AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

[lorakf]

AFL trade 2014: AFL bans Sydney Swans from trading players in

Sydney has been told it cannot trade any players into the club this year or next unless the club is prepared to bring about an instant end to the cost of living allowance.

[GordonS]

AFL trade 2014: AFL bans Sydney Swans from trading players in

Sydney has been told it cannot trade any players into the club this year or next unless the club is prepared to bring about an instant end to the cost of living allowance.

just saw this myself. looks like the eddieFL has won again. what an absolute joke and what a disgraceful decision

[Untamed Snark]

AFL trade 2014: AFL bans Sydney Swans from trading players in

Sydney has been told it cannot trade any players into the club this year or next unless the club is prepared to bring about an instant end to the cost of living allowance.

Unbelievable

[Mug Punter]

just saw this myself. looks like the eddieFL has won again. what an absolute joke and what a disgraceful decision

They are the ultimate Boys' Club aren't they...

Ironically I am more than happy with us growing our list organically over the next couple of seasons but as a matter of principle this is a disgrace

[Ludwig]

Well it seems that not only are players' agreements no longer worth the paper they are written, but also agreements made with the AFL. It's an absolute disgrace.

From a practical standpoint, it probably won't make much difference anyway. I doubt if we have enough money in the salary cap to woo any quality players for the next couple of years anyway. There didn't seem to be anything in the works at all this year, so effectively it is just a restriction for 2015 trading season. We can still sign delisted free agents.

The environment and strategy really doesn't change much for the Swans. We just need to work through the end of COLA period, keep the players we want and maintain the kind of club and culture that players want to stay at. The Academy and the draft will provide enough fresh talent to satisfy our need for the next 2 years.

[Meg]

I don't understand this:

"The AFL's position is that it is helping Sydney manage its contractual obligations this year and next by phasing COLA out over a period of two years.

It says allowing the club to bring senior players in on the same conditions would destroy the purpose of the 'phasing out' process."

I thought that any new player or new contract from 2015 would not have COLA assistance anyway - and that made sense while phasing out COLA on existing contracts. But if so, then why on earth should the Swans be banned from trading in players just the same as any other club?

Presumably my understanding was wrong, but if so then that is the change that should be made to the COLA phasing not a ban on the Swans being able to trade.

More Eddy-driven AFL vindictiveness. Outrageous in my view. Wonder if there are any legal implications that the Swans could consider?


Read more: AFL trade 2014: AFL bans Sydney Swans from trading players in

[Matt80]

Franklin was a much bigger deal than we thought.

The Swans get penalised while the Premiers can ad two quality players. The AFL obviously feel the Hawks have been violated over Franklin.

Screw the AFL. I think the Swans should hire James Hird as assistant coach to spite the AFL.

[Meg]

And another thing - clearly GWS is being allowed to trade from announcements already made. So what's the position on their COLA? Originally it was said it was going on same timetable as ours but then a later statement was ambiguous on this topic, and seemed to imply they were keeping it. If they are keeping (what justification if Swans are losing it?) and being allowed to trade with COLA support + an expanded salary cap! then it is clear which Sydney team the AFL want to be successful.

[barry]

What an absolute disgrace.

This comp is a pathetic VFL with a capital V. How can we possibly be banned from trading players if we have the money. Malceski would free up $400K easily. Throw out a few duds and we could easily free up $600K which is enough to get someone decent and even if it really is $550K (COLA adjusted).

We had to play the grand final away despite finishing top. What more victorian bias do we need ?

[Reggi]

This is a friggen outrage. Really not sure I can follow the sport any more

Punished for following the rules

[Mel_C]

This is bull@@@@. I am so pissed off!!! ????. How can the AFL be allowed to do this? This can't be legal.

The AFL still haven't got over that we picked up Buddy instead of him going to their new baby.

We have to fight this.

[stellation]

AFL trade 2014: AFL bans Sydney Swans from trading players in

Sydney has been told it cannot trade any players into the club this year or next unless the club is prepared to bring about an instant end to the cost of living allowance.

This probably deserves its own thread! Absolutely puzzling by the AFL, I genuinely do not understand how the logic can be justified as anything other than "stop annoying the other clubs".

[Ludwig]

I don't understand this:

"The AFL's position is that it is helping Sydney manage its contractual obligations this year and next by phasing COLA out over a period of two years.

It says allowing the club to bring senior players in on the same conditions would destroy the purpose of the 'phasing out' process."

I thought that any new player or new contract from 2015 would not have COLA assistance anyway - and that made sense while phasing out COLA on existing contracts. But if so, then why on earth should the Swans be banned from trading in players just the same as any other club?

Presumably my understanding was wrong, but if so then that is the change that should be made to the COLA phasing not a ban on the Swans being able to trade.

More Eddy-driven AFL vindictiveness. Outrageous in my view. Wonder if there are any legal implications that the Swans could consider?


Read more: AFL trade 2014: AFL bans Sydney Swans from trading players in

I can certainly understand if there were no new contracts to be made that included the existing Cola arrangements, but would be covered instead by the 2017 arrangement. Like you, I believe this would be a sensible phase out policy.

It is also my understanding that player contracts are actually made between the player and the AFL, not the club, so it is the AFL that is breaking its contract with the player. (I suppose the player goes to a particular club in a kind of franchise arrangement.) There may be provisions that permit the AFL to do this and there would be way for us to know this unless the matter went to the courts.

[Meg]

Story now on AFL website as well.

Now both Goodes and Shaw playing on makes perfect sense (as the club knew last month this outrage was coming). We would have been up .... creek if they had retired I think.

AFL tells Swans: Trade players in and COLA will be scrapped ASAP - AFL.com.au

[ernie koala]

And of course, under the picture of Buddy it reads..."The Sydney Swans lured Buddy Franklin to the club on a lucrative long term deal"...

The facts are Buddy via his manager came to the Swans not once, but twice...The first time we knocked him back!

This whole saga, and the way it has been portrayed in the media, is wrong, false and utterly ridiculous...

The AFL set up COLA, not the Swans.