Deletion of Jake Brimmer (2nd nomination)

Comment: as this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Sargent|similar AFD showed failing  is irrelevant if the subject passes . As Fenix Down demonstrated above this individual has garnered significant coverage and thus passes  in my opinion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFOOTY||WP:GNG||WP:GNG)

Comment: It was clear in the previous AFD, that he fails ; the argument to keep in the last AFD is that he passed . And he still does. In the past AFD I raised two sources that were unchallenged http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2753267/Liverpool-youngster-Jake-Brimmer-scores-two-brilliant-free-kicks-Australia-U-16s.html one and http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/article/liverpools-aussie-scores-for-joeys-in-pre-world-cup-clash/raady0jt4ro31ubhr8o58edo5 two. Add in the ones above, and the keep argument is stronger than ever. And what's with the SALT from
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFOOTBALL||WP:GNG)

Comment: He hasn't lost notability since last AFD, rather gained it. There's more than just outine information available, with significant information and independent sources available to warrant his article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Redirect (WP:R)

Comment: My comment from the previous AfD still stands: fails , but there is plenty out there to satisfy GNG. Sure there is a lot returned by google about a couple of free kicks he scored, but there are also these amongst others
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFOOTY)