Changes for Round 14 Vs Port at Adelaide

[MattW]

Dane Rampe listed as187cm. Invariably players on opposition who are taller than him. So unless they give Gould a go, how are they going to know if he can match it with someone bigger than him.

They've given a lot of youngsters a go. There must be a performance related reason that Gould isn't playing.

[Markwebbos]

They've given a lot of youngsters a go. There must be a performance related reason that Gould isn't playing.

It almost feels like they are teaching him a lesson.

I have the (baseless, entirely speculative) feeling that Manchild might have walked into the club having played SANFL against men, and read all the media saying he was ready for a round one start.

And that all of this is in some way a reaction to that. Almost like the club is determined to prove to him he has to earn his spot. More than they might with another player or in another position.

But that makes me hope that once he debuts he’s going to become a permanent fixture.

Weirdly I’m reminded of Mitchell who was racking up insane numbers in the NEAFL and still not getting a game. He was clearly good enough, BUT the club had a point to prove.

[707]

That didn't end well!

[Markwebbos]

I’m crossing my fingers that Manchild appreciates being held back, and is better for it.

I’m hoping he’s the next Rampe

[KSAS]

It seems to me that since Papleys staging incident he now has a target on his back - the commentators keep mentioning it and the umpires are being harsh on him. Have others seen this or is it my imagination?

+1 I was thinking the same and couldn't believe Grimes/Vlaustin getting off their staging fines which looked far worse! In hindsight, we should've also appealed but this belongs in another thread.

[Mark26]

+1 I was thinking the same and couldn't believe Grimes/Vlaustin getting off their staging fines which looked far worse! In hindsight, we should've also appealed but this belongs in another thread.

Apologies, but what follows certainly belongs in another thread! It seems that be the Swans' mantra at the moment: don't upset or challenge the AFL administration in any way. We don't challenge umpiring decisions, fines, suspensions. We even went so far to call the police and inform admin about the ET breach in WA. Makes me think that we might ask for some leniency in another area??? Ie Bud's contract being in the cap should he retire early.

[Thunder Shaker]

Which ones on the list of ten do you think might be related to ‘poor fitness regime and recovery’?

Not these:
* E.Taylor is serving a suspension.
* Maibaum is out for the rest of the season due to bereavement.
* Heeney's ankle got splattered during a game.
* Rampe broke his hand during a game. Playing with the injury and re-injuring it can be categorised as "poor ... recovery" though not the original injury.

I suspect a few of the other "season" injuries isn't anything to do with recovery, more a conservative approach to injury management because we're not making finals this year. There isn't much point trying to get players up for one or two games that have no bearing on whether we make the finals. We don't know yet when the 2021 season is scheduled to start, and getting the injured players healed instead of risking them would allow us to get a head start on next year's preseason.

[The Runner]

Apologies, but what follows certainly belongs in another thread! It seems that be the Swans' mantra at the moment: don't upset or challenge the AFL administration in any way. We don't challenge umpiring decisions, fines, suspensions. We even went so far to call the police and inform admin about the ET breach in WA. Makes me think that we might ask for some leniency in another area??? Ie Bud's contract being in the cap should he retire early.

This is a terrible post

[TheBloods]

Apologies, but what follows certainly belongs in another thread! It seems that be the Swans' mantra at the moment: don't upset or challenge the AFL administration in any way. We don't challenge umpiring decisions, fines, suspensions. We even went so far to call the police and inform admin about the ET breach in WA. Makes me think that we might ask for some leniency in another area??? Ie Bud's contract being in the cap should he retire early.

What a gigantic leap.

[Mark26]

What a gigantic leap.

Maybe so. I hope so. I love our club and Bud. I'll be a member all my days. Franklin is a true champion of the game and I love watching him play.

But we couldn't even get him on the park this year. Maybe he's cooked. All the noise from inside the club is that he'll play again. So again, I hope I'm wrong on his playing future.

But, if Bud is done and we have huge dollars left to pay him, we don't have the luxury of settling for an amicable lesser agreed to amount like the Dogs did with Boyd. It would be strange in my opinion if the Swans didn't try and change the conditions of his contract and loosen the AFL's holding us accountable to it.

That led me to think about the unfair conditions we've had to face in recent times. Why did we receive that trade ban? The loss of COLA? Why are we the only club who the AFL will make honour a contract like Bud's, when others can change terms? And damn it, why can't Horse have a coffee with Gil?

If you're going to try something outlandish, (like getting a set in stone contract changed), I think it's human nature to try and butter up who you want a favour off.

All of that added up to my previous post. If I created offense, I didn't mean to. I wouldn't take anything I take too seriously at the moment. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, just tired.

I'm also not trying to convince anyone on here; just attempting to explain how I arrived at that gigantic leap.

[707]

Is this the Changes for Port Adelaide thread? Think I've stumbled into the wrong thread ...

[stevoswan]

Maybe so. I hope so. I love our club and Bud. I'll be a member all my days. Franklin is a true champion of the game and I love watching him play.

But we couldn't even get him on the park this year. Maybe he's cooked. All the noise from inside the club is that he'll play again. So again, I hope I'm wrong on his playing future.

But, if Bud is done and we have huge dollars left to pay him, we don't have the luxury of settling for an amicable lesser agreed to amount like the Dogs did with Boyd. It would be strange in my opinion if the Swans didn't try and change the conditions of his contract and loosen the AFL's holding us accountable to it.

That led me to think about the unfair conditions we've had to face in recent times. Why did we receive that trade ban? The loss of COLA? Why are we the only club who the AFL will make honour a contract like Bud's, when others can change terms? And damn it, why can't Horse have a coffee with Gil?

If you're going to try something outlandish, (like getting a set in stone contract changed), I think it's human nature to try and butter up who you want a favour off.

All of that added up to my previous post. If I created offense, I didn't mean to. I wouldn't take anything I take too seriously at the moment. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, just tired.

I'm also not trying to convince anyone on here; just attempting to explain how I arrived at that gigantic leap.

Fair call.

I too sometimes wonder why the Swans don't send more 'please explains' to league headquarters. Maybe they do in private but I suspect that the Swans fear Vic fan and journo or even coach backlash if they complain publically.....thereby having their complaint backfire. We've seen what's happened with Papley's 'staging' since Clarkson had a sook.

[Old Yella]

What about bringing in McLean? We were small down back last week and he's played there before. He gives it a crack.....

[Aaron]

We need one more tall defender: Brand or Aliir. Brand played in the recent scratch match bout only for limited time while the injury list states that he is "1 week".
We need one more ruck/forward: McLean or Amartey. Like to see Amartey debut and add the extra excitement.
Out? Let the Match Committee decide -possibly Foot and who knows.

[The Runner]

This belongs in another thread. But honouring Buddy's contract is essential to maintaining the integrity of Free Agency. Otherwise all clubs could offer crazy back ended deals that are never going to be satisfied.