an idea of NT involvement. How this is fair completely eludes me.
Shaun Burgoyne (209 games) PA/HAW
Jared Brennan (162) BL/GC
Aaron Davey (161) MELB
Matthew Stokes (135) GEEL
Richard Tambling (119) RI/AD
Cyril Rioli (109) HAW
Tom Logan (104) BL/PA
Alwyn Davey (90) ESS
Steven Motlop (31) GEEL
Curtly Hampton (20) GWS
Steven May (13) GC
Liam Patrick (11) GC
Shaun Edwards (10) GWS
Jed Anderson (3) HAW
This is for 11 to 15 year old boys and girls though. If someone is good enough to be drafted from your area and you haven't helped in develop earlier then you cant get them. I doubt the clubs will spend much money on this. Even the richer clubs wont see the benefits for years and do they really want to spend up big on girls. As harsh as it sounds the womens league is going to take many years bfore they give clubs close to any profits. I see clubs maybe getting one or two players every 5 or 10 years out of this. I could be right or wrong but by the time they get one we could all have Alzheimer's.
desertsaint wrote:i agree in some respects with Plugger - certainly in regards to the Victorian divy, but that all indigenous talent in the NT has been divided between just five teams is blatantly unfair - still scratching my head how geelong, hawthorn, and of course collingwood and were chosen and the doggies ignored despite playing home games in Darwin for a few years. Essendon and Melbourne have some link, but neither more so than the Dogs. And Melbourne has support in just one small community.
Guaranteed from ten to twenty players in AFL lists every year will come from this pool currently - with extra support this number will grow. And the greatest opportunity to grab this talent is given to a select five clubs? Here is a list from 2013 - some gone, replaced by others, which gives you an idea of NT involvement. How this is fair completely eludes me.
Shaun Burgoyne (209 games) PA/HAW
Jared Brennan (162) BL/GC
Aaron Davey (161) MELB
Matthew Stokes (135) GEEL
Richard Tambling (119) RI/AD
Cyril Rioli (109) HAW
Tom Logan (104) BL/PA
Alwyn Davey (90) ESS
Steven Motlop (31) GEEL
Curtly Hampton (20) GWS
Steven May (13) GC
Liam Patrick (11) GC
Shaun Edwards (10) GWS
Jed Anderson (3) HAW
I could be wrong on this but imagine they (and us) can't just put any Indigenous kid in their academy. Only those who live in the middle of nowhere or don't speak much English or are extremely poor ie those outside the AFL normal reach and have cultural/tribal issues that makes it difficult for them to transition into the professional world of AFL. The AFL would make a call on whether they can be included but I still think its rife for clubs to cleverly wangle it to get a talented young kid on their books. And we know clubs will always push the rules to get any advantage they can. No coincidence its the richer clubs who will be able to put resources into scouting and running programs in NT. They would only agree to it if there was a real payoff.
Our advantage I guess is that we can try and find Asian and African kids with sporting talent in our catchment which the AFL is hot for. We won't have the funds the other richer clubs will have though to find that diamond hidden in the rough and polish them. And it won't come anywhere near the advantages the Northern clubs have with their zones. Just read they are describing Mills that Sydney got with their "academy pick 3 as a "freak". The reason so many of these academy kids are going so high in the draft is that the clubs can identify and fast track their development from a much younger age knowing they will get them in the draft. Imagine how further down the track McCartin and Billings would be if we were able to work with them for two years before we drafted them? It's just an insane advantage.
