Geelong coach Chris Scott strongly questions father-son rule and voices views on northern academies, equalisation

Geelong coach Chris Scott has questioned the father-son rule and voiced his opinion on northern academies and equalisation in a lengthy press conference.

Geelong coach Chris Scott has strongly challenged the father-son rule, labelling it as “bizarre” and a “relic of the past” which he says goes against the AFL’s ambition to create an equalised competition.

Scott made a tongue-in-cheek comment on AFL360 this week to have “no father-sons” when discussing what should change in the game following Greg Swann’s appointment as the league’s football boss.

Asked why he wants to see the father-son rule scrapped, Scott clarified his position in a lengthy explanation as he questioned several highly-rated father-sons in recent years, the price clubs pay for those players, and the unfair advantages father-sons have compared to other potential draftees.

However, Scott said it was “fair enough” for clubs like Carlton, who have 2026 top prospect Cody Walker tied to them as a father-son, to lobby for the rule to remain.

He stressed that it was not the club’s view and that he had “not put a hell of a lot of thought into it”, but said it is “strange” that the top-two sides have the Daicos and Ashcroft brothers – who are family friends with Scott through their father, premiership teammate Marcus.

Nick Daicos celebrates a goal for the Pies. Picture: Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images

“I’m not sure what my position is, except to say that I am very aware of how bizarre the rule is and in a highly equalised competition, is it right that teams one, two on top of the ladder have four players in their team – three of them absolute locks as number one picks, the other one probably a top five or 10 pick?” Scott questioned.

“So just on the surface of it, that seems strange, so that would be my observation.

“And then secondly, is it right that you can have two guys that up playing for the same junior team, playing for the same pathway, and one has the right to choose whether he goes to Geelong or whether he goes into the draft.

“It’s not as if the father sons have to play for their team, because of their birthright, they have this opportunity to choose their path where the other guy goes into the draft and who knows where he could go. Does that seem right?

“That seems strange to me especially in an AFL competition where you’ve got some clubs who have been in it for 150 years and you’ve got other clubs who have been in it for 15. It seems strange and then you add on the price that teams need to pay for these players.

“Now, it’s incongruous that you get a discount because you’ve got a father son. If nothing else, you should have to pay a premium for these guys.

“The way (the AFL) do think about it, which is clearly we just want a close competition, this rule seems strange. And I think it’s a relic of the past where it was a nice romantic idea in the ’70s when it wasn’t equalised.”

Will Ashcroft. Picture: Chris Hyde/AFL Photos/Getty Images)

Levi Ashcroft was a No.1 pick contender last year. Picture: Russell Freeman/AFL Photos via Getty Images

The Cats secured a trio of club greats cheaply through the previous father-son rule in Tom Hawkins (taken with pick 41 in the 2006 draft), Gary Ablett Jnr (pick 40, 2001) and Matthew Scarlett (pick 35, 1997), but Scott said that should have no bearing on what happens in the future.

He claimed the AFL’s intent to equalise the competition was having the opposite effect.

“When was Tom Hawkins a father-son? Was Nick Daicos even born? Like how far do we want to go back? Do we want to talk about whether it was fair that Polly Farmer played for the Cats as well?” Scott said.

“I mean, at some point things need to evolve and change, and as things have evolved within the AFL competition, we’ve got pioneering teams in the northern states, we’ve got this fascination with trying to equalise the competition.

“And when you do that, all you see is the inequity, because everyone’s different. GWS’s situation is so different to Richmond’s. So to try to make this a really socialised environment where everything is evened up, you’re just never going to get there.

“There was a competitive balance piece of work that was done, and it appeared to me it just became a matter of complaining about what you didn’t have compared to the next guy.

“(Clubs) should lobby on their own behalf. And I would imagine Carlton, are red-hot on keeping the father-son rule the same, because they’ve got a gun coming through. Fair enough, I don’t argue against that.

“The Ashcroft boys are friends of mine, they are guns, I love them and their family. But because of their birthright, they had the opportunity to play for Brisbane or the Gold Coast or go into the draft.

“That’s something that not many young star players have the opportunity to do. Now, I don’t begrudge them at all, certainly not the Brisbane Lions, they’re doing as much as they can to maximise their position.”

Scott said that the northern academies serve a purpose in helping attract and develop talent, but reiterated that clubs should pay a fair price for those prospects.

“I don’t think any reasonable person in the AFL thinks promoting the game and helping as much as possible to get talented athletes playing footy in the northern states is a bad thing,” Scott said.

“Everyone I think in principle agrees that that’s a good idea. But we also understand the vested interests that some of those clubs have in getting first rights to those talented athletes. It seems to me that it all comes down to the price that clubs have to pay.

“Like, if it’s fundamental to the history of the game that the father son rule is maintained, then it is incumbent on the AFL to make sure that the price paid for generational players is appropriate. And that was true with Tom Hawkins as it is true with Will Ashcroft.”

Originally published as Geelong coach Chris Scott strongly questions father-son rule and voices views on northern academies, equalisation