RWO Game Day Thread - Finals Weeks 1-3 - 27th-28th August

[Norris Lurker]

Haven't heard anything today; but a few of them weren't looking good yesterday.

[Norris Lurker]

This week's (belated and hurriedly written) RWO Wrap of the weekend action is now online.

[Footy Barista]

Given those players are not on the Swans list where are they supposed to play when not selected by the Swans.

when it comes to finals they shouldn't play at all, how is this any different to a premier division player dropping to divison 1 or 2 having only played a handful of games in that comp, the rule should not be around moving forward

- - - Updated - - -

We beat you guys the other week with a fair few out. But I dont think UTS have ever beaten us. At least not that I can remember.

I clearly don't play for north shore

[mrns]

when it comes to finals they shouldn't play at all, how is this any different to a premier division player dropping to divison 1 or 2 having only played a handful of games in that comp, the rule should not be around moving forward

Theres a reason these players are called "top up" players for the swans reserves, the difference between them are the blokes they line up with is that they are not on a contract to play for the swans reserves every week. They are playing under the top up system to chase a chance of being rookie listed.

The contracted players by the swans are registered to the Sydney Swans, if you've ever looked at clearances on Sydney AFL you see a name like Jack Hiscox or Callum Mills has been cleared by Sydney AFL from their club Sydney Uni or North Shore to the Swans as their club. The top up players on the other hand are effectively on loan by the club they play for. When their services are not required for a weekend as they are regularly rotated they are entitled to represent their club that has supported these players for years.

[Footy Barista]

Theres a reason these players are called "top up" players for the swans reserves, the difference between them are the blokes they line up with is that they are not on a contract to play for the swans reserves every week. They are playing under the top up system to chase a chance of being rookie listed.

The contracted players by the swans are registered to the Sydney Swans, if you've ever looked at clearances on Sydney AFL you see a name like Jack Hiscox or Callum Mills has been cleared by Sydney AFL from their club Sydney Uni or North Shore to the Swans as their club. The top up players on the other hand are effectively on loan by the club they play for. When their services are not required for a weekend as they are regularly rotated they are entitled to represent their club that has supported these players for years.

I understand the concept of "top up" players and when they are not picked they play for their local club, however I don't buy they are on loan from their local clubs when they are play 10 plus game in one competition and a handful in another, it is clearly a disadvantage to those other clubs like uts who have no "top up" players, those games should not count for Sydney afl game.

Callum Mills I believe played 1 game total for North shore so I wont buy that one, my argument is how can Wilson (16 games neafl and 1 syd afl game) Hebron (16 games and 2 syd afl games) let alone the others qualify for finals, this will trickle down to the lower grades giving a ridiculous advantage, you cant do it in any other grade. Im sure other clubs wont budge with it moving forward and that system will be albolished

[saviour01]

I clearly don't play for north shore

My bad, thought I was replying to Norris.

Agree someone who has played 16 neafl and 1 syd afl shouldn't be able to play. At a minimum should be 6 sydney afl games.

[Norris Lurker]

If games playing as top-ups or rep teams weren't counted, do you think there could potentially be issues with clubs being reluctant to let their players be top-ups for the Swans/Giants or playing for the Rams etc?
I don't know the answer to that question, but the rule as it currently stands presumably exists for a reason.

[justabaraker]

If a club sacrifices their player as a toppie, and battles through part of the season without him, then I don't think it's unreasonable for him to come back and play come finals time.

[Benchwarmer]

My bad, thought I was replying to Norris.

Agree someone who has played 16 neafl and 1 syd afl shouldn't be able to play. At a minimum should be 6 sydney afl games.

A large majority of all Leagues show the following in their bylaws.

"Any player who has played in a total of 50% or more of home and away matches of a higher grade or grades shall not be eligible to play final matches in a lower grade unless the higher and lower grades are played on the same day ( as defined by the League)."

It seems to me to be very simple and very fair.

In the case of the top up players on a bye , there is already a by law covering this situation.

[mrns]

I understand the concept of "top up" players and when they are not picked they play for their local club, however I don't buy they are on loan from their local clubs when they are play 10 plus game in one competition and a handful in another, it is clearly a disadvantage to those other clubs like uts who have no "top up" players, those games should not count for Sydney afl game.

Callum Mills I believe played 1 game total for North shore so I wont buy that one, my argument is how can Wilson (16 games neafl and 1 syd afl game) Hebron (16 games and 2 syd afl games) let alone the others qualify for finals, this will trickle down to the lower grades giving a ridiculous advantage, you cant do it in any other grade. Im sure other clubs wont budge with it moving forward and that system will be albolished

Why would we punish clubs that have the ability to attract higher quality players, there are other clubs with these types of players i.e. st george, and though teams like UTS may not have any NEAFL listed players, if every team in the premier division competition had NEAFL listed players/top up players readily available we would not be having this discussion, its as simple as that, have top ups players want to play at your club.

[unconfuseme]

These kids are virtually all u/18's or younger.

If we do not want to encourage them to improve and strive for the next level, simply ban them from playing footy - which is what is being suggested here.

All they want to do is play footy at every opportunity, but let's introduce a rule to stop them.

When it's time for them to come back to Sydney club football - which happens to 99% of them - don't expect them to show any loyalty or support for this comp.

[Pmcc2911]

Why would we punish clubs that have the ability to attract higher quality players, there are other clubs with these types of players i.e. st george, and though teams like UTS may not have any NEAFL listed players, if every team in the premier division competition had NEAFL listed players/top up players readily available we would not be having this discussion, its as simple as that, have top ups players want to play at your club.

Just a point, the players mentioned earlier are all local juniors who have come up via the U/19's

[mrns]

Just a point, the players mentioned earlier are all local juniors who have come up via the U/19's

exactly, they chose they clubs at the end of the day, bad luck if they didn't want to play for UTS, up to your volunteers and players to create an environment were juniors wanna play.

[Footy Barista]

Why would we punish clubs that have the ability to attract higher quality players, there are other clubs with these types of players i.e. st george, and though teams like UTS may not have any NEAFL listed players, if every team in the premier division competition had NEAFL listed players/top up players readily available we would not be having this discussion, its as simple as that, have top ups players want to play at your club.

Wilson is Maroubra junior, but plays for North shore? there is no punishment involved, I just believe that 16 neafl games is over qualification......im only talking about finals there should be a qualifaction policy just like every other grade....

- - - Updated - - -

These kids are virtually all u/18's or younger.

If we do not want to encourage them to improve and strive for the next level, simply ban them from playing footy - which is what is being suggested here.

All they want to do is play footy at every opportunity, but let's introduce a rule to stop them.

When it's time for them to come back to Sydney club football - which happens to 99% of them - don't expect them to show any loyalty or support for this comp.

I don't expect them to show any loyalty....more than 50 percent either move on to other comps or play neafl...seems I have hit a nerve with those affected

[Leaguey]

Wilson is Maroubra junior, but plays for North shore? there is no punishment involved, I just believe that 16 neafl games is over qualification......im only talking about finals there should be a qualifaction policy just like every other grade....



- - - Updated - - -



I don't expect them to show any loyalty....more than 50 percent either move on to other comps or play neafl...seems I have hit a nerve with those affected

Wilson is interesting,my league mates say his background is Rugby League & went to Holy Cross College a Ryde (a renown league nursery) but chose the AFL pathway.May explain his senior club in North Shore but not sure about the Maroubra connection.Swans note,apparently he has a younger brother who is an up & coming League player at Holy Cross College.