Changes for Round 3 V GWS.

[tasswan]

If we were 0-2, then would have no choice but to rush players back.
With how well the team is playing, i would prefer no change. At the moment I think it is more important to play the kids and get games into them than bring in a 30+ yr old in Benny.
No doubt McGlynn will be very important during the season.

Question: Once Rohan comes back and Papley is back onto the rookie list can he (Papley) be upgraded again for another LTI player?

[aguy]

Question: Once Rohan comes back and Papley is back onto the rookie list can he (Papley) be upgraded again for another LTI player?

Short answer is yes. It's been set by precedent that if you have two or more players on the LTI list then the AFL will basic let you interchange which players are returned to the rookie list returned to the rookie list when the senior players are playing again. In other words you don't need to return the rookie who was originally upgraded for that senior player, you could return one of the other rookies you've upgraded instead

[Reggi]

I presume the best option is to always replace the highestbpaid player on the lti list

[Primmy]

The kiddies will need a rotating rest, so I'd expect player management to step up shortly. If Macca is back in, then it would need to be Jones, which is a shame, and if Benny is back in I'd think Robbo for a week, then perhaps rotating the other kids.

Thats my expert and inept opinion, and I'm sticking to it...For now

[Meg]

I presume the best option is to always replace the highestbpaid player on the lti list

Makes no difference. The salaries of players on LTI are still included in the salary cap. The salaries of the rookie/s upgraded to replace the LTI are not included for the period for which they are replacing the LTI.

So salary-wise it doesn't matter which player on LTI list a rookie is deemed to be replacing.

[jetts32]

In: Papely no. 2

Admin, is there any chance I can change my username from Jetts to Paps?

[Mug Punter]

Makes no difference. The salaries of players on LTI are still included in the salary cap. The salaries of the rookie/s upgraded to replace the LTI are not included for the period for which they are replacing the LTI.

So salary-wise it doesn't matter which player on LTI list a rookie is deemed to be replacing.

So what was Healy crapping on about us just having enough money for Papley for? Because he was definitely talking about the upgrade and not the initial rookie listing. If Papley's upgrade due to Rohan being on the LTI has no impact then why did he mention it? Also, when Rohan comes back does that mean we lose Papley for the rest of the year or would we use him to take Alex's spot on the list. I'd hate for us not to be able to play him all season, so I'm confused.....

[bungwahl]

So what was Healy crapping on about us just having enough money for Papley for? Because he was definitely talking about the upgrade and not the initial rookie listing. If Papley's upgrade due to Rohan being on the LTI has no impact then why did he mention it? Also, when Rohan comes back does that mean we lose Papley for the rest of the year or would we use him to take Alex's spot on the list. I'd hate for us not to be able to play him all season, so I'm confused.....

I thought I read somewhere that we had a few spare senior spots on the list anyway, so he wouldn't necessarily need to be returned to the rookie list. Perhaps Healy was talking about the situation where Rohan returned and Papley remained. Although, would Healy actually know anything about the Swans finances?

[Meg]

I thought I read somewhere that we had a few spare senior spots on the list anyway, so he wouldn't necessarily need to be returned to the rookie list. Perhaps Healy was talking about the situation where Rohan returned and Papley remained. Although, would Healy actually know anything about the Swans finances?

To me what Healy is reported to have said doesn't make sense. I suspect he doesn't understand the salary cap rules in regard to rookies.

Yes we have two 'spare' senior spots in the sense that formally we have a senior list of the minimum of 38 and the allowed maximum is 40. However I suspect we don't have salary cap space to increase our senior list. That said we have only upgraded Papley to date and we already have two on the LTI - Rohan and Johnson. Papley was upgraded nominally to replace Rohan but I don't think there is anything in the rules that would prevent the club switching him to replace Johnson, should they wish to do so when Rohan comes back.

I suspect the club has just been playing it cautiously to see how Papley coped in the seniors. And we've got a pretty good idea of that now!

