12/10 rule - will it apply for all of 2006?

Understand why the rule is there but the VFL must be the only competition existing, that clubs MAY NOT be able to select their best side week in week out. Watching a lot of Coburg this year, hit home that certain players were getting selected not on form but they had to make up the required numbers of VFL players - I must say some of the Richmond boys struggled as well. On a different subject - the Coach didnt help the performance. It will be even harder for Coburg next year with Richmond maybe going another 2 rookies on list. They had only 40 players on its list this year including rookies - that may jump to 42 or 43 players next year - and with the 12/10 rule this could mean up to 10 Richmond listed players playing VFL seconds footy - really makes selection hard

It all depends how you look at it. Is this the VFL competition where some AFL players are playing, or is it an AFL sconds competition with some top up players. The VFL is VFL players first, with saome add ins of AFL players as they are available. As for Coburg, I really don't understand your point as there was no quota, as you imply, of VFL players for them during the year, so it had no impact. It was about list for Coburg, not 12/10. The actual sitiuation is actually the complete opposite to your suggestion at most clubs, where AFL listed players get a game ahead of deserving VFL players due to the need to satisfy their AFL master.

i was under the impression that the 12/10 was in place this year - that was the way Coburg picked their side anyway. I can only talk of Coburg - but if Richmond were not around then Coburg would be ???? I love going to Coburg games at the City oval but not many people join me. Coburg reserves had some shocking defeats this year - some over 100 points which I watched and then with amazment you see maybe 2-3 players in that team get promoted the following week to cover injuries or the like at Richmond. It is a hard situation - and you will not please everyone. It probabaly depends of what supporters are going to games the most - Coburg supporters or Richmiond supporters - they both want to only see their own which is fair enough

I believe the issue was going to be looked at after the end of last season, with a view to going 12/10 full-time. It seems to work during the finals, but the AFL clubs would be fuming if this was in place during the home and away season. Standalone clubs would support the idea, but how many of the aligned clubs would really think its in their best interests? I think Sandringham would be one club that supported the idea, but I reckon clubs like Coburg, Box Hill and the Bullants wouldn't be too keen on it. I don't think its necessarily a case of clubs being in bed with their AFL partner, but because they are now structured to rely heavily on their AFL talent. If it went to a vote from the VFL clubs, I don't think a 12/10 minimum would get voted through. Thoughts?

Such a difficult issue this. Whilst I understand the thinking behind 12/10 , the same problems can exist ( in reverse) as with open selection. 12/10 is designed to ensure that VFL listed players of sufficient ability get selected ahead of younger , developing or even out of form AFL listed guys But what happens when the reverse exists .... clubs being forced to play lesser talented VFL players just because they may have smaller injury lists ? In other words , the reward for good management/good luck on the injury front is that you have to play AFL listed guys in the ressies. Personally , I think Box Hill has a reasonable record on this front , albeit influenced by Hawthorn's conservative injury management system. We've never had a problem with playing AFL guys in the ressies , regardless of who was coaching. I'm for simply picking sides on form. If clubs continue to follow the Bullants example from this season , they'll pay the price come finals time.

I've found this issue to be one which is open to opinion and maybe a detailed letter or e-mail to Mr Stillman might lead to something being done about it. Personally, I don't think it should be tinkered with and should only apply when aligned sides play against stand alone sides so the game is not a no contest which has happened in recent years. The rule should stay in place for finals as well.

From the 2005 Football Victoria Annual report: Written by Chairman Bob Tregear.

Quote:...A major challenge for the VFL competition and its clubs is the high number of AFL-listed players who must be accommodated each week. With 10 AFL clubs in Victoria, more than half of each aligned VFL clubs’ senior players each week are provided by their AFL partners. At club level, this presents a challenge in maintaining a sense of clear identity and control by volunteer administrators. From a game development perspective, there is significantly less opportunity for non AFL-listed Victorian players to compete in the VFL competition than for South Australian or West Australian players in the SANFL and WAFL competitions. Proportionately, Victorian players have only 40 per cent of the opportunities available to their South Australian and West Australian counterparts. Clearly, further structural changes to the VFL competition will be necessary to address these concerns. Any solution will need to account for the capital and recurrent resourcing of VFL clubs, as well as the needs of AFL clubs. The Football Victoria Board will work closely in coming months with VFL clubs and the AFL to determine the preferred future direction...