AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • annew
    Senior Player
    • Mar 2006
    • 2164

    #46
    Originally posted by Matt80
    It's staggering to think that the AFL wants to smack the Swans, while GWS pays a million dollars a season to Tom Scully and payed huge money for Isral Falou. GWS are not managing their cap responsibly.
    You are so are so right with your comment.

    Comment

    • Ludwig
      Veterans List
      • Apr 2007
      • 9359

      #47
      Originally posted by Bloodthirsty
      You know what I hate about the Swans the most? They never fight back against this corruption. Just vague, non-descript diplomacy.
      The problem is that the bully has all the power. Realistically, what can we do?

      It seems that if you are the Sydney Swans and just following AFL rules, the punishment will be roughly the same as for systematic doping by a big Melbourne club.

      Comment

      • annew
        Senior Player
        • Mar 2006
        • 2164

        #48
        Originally posted by Cosmic Wizard
        Yes but what player (s) were the swans trying to trade in??

        It is very clear that the AFL got wind of something and decided to crush it, whether it legal or not!

        Maybe a Collingwood players???
        It is exactly what I thought too, maybe Frawley, maybe Ryder. Since when can the AFL say you cannot trade that player in because we said so. What if our current rucks dont develop and Pyke gets injured or retires we cannot trade and experienced player unless they are delisted - this sucks big time.

        Comment

        • Mel_C
          Veterans List
          • Jan 2003
          • 4470

          #49
          Originally posted by Bloodthirsty
          You know what I hate about the Swans the most? They never fight back against this corruption. Just vague, non-descript diplomacy.

          Of course the sheep will believe the lies if the Swans never STRONGLY call out the lies for what they are. What's to be gained by diplomacy if we keep getting smashed?
          Maybe unlike other clubs we have fought it privately instead of publicly. But I would like us to come out and make a public statement.

          I want to do something to fight this ????.

          I haven't been worked up like this for ages! And to top it off I just received my credit card statement for prelim flights, accommodation, tickets and GF tickets....aaarrggghhh!!!!

          Comment

          • Auntie.Gerald
            Veterans List
            • Oct 2009
            • 6480

            #50
            it sucks when the CEO of the AFL goes and gets a coffee and the Chairman of the big Melb clubs are waiting to ambush him at his local coffee shop

            look what will be will be

            The AFL is a moving feast and for an expansion to be successful and impact and take a foothold in non football states they gave us great benefits

            They have lead with a bastard inc headline so that when they tell us we can keep the academies they have something to stand behind !
            "be tough, only when it gets tough"

            Comment

            • Mel_C
              Veterans List
              • Jan 2003
              • 4470

              #51
              Originally posted by Matt80
              It's staggering to think that the AFL wants to smack the Swans, while GWS pays a million dollars a season to Tom Scully and payed huge money for Isral Falou. GWS are not managing their cap responsibly.
              Totally agree with this. And if it was GWS that picked up Buddy then none of this would be happening. It's all because it didn't fit into the AFL's plans.

              Comment

              • annew
                Senior Player
                • Mar 2006
                • 2164

                #52
                I would be securing Reid, Jetta, Parker etc etc and all our good players so that their contracts don't run out and we have time to develop the draft picks we have to take. I cannot believe that they can say for 3 years (2015, 2016 & 2017) we cannot obtain any senior players other than delisted ones. This is a really bad look and I would hope that the swans take them to court for restriction of trade. Sucks big time. I also want to know why Hawthorn keeps getting admired for their list management and yet we get punished. I am disgusted with the AFL.

                Comment

                • Auntie.Gerald
                  Veterans List
                  • Oct 2009
                  • 6480

                  #53
                  Originally posted by Mel_C

                  I haven't been worked up like this for ages! And to top it off I just received my credit card statement for prelim flights, accommodation, tickets and GF tickets....aaarrggghhh!!!!
                  woman-going-crazy.jpg
                  "be tough, only when it gets tough"

                  Comment

                  • Ampersand
                    On the Rookie List
                    • Apr 2014
                    • 694

                    #54
                    I'm just... flabbergasted.

                    Comment

                    • CJK
                      Human
                      • Apr 2006
                      • 2170

                      #55
                      U sux AFL

                      Sux so much
                      -

                      Comment

                      • floppinab
                        Senior Player
                        • Jan 2003
                        • 1681

                        #56
                        Mods this needs it's own thread.
                        How hard would it be to allow us to trade for players without any COLA included for the next few years, i.e. as per conditions in 2017???? It feels like we are being punished big time. Anyone would think we've had the playing group on drugs or something.................

                        Comment

                        • Ampersand
                          On the Rookie List
                          • Apr 2014
                          • 694

                          #57
                          There's a statement on the Swans website:

                          Sydney Swans Statement - Trade Restrictions

                          Full text:

                          The Sydney Swans can confirm the AFL has written to the Club outlining a number of restrictions in place throughout the free agency and trade period for the next two years.

                          The Club has been restricted to only trading in delisted free agents, players through the draft or rookie upgrades.

                          The AFL informed the Club if it doesn?t comply, the Cost of Living Allowance will cease immediately and not phased out over two years and replaced with a rent subsidy system as previously advised.

                          Swans chief executive Andrew Ireland said the Club is extremely disappointed.

                          ?As you?d expect, the Club is very disappointed and we don?t understand why the AFL has made this rule specifically for us considering we?ve complied with their rules,? Ireland said.

                          ?While we wholeheartedly believe players should receive the cost of living allowance due to the higher cost of living in Sydney, it was ultimately the AFL?s rule, it wasn?t optional and therefore we included it in every player?s contract.

                          ?It doesn?t make any sense that we?re being punished for something that we?ve been told to do.

                          ?It also doesn?t seem fair that we can lose players yet we?re unable to replace them.

                          ?The only reason we?ve been able to recruit players in previous years is by creating salary cap room as a result of players departing the club, which is exactly the same as every other club.

                          ?We?ll continue to discuss the restrictions in place with the AFL administration and Commission.?

                          Comment

                          • chalbilto
                            Senior Player
                            • Oct 2007
                            • 1139

                            #58
                            Are there any legal professionals on this forum who could offer an opinion of the legality regarding the restrictions in this edict?

                            Comment

                            • Meg
                              Go Swannies!
                              Site Admin
                              • Aug 2011
                              • 4828

                              #59
                              List changes and trade bait

                              Swans statement and AFL full statement now on Swans website + link to Andrew Ireland's interview on Sen. Worth listening to the interview. (And by the way, in it Ireland mentions they want/intend to upgrade Jake Lloyd.)

                              Putting it altogether, it seems to me that the AFL was scared there would be a perception that Swans were abusing COLA if they recruited a player in trade week. A perception the AFL have never made any attempt to defuse.

                              But the interviewers sound quite outraged by the AFL action which is good!

                              Comment

                              • Ludwig
                                Veterans List
                                • Apr 2007
                                • 9359

                                #60
                                Originally posted by floppinab
                                How hard would it be to allow us to trade for players without any COLA included for the next few years, i.e. as per conditions in 2017???? It feels like we are being punished big time. Anyone would think we've had the playing group on drugs or something.................
                                This is the main point of contention and the one that doesn't make sense except as an enactment of punishment for some undisclosed reason. Perhaps there is still room for negotiation. I believe this matter will go to the AFL Commission. I don't think this will have an impact this year, so perhaps this part of the ban can be waved for next year's trading period.

                                Comment

                                Working...