[Mug Punter]

To me what Healy is reported to have said doesn't make sense. I suspect he doesn't understand the salary cap rules in regard to rookies.

Yes we have two 'spare' senior spots in the sense that formally we have a senior list of the minimum of 38 and the allowed maximum is 40. However I suspect we don't have salary cap space to increase our senior list. That said we have only upgraded Papley to date and we already have two on the LTI - Rohan and Johnson. Papley was upgraded nominally to replace Rohan but I don't think there is anything in the rules that would prevent the club switching him to replace Johnson, should they wish to do so when Rohan comes back.

I suspect the club has just been playing it cautiously to see how Papley coped in the seniors. And we've got a pretty good idea of that now!

Thanks for clarifying that.

That makes sense, at the very least he'd be back on the rookie list when Gary returns and then can be upgraded for Alex's spot which he sadly won't be taking this year, if ever.....

You'd never wish a bad injury on anyone but it would be good if Harry could get some taste of senior footy this year form permitting. I'm going to head to Henson for the twos at midday on Sunday before the bug game which I'm really looking forward to.

[Ludwig]

To me what Healy is reported to have said doesn't make sense. I suspect he doesn't understand the salary cap rules in regard to rookies.

Yes we have two 'spare' senior spots in the sense that formally we have a senior list of the minimum of 38 and the allowed maximum is 40. However I suspect we don't have salary cap space to increase our senior list. That said we have only upgraded Papley to date and we already have two on the LTI - Rohan and Johnson. Papley was upgraded nominally to replace Rohan but I don't think there is anything in the rules that would prevent the club switching him to replace Johnson, should they wish to do so when Rohan comes back.

I suspect the club has just been playing it cautiously to see how Papley coped in the seniors. And we've got a pretty good idea of that now!

Thanks Meg for keeping us informed on the labyrinthine AFL rule book as well as the status of our LTIL.

For some reason I thought rookie salaries only counted 50% toward the cap. I'm not sure where I got that idea from. I think we probably didn't have enough cap space to take Papley in the ND, so we had to hope he was still available at our 1st rookie pick. It's still confusing why Healy made the comment that the decision to take Papley was made the night before the rookie draft.

[Mug Punter]

Thanks Meg for keeping us informed on the labyrinthine AFL rule book as well as the status of our LTIL.

For some reason I thought rookie salaries only counted 50% toward the cap. I'm not sure where I got that idea from. I think we probably didn't have enough cap space to take Papley in the ND, so we had to hope he was still available at our 1st rookie pick. It's still confusing why Healy made the comment that the decision to take Papley was made the night before the rookie draft.

Whatever the situation I'm so glad that they whipped the hat around and got him on our list because I just love the way the little fella goes about his footy, he has great bloodlines and he is just that bolter we needed to give the side that X Factor. Normally I'd be worried about a first year player like him fading badly but I'm not sure we'll see that with tom. For start he is a bit older and has a wiser head on his shoulders and secondly he is big enough and physical enough to handle himself as an AFL footballer given his senior country footy background. I've loved the arrival of Mills and Hewett but Tom is my story of the season so far

[Meg]

For some reason I thought rookie salaries only counted 50% toward the cap. I'm not sure where I got that idea from.

I have read that (50% rule) as well but it's not what current collective agreement says. Perhaps it used to be the rule. I haven't searched further.

[dimelb]

Thanks for clarifying that.

That makes sense, at the very least he'd be back on the rookie list when Gary returns and then can be upgraded for Alex's spot which he sadly won't be taking this year, if ever.....

You'd never wish a bad injury on anyone but it would be good if Harry could get some taste of senior footy this year form permitting. I'm going to head to Henson for the twos at midday on Sunday before the bug game which I'm really looking forward to.

MP, just to make sure, the big game is on Saturday.

[CureTheSane]

In: Papely no. 2

Admin, is there any chance I can change my username from Jetts to Paps?

haha, not as bad as all the Hawks supporters yelling "Come here buddy" to their dogs
At least yours is electronic...