AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

[Matt80]

The scenario you went through is probably close to the mark, as well as the attending labels.

I tend to think of the term Kafkaesque for these kinds of situations, and am considering having another read of The Trial to get in the appropriate headspace.

The frightening part of all this is the total lack of predictability of future AFL dictates, as they don't even follow their own rules when making decisions. The AFL is just becoming a free-for-all at every level. This particular absurdity which has a affected us is but a sideshow to the way they are dealing with much larger issues of the Essendon saga and pseudo free agency. Now we've been thrown out of the playpen just when things were getting interesting.

The attack on the academies, especially ours, has already begun, and we shouldn't expect any letup given this latest diabolical blow, which is Eddie's last cheap shot of his COLA crusade. It's a really low act as he's already won that war.

The exodus from GWS is also worrying in that any slipping down the ladder or negative perception about the Swans could have a similar effect. We are being driven toward distinct disadvantage territory where we have to do everything better both on and off the field just to stay even. That's the way Eddie and Newbold like it.

I don't think the Swans or any club want to take down the AFL, because everyone will suffer by that. Essendon was almost forced to take them on because of the severe consequences awaiting them, so they thought they had to try some extreme measures. I believe the bill will exceed $20 mil. before that's over with, regardless of the outcome of player suspensions.

The only hope I have relates to the outcome of the Todd Viney incident when near universal outrage at his suspension brought an overturn of the MRP decision. Logic and reason prevailed. But that didn't involve McGuire. This will be a lot harder.

Do you think Eddie will tire of Newbold if the Hawks in the Premiership in 2015 and 2016? If the Hawks snare a popular Collingwood free agent next year, Eddie will turn on them. He has turned on Andrew Ireland despite the fact he played many games for Collingwood.

[annew]

No it is two. If we trade this year (2014)'we lose the COLA for 2015 & 2016. If we trade next year (2015) we lose the COLA for 2016. We can trade end 2016 season as there will be no COLA in 2017.

I think there was some ambiguity in earlier wording but I'm sure that is what is meant.

Thanks for explaining. It's still crap though..

[Ludwig]

What I cannot comprehend is that since the AFL-mandated COLA was obligatory to be included in all player contracts and the AFL paid the COLA, why is not the AFL's responsibility to negotiate any COLA changes in existing contracts directly with the players involved for contracts negotiated when that regime was in place. If the AFL wants to renege on its agreement to pay the COLA to a player it should be something that is negotiated between the AFL and that player. I don't know why the Swans are even a party to it. The Swans should pay the part of the player contract that they are obligated to pay, and if the AFL fails to pay the COLA portion that they are obligated to pay, then the player, perhaps through the AFLPA, should sue the AFL for that payment. It would seem an open and shut case that the AFL would have to pay the player.

I can understand if the AFL decides to immediate stop the COLA on all new contracts, but how can they back out of agreements they are already committed to? As Peter Gordon of the WB reminded us

"An agreement's an agreement. It has legal effect and people ought to think seriously before they sign them because when they sign them, they're bound by them

Apparently this is not the case as far a the AFL is concerned.

I don't know where it says the AFL has the right to opt out of its legal obligations as it wishes, as well unilaterally transfer its obligations onto other parties. It seems that AFL-Sydney Swans relationship is more in line with a 'Master-Slave' association than one between 2 parties of which both have legal standing.

[S.S. Bleeder]

Joe More has written another great article;

http://www.bigfooty.com/news/2014/10/swans-shut-out/

[0918330512]

Do you think Eddie will tire of Newbold if the Hawks in the Premiership in 2015 and 2016? If the Hawks snare a popular Collingwood free agent next year, Eddie will turn on them. He has turned on Andrew Ireland despite the fact he played many games for Collingwood.

Matt, you're now fixating on this whole Eddie's turning on Andrew thing. A bit of perspective, if I may. Andrew Ireland's last game for for the Magpies was in 1980 ... that was some 18 years before Eddie became Collingwood's President. Before joining Sydney, Ireland was the CEO of Brisbane (through a very successful period). I'd say Andrew was pretty removed from Collingwood by now. Why on earth would Eddie have any allegiance to a relic of a long passed age? Some people on RWO have far less allegiance to currently contracted Swans players, incessantly & unrelentingly insisting they be traded, & when it's obvious they are staying, they move on to another currently contracted player, wanting to move them on because they're "too slow" & "it'll make room under the cap". Seriously, what on earth does Eddie owe Ireland as a former Collingwood player??
That aside, Eddie is wrong, wrong, wrong.

[S.S. Bleeder]

"An agreement's an agreement. It has legal effect and people ought to think seriously before they sign them because when they sign them, they're bound by them".
Haha. I had to snigger when I heard him say that. He wasn't too concerned about the agreement the club had with McCarthey when they forced him to resign. What a hypocrite. So typical of this ambulance chaser.

[Meg]

Thanks for explaining. It's still crap though..

Ah well I completely agree on that!

[The Big Cat]

The coach has his say in Caro's column

Sydney coach John Longmire questions AFL's decision to ban club from trading in players

[rojo]

Caroline Wilson has written an article in the Age (this evening). Unfortunately I cannot read more than the headline! Anyone else seen what she has to say?

[The Big Cat]

Jon Ralph reporting in the HS that the commission wanted to remove the COLA this year but only relented when Swans gave an assurance that they would not trade in more players this year. He goes on to say that Swans hope to reverse the Commission's ruling for next year.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

[Ludwig]

The couch has his say in Caro's column

[rojo]

Thanks Big Cat. Is it just me thinking that JL is not showing enough angst.

[Nico]

AD was pretty good after all. Appears the Commission wants "his" decisions reversed. Commissioners, huh, club loyalties never die. And a commissioner who played for the biggest rorting club.

[goswannies]

Matt, you're now fixating on this whole Eddie's turning on Andrew thing. A bit of perspective, if I may. Andrew Ireland's last game for for the Magpies was in 1980 ... that was some 18 years before Eddie became Collingwood's President. Before joining Sydney, Ireland was the CEO of Brisbane (through a very successful period). I'd say Andrew was pretty removed from Collingwood by now. Why on earth would Eddie have any allegiance to a relic of a long passed age? Some people on RWO have far less allegiance to currently contracted Swans players, incessantly & unrelentingly insisting they be traded, & when it's obvious they are staying, they move on to another currently contracted player, wanting to move them on because they're "too slow" & "it'll make room under the cap". Seriously, what on earth does Eddie owe Ireland as a former Collingwood player??

If this reference is, I assume, to Craig Bird, then he's played 21 more games for us than the "many (110) games" Ireland did for Collingwood. If Eddie owes Ireland something, we owe Birdy more.

[Meg]

Thanks Big Cat. Is it just me thinking that JL is not showing enough angst.

By JL's cool, calm, polite and non-controversial standards, he sounds pretty ropable to me!

"We've clearly run foul of someone somewhere."

"From a coach's perspective we're trying to manage our list to try to get better and this is being done to us."