RSS: Deal struck for Reserves

[Jeffers1984]

@@@@, @@@@, @@@@

I agree... @@@@, @@@@, @@@@.

[The Boot]

"A rising tide lifts all boats ... "

[R&WtilIDie]

Swans reserves in the VFL? err...not such a good idea. You want our reserves to travel to Melbourne every week? I sure as hell don't.

The situation isn't perfect, but at least they under swans coaches, playing swans footing, and in positions that the swans want them to play in. In a VFL club, not only would they not all be playing together, but they play in whatever position the VFL coach needs them to play in.

Yes, the standard could be better, but it's the best we can get out of the situation.

[TheMase]

Are you sure?

Sounds like 2 less rookies, but 2 more senior players, with total player numbers the same. Therefore, no change in the numbers playing in the reserves.

Pretty sure by listing two vets we lose two rookies, so a change to the squad size.

[Layby]

Big week for ROKL gets to watch the magoos for 3 years and does not have to work with obsessed simpletons

Good on you mate

[Ludwig]

Pretty sure by listing two vets we lose two rookies, so a change to the squad size.

But doesn't the senior side go from 38 to 40? Isn't that the purpose of listing the two as vets in the first place?

[ugg]

But doesn't the senior side go from 38 to 40? Isn't that the purpose of listing the two as vets in the first place?

Yes I think you are correct but only if you are talking about 'outside veterans'. If the rumours of salary cap pressures are true, I doubt we could afford 2 more senior players and we would rather go with 2 rookies considering the relative success of the rookies in the Roos era.

[ugg]

For all those bemoaning the fact that we're not playing in the VFL, I think its pretty clear that the logistics of such an operation is beyond us at this stage and Canberra seems to be the best 'available' option.

I understand quite a few clubs were pushing for the limit to be 12, so for the number to be raised to 13 and the bench extended to 6, I think the Swans have done pretty well. Personally, I don't think it will make too much difference. Perhaps the scores will be a few goals closer, but the gap between the sides is too big. However, I hope I'm proved wrong both for the competition's and our (it can't hurt to lose a few, there can be things to be learnt from a loss) sakes.

Edit: The Canberra Times view of it: http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/new...s/1074417.html
Interesting change with the top-ups as well, and the assistance to the woeful Wildcats.

[melbloods78]

shame would have great to see our kids playing in my backyard !

[ItsAllGoodes]

So the top-up players now have to come from the Canberra Clubs (not from the NSW/ACT Rams) - probably wont be any of their Top 22, so I assume we will try to take the best of the youngsters at those clubs so we can have a good look at them for possible future drafting etc.

Plus we pay the ACT clubs to use those players, whilst handing out a few of our players - the ones we dont give a game to - to play for the other clubs
Dont mind paying them money...this is just helping to support the ACT competiion financially

We only play 13 of our players at one time, but 18 can play in total...5 Swans on the bench at any one time. Means alot less game time for our players, but since many are young should assist in minimising injuries

I see this as a mix of good and bad - i'd rather be able to use RAMs players for top-ups as they are more likely to be draft prospects

At least every available Swans Reserves player should get a game each week (albeit in some cases playing with another club) - this year...at least until injuries set in late in the year, 2-4 players would not get a game in each week and what with team byes, season byes etc, there were some players who went several weeks without a game

The number of byes still worries me - they need to find an 8th team - but obviously it needs to be a team of good quality

I still think that this is not the best thing for the development of our players but its probably a reasonable longer term option for the development of the game in the region and for our standing in the ACT - our home away from home

I'd rather we had decided to play in the VFL as a standalone team - part selfish as I could watch them play, but the main reason was that the likes of Moore, Laidlaw, etc need to be playing in the best competition they could be to ready them for AFL

[ScottH]

At least they'll be playing, somewhere.

[liz]

Interesting change with the top-ups as well,

I think that change is a bit of a shame. Surely the Swans' extensive use of U18 players from both Sydney and the Canberra area has done as much to contribute to the longer term development of AFL in the state as using reserve grade AFLACT players would do? Most of the top ups that played with them this year are 17 and 18 and aren't going to be good enough for an AFL career so are likely to graduate in due course into the ACTAFL or SFL. By playing regular games as an under age player with the Swans, surely that is going to improve their football, which will then filter through into the senior leagues.

Or do the AFL clubs want the Swans to use their juniors? In which case the player pool would be quite similar, expect that it would cut out players like Monk, who was a regular this season but I think comes from the Central Coast, but would leave available someone like Breust, who is almost certainly associated with a Canberra club already.

[Damien]

Perhaps they could start playing the SFL rep team or even other NSW regional rep teams or something in their bye weeks?

I think a bit of creativity is required. I don't know how many leagues we have in the state, but you could almost come up with a concept of the swans playing different regional league rep teams weekly, culminating in a NSW Championship final.

I was really scared that if we stayed in the ACT league we would end up with an SANFL/WAFL situation, where our players were distributed between teams, so I am happy they get to stay together but I get the feeling that the playing in a NSW/ACT league was an AFL directive. They seem pretty intent on limiting to the state leagues to their own state (with the exceptions of Tas/NT joining perhaps).

[ugg]

Or do the AFL clubs want the Swans to use their juniors?

Although this was not stated in the article, from reading some of the posts on the AFL Canberra thread on Bigfooty this seems to be the arrangement.

[cos789]

Ridiculous.

IMO they would be better off fielding two teams in the comp if the locals want the club to be limited in it's domination of the comp. They are going to be limited to only about half a team when it is named anyway, so why not do it properly so that all the ressies players get a game every week.

That was my idea .They'relimiting the Swans numbers so the easiest
solution is to field two teams .
This expands the current competition .
Doubles the number of top line teams in Sydney
provides for a Sydney derby .

.