AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

[dimelb]

Amen.

[jono2707]

Interesting comment. Bit like a Prime Minister saying that he/she speaks for every Australian. You undersell Swans supporters. Most Swans supporters would know. I doubt a single Melbourne supporter, member or not, doesn't know about the ban. We are all righteously indignant. So it is only a few on RWO who are miffed. Garbage. Fair dinkum, to say you won't renew is like Richmond supporters burning their member ship card after they get done in the first round. NRF. Not renewing hurts the club and becomes a double whammy.

Just a hiccup, a pre season hiccup. We will be there when the whips are cracking.

There's most probably quite a bit less around this story in the Sydney press. AFL isn't a huge deal most of the time in Sydney media anyway, unfortunately. Now that it's the offseason other sports are getting the attention in Sydney. That and Jarryd Hayne leaving for the NFL.

Just to clarify, I neither claimed to speak for other supporters, nor said I won't renew my membership next year. I'll be there with bells on for many of the exact reasons that Liz beautifully outlined above.

[Melbourne_Blood]

I suppose the positive out of this is our backs being firmly against the wall again, which is the way our club seems to respond best, at least on field. Notwithstanding our incredible season this year bar one game. I hope this situation provokes a steely resolve in all our players and coaches that doesn't yield until they raise the cup again. When it relents for maybe a few weeks and then becomes twice as steely to repeat the feat and stick it up right up these mongrels!!!! That's what I hope happens, anyway...

[Bloodthirsty]

If the Swans get another awesome injury run next year, it will be a miracle. Miracles don't tend to happen that often.

With the other contenders as equally strong as the Swans, it will come down to which team has the best injury run. We had a good run and stuffed it. Will we get another perfect run?

Also a lot of hope is being pinned on inexperienced kids. Will they perform better than the experienced core of the other two main contenders? Probably not.

2015 is going to be a nailbiter. 2014 could have been a walk in the park. So much so that the Swans actually thought it was literally a walk in the park.

[annew]

There is an important difference between the Buddy and Boyd situations (other than the fact one is a very good player who is undoubtedly worth $1m a year - or more - while the other might become a good player one day). That is that the Dogs traded for Boyd (and reached agreement with the releasing club), while the Swans recruited Buddy as a restricted free agent whereby the Hawks had the choice to match the contract. FA contracts are always likely to be subject to more scrutiny if there is a suspicion they are structured to make them unmatchable. Not that I am suggesting Buddy's was.

You are right Liz, guess I am still angry over the amount of criticism and scrutiny we received because we were innovative and fortunate to get Buddy yet other clubs can do what they like.

[liz]

If the Swans get another awesome injury run next year, it will be a miracle. Miracles don't tend to happen that often.

With the other contenders as equally strong as the Swans, it will come down to which team has the best injury run. We had a good run and stuffed it. Will we get another perfect run?

Also a lot of hope is being pinned on inexperienced kids. Will they perform better than the experienced core of the other two main contenders? Probably not.

2015 is going to be a nailbiter. 2014 could have been a walk in the park. So much so that the Swans actually thought it was literally a walk in the park.

What if the world ends tomorrow?

Nothing you have said is false, but I don't really see the point of thinking that way as a supporter where you have no influence over how things might pan out. In our own worlds of risk it certainly makes sense to allow for contingencies but as a footy supporter, what gets you revved up is anticipation of what might be.

Also, consider I could tell you now that the Swans will definitely win the premiership next year - ie accept that I have a time machine and I know this to be the case. Will your enjoyment of that premiership be as great, knowing all year it is inevitable? Surely it is the doubt and hope and uncertainty that gives following a footy team its edge, and therefore most of its fulfilment. Otherwise we might just as well go to the theatre or the cinema where we know the outcome is predetermined.

[i'm-uninformed2]

By the way did anyone mention Gill is a bed wetter?

[Doctor]

I couldn't agree more with Liz's post on the last page. My experiences with the club over the years, most recently at the Club Champion dinner, have left me in no doubt as to how professionally run we are. I used to say the same about the AFL, and how it ran rings around the other codes in its approach to running the game. I think that what we are seeing now is just how much work Demetriou put in to holding the self-interested Victorian clubs and power brokers at bay. The player recruitment plan can't be legal and it still annoys me that we didn't go and get an injunction but, as always, I trust the club to know what it's doing.

As to what it means for the code in NSW, let me run this by you as an example. Despite the amazing trade news today, including two big trades involving the Giants, there was not a mention of any of it on Nine's main news bulletin tonight. Nothing. That's how far the code has to go in NSW and that's why the actions of those small-minded club presidents in Melbourne anger me so much.

[annew]

Everyone is entitled to their own take on this, but from my perspective:

- I still follow a club with an incredibly strong list, and one that has just recruited one of the most highly rated 18 year olds in the land
- I still follow a club that I expect to challenge for the premiership next year, and (obviously) in the process win far more games than it loses
- I still follow the club that boasts a player - in Franklin - who can do what no other current day player can do and who brought joy to my face countless times last season. I, for one, am looking forward to more of the same in 2015
- I still follow a club that had the courage to take a risk (the Franklin contract) that was beyond comprehension of most clubs. It may yet backfire but no-one can accuse them of sitting on their laurels or taking the safe route in an effort to entertain us
- I still follow a club whose administration is the envy of most other clubs in the competition
- I still follow a club that conducts itself with integrity and grace in the AFL public arena
- I still follow a club that I am proud to boast about to whoever will listen. The second thing that most people find out about me after we meet (after my name) is that I am a fanatical Swans supporter and long may that continue

So, our club may or may not have been screwed by the AFL. Just because we can't see what they are doing about it behind the scenes doesn't mean they are not doing anything about it. I don't believe the ruling will have had any significant detrimental effect on the list for 2015 and the club has the best part of a year to do something about it for the 2015 trading period. We appear to have most of the thinking media behind us, and the AFLPA. I suspect more than a handful of the other clubs are secretly aghast as well - not only on the merits of fairness but also because it limits their ability to trade with the Swans.

It's the AFL that has transgressed, not the Swans. If nothing changes, I will find a way to take my angst out on the AFL. Though I am not dumb enough to think that they'll listen. But I have no intention of giving up on all the pleasure and pride that the Swans deliver to me. That would be cutting off my nose to spite my face.

Well said. I totally agree. This is Eddie's puppet Gillon's response
"We have been in deep dialogue with the Swans ? we?ve talked to them 20 times ? and we?ve looked for a way to make it less stark, and we haven?t been able to do it.?
Does not address why it has to be stark - why are we being punished????????? This is just mystifying and absurd.

[Meg]

"?In the context of the transition, you have made the decision to exit it in its current form, you can?t have a transition that then perpetuates the problems with it."

What on earth does that mean? (And I love the 'you have made the decision' - who was the 'you'?

No Cookies | The Courier-Mail

[Meg]

Makes no sense. They should have:

1. Gone through existing contracts that have a COLA clause to calculate the amount required for the next two years.

2. Paid COLA for only those players. So if 3 of those players leave at end of 2015, the amount