Yes Master, Thank You Master

The AFL never stops adjusting the system. Just when clubs think they understand the landscape, the rules shift again. The latest proposed changes to father son and NGA access are a perfect example, and once again, it is clubs like the Port Adelaide Football Club that look set to wear it.

The changes centre around tightening access and reducing the value of matching bids through the draft points system. It is being framed as fairness. In reality, it risks closing off one of the few pathways available to access elite young talent outside of finishing at the bottom of the ladder.

And that is where the tone of the whole situation starts to feel familiar. The rules change, the club responds, and the posture is the same. Yes master. Thank you master. We will adjust.

Clubs like Brisbane, Gold Coast and Sydney have already built lists that have benefited enormously from academy and father son concessions. Geelong has also leveraged the system over time. Those advantages do not disappear overnight. They remain embedded in those lists, giving them a head start that compounds year after year.

Now the rules are changing.

So Port finds itself competing against clubs that have already benefited from these mechanisms, while being denied the same opportunity just as its own pipeline begins to emerge. Over the next three years, there are multiple high end prospects tied to the club, including Dougie Cochrane, who is widely expected to be a top three selection.

That is not theoretical. That is real talent, arriving just when Port’s list needs it and at exactly the moment access is being tightened.

On the surface, it is not just Port. Carlton and Essendon are also set to be impacted, which weakens the argument if viewed in isolation. But context matters. Port is the club with multiple top 20 prospects in the immediate pipeline, and that makes the timing of this change far more significant.

And timing is everything in the AFL.

This is not just about what the rules are. It is about when they change, and who they affect. Too often, it feels like clubs outside the expansion states, outside of Victoria, and without a significant member voice on the board are the ones caught in that window. The clubs that had access have already used it. The clubs that are about to use it suddenly find the door closing.

That sense of always being on the wrong side of the timing only reinforces a broader frustration among Port supporters. Whether it is draft rules, free agency compensation, fixturing or tribunal outcomes, there is a growing perception that the club consistently gets the rough end of the stick. Fair or not, perception matters. And right now, that perception is strong.

It is compounded by the fact that clubs have had no real opportunity to prepare for these changes. If the rules had been clearly signposted earlier, clubs could have adjusted their strategy. They could have banked picks. They could have targeted the 2026 and 2027 drafts by trading future selections and building capital in anticipation.

But that has not been possible. The rules are being changed without the lead time required to plan for them, leaving clubs exposed. It is not just a list management challenge. It is a structural disadvantage.

Layer on top of that the likely shift in free agency compensation, where picks may start from around pick 8, just as Zak Butters shapes as a potential departure, and the squeeze tightens further. Lose elite talent, receive diluted compensation, and face reduced access to elite youth coming in. Yes master. Thank you master.

Which brings the conversation back to something that has been raised repeatedly on this platform. Governance.

The Black and White Noise has previously examined the Port Adelaide constitution and the issue of member control. The reality is stark. The Australian Football League appoints seven of the nine board members at Port Adelaide. It also holds the power to veto all nine, including those elected by members.

That creates an unavoidable conflict when the club is negotiating directly with the AFL on issues like these.

Because who is really sitting at the table?

No matter how capable or committed the individuals involved may be, the structure itself limits independence. It raises a simple but uncomfortable question. Can Port Adelaide truly advocate for its own interests when the organisation it is negotiating with effectively controls its board?

And that question becomes even sharper when you consider the position of David Koch himself.

Koch has made no secret of his ambition to one day sit on the AFL Commission. It is an understandable goal for someone so deeply embedded in the game, but it also complicates the picture. When the president of the club is aspiring to join the very body that sets the rules, oversees the competition and ultimately holds power over the club, impartiality becomes harder to maintain.

Even the perception of that conflict matters.

Because in moments like this, when the club needs to push back, to advocate strongly, to challenge decisions that disadvantage its future, the question lingers. Is the club negotiating as hard as it could be, or is it mindful of relationships, of pathways, of future opportunities?

It is not about questioning intent. It is about recognising the structural tension that exists.

And for supporters, it feeds into the same underlying feeling. That the club is too often in a position where it cannot, or does not, fully push back.

Yes master. Thank you master.

Port supporters want to believe the club is fighting for every advantage. They want to believe it has a strong, independent voice. But when rule changes like this land, and the club appears to be on the wrong side of both timing and impact, it becomes harder to hold that belief.

This is why member control matters. Not as a slogan, but as a safeguard. Because without it, every negotiation carries doubt.

The AFL will continue to change the rules. That is part of the competition. But for Port Adelaide, the issue is not just the rules themselves. It is the pattern, the timing, and the position the club finds itself in every time those changes arrive.

Competing against clubs who have already benefited, while being denied the same opportunity when it is your turn, is not just frustrating.

It starts to feel like something else entirely.

Yes master. Thank you master.