AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

[Ludwig]

I thought Terry Wallace took over the Bulldogs when they were nearly extinct and drove them to two Preliminary finals.

They weren't performing well when he got the job, but they had a lot of talent, which is easier to see in retrospect, and they had 3 good years under Wallace. He took over a list, he didn't put it together. But if you are a good list manager, you should be able to keep the club from sliding down the ladder. His record at Footscray and Richmond shows that he is not much of a strategic thinker.

[ScottH]

- - - Updated - - -



Hey "moderator". Why do you allow political comments like this yet disallow non-left wing comments?

??

There are not rules against political comments.
As far as I can see Ludwigs comments were about Journos, not politcal comments.

[S.S. Bleeder]

??

There are not rules against political comments.
As far as I can see Ludwigs comments were about Journos, not politcal comments.

Well in that case explain to me why my comments have been deleted before? I refer you to my re-posted comments today at 12:39 AM. There are many more too when I have criticized people for using this forum to push their beliefs onto others. I'll tell you why. Because my comments conflicts with the political beliefs of a handful of regular contributors to RWO who have far left opinions. ALA the tail waging the dog; sounds just like Eddie doesn't it?

[S.S. Bleeder]

What happens if the AFL have said to the Swans:

" Accept this deal and we won't touch the Academy and Father / Son bidding process in the future. You can have Mills and Dunkley for your first two picks next year. We needed to silence the AFL community on the perceived advantages the Swans have "

If they leave the academy bidding process in place, I would take the deal.

What does Red and White think?

It's hard to imagine that happening. That's how businesses and corporations were run 20-30 years ago; having under the table agreements with other parties, scratching each others backs, etc in breach of the AFL Code of Conduct, etc. Despite being extremely incompetent, I wouldn't even expect that from the VFL would be capable of such conspiracies. The story would come out in the end and that's too big a risk.

[Go Swannies]

Well in that case explain to me why my comments have been deleted before? I refer you to my re-posted comments today at 12:39 AM. There are many more too when I have criticized people for using this forum to push their beliefs onto others. I'll tell you why. Because my comments conflicts with the political beliefs of a handful of regular contributors to RWO who have far left opinions. ALA the tail waging the dog; sounds just like Eddie doesn't it?

It's clearly a conspiracy. I only come to RWO to seek out the few comments every thousand that have a mild political flavour. In fact I can't think of anywhere else I'd go to follow political discourse.

In fact I only check in here to see when the logical link is drawn between the Swans restraint of trade and the Royal Commission forcing so many members of the Baird government onto the back benches or out of parliament. The links between the War on Terror and this year's Grand Final are obvious and I suspect Bill Shorten may have delivered the pre-game rev-up to the Swans. The AFL's administration closely mirrors my local council, but don't get me started on that.

[dimelb]

People, when I last looked you can still respond to Emma Quayle's article. Have a go and vent!

[rb4x]

Sorry but I have no intention of giving The Age my email address.

[Untamed Snark]

Sorry but I have no intention of giving The Age my email address.

Use a fake one, something like [email protected]

[wolftone57]

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

Yes it is definitely the VFL not the AFL. After all the Victorians are just flexing their muscle. We don't have any real say in the VFL masquerading as AFL.

The AFL is a real live Animal Farm.

[cheersquadsteve]

i have it from a most reliable source, that the swans were going after frawley and he had agreed in principal to join the club, knowing that malceski was probably leaving and a few retirements plus the academy additions we would be fine regarding the salary cap.

HQ has gotten wind of this and have put the breaks on the deal, presumably cause they don't want to hear eddie et all sook and cry cause the swans are a club that has worked out how to use free agency to their advantage.

the club wont take legal action nor will they make too many waves simply because they believe the commission will sort this crap out before the next trade period

[Ludwig]

Well in that case explain to me why my comments have been deleted before? I refer you to my re-posted comments today at 12:39 AM. There are many more too when I have criticized people for using this forum to push their beliefs onto others. I'll tell you why. Because my comments conflicts with the political beliefs of a handful of regular contributors to RWO who have far left opinions. ALA the tail waging the dog; sounds just like Eddie doesn't it?

I know this is directed toward me and perhaps some others that you think may share similar views to mine. I take no offence at this. But I think you are mistaken about pushing particular political agendas. I can only speak for myself in this regard.

I consider myself to be a totally non-political person. I don't support any politicians or any political party. In fact, the only time I ever vote is when asked by a friend who happens to be running for political office, so it's really more of a personal favour that I do so.

I don't think of myself as falling anywhere on the political spectrum. Although I would not classify myself as a humanitarian, I probably do fall under the general rubric of Humanitarianism which just taking the brief meaning off the internet is:

In its most general form, humanitarianism is an ethic of kindness, benevolence, and sympathy extended universally and impartially to all human beings.

I don't think of that definition as being political, but I can understand if others do.

I don't mind a little banter, and if some posters bring the discussion into the realm of the political, I might put in my 2 cents. But I rarely if ever initiate those exchanges. Sometimes I get my posts deleted for it as well.

Now, as for the general content about the things I do often comment on regarding off field issues: The AFL, footy clubs and many of the players have taken open and strongly principled stances against racism, against violence and abuse of women and against homophobic behaviour or comments. As such, I believe these issues are not political, but rather pertinent to the Australian Rules football community and appropriate subject matter for a footy forum such as RWO. This is particularly true in the case of racism because of the racial abuse directed at some of our players.

It is well known on this forum that I unequivocally support the AFL in their stance on these matters and would urge the AFL to go even further in this regard. I don't see how this position has anything to do with politics whatsoever. I have been very critical of footy industry personages such as Eddie McGuire, Brian Taylor and Sam Newman because they have made remarks contrary to the position of the AFL and are thus inappropriate for those working in the football industry. I feel that fans should be able to go to games and not hear their players being racially or ethnically vilified.

I don't hold any special position with RWO and accept to play by whatever rules the moderators or wider RWO community think appropriate for this forum. If they feel that I have gone too far in the areas mentioned above, I would gladly curtail my comments.

I have never asked the moderators to delete anyone's comments on this forum. If your posts were deleted, it had nothing to do with me. I have had plenty of mine deleted as well.

[ScottH]

Well in that case explain to me why my comments have been deleted before? I refer you to my re-posted comments today at 12:39 AM. There are many more too when I have criticized people for using this forum to push their beliefs onto others. I'll tell you why. Because my comments conflicts with the political beliefs of a handful of regular contributors to RWO who have far left opinions. ALA the tail waging the dog; sounds just like Eddie doesn't it?

I thought that was because they were off topic, as the reason explains.

Trust me there is no political agendas around here!!

[Ampersand]

Well said, Ludwig.

[S.S. Bleeder]

i have it from a most reliable source, that the swans were going after frawley and he had agreed in principal to join the club, knowing that malceski was probably leaving and a few retirements plus the academy additions we would be fine regarding the salary cap.

HQ has gotten wind of this and have put the breaks on the deal, presumably cause they don't want to hear eddie et all sook and cry cause the swans are a club that has worked out how to use free agency to their advantage.

the club wont take legal action nor will they make too many waves simply because they believe the commission will sort this crap out before the next trade period

So the AFL is against Frawley joining us but happy for him to join the premiers? Go figure. And why didn't the Swans fight it at the time? This makes no sense.

[S.S. Bleeder]

You're right Ludwig. I was referring to you amongst others. Your above statement contradicts your previous comments which I found extremely offensive and insulting. I won't say anymore as this thread is about the AFL stiffing us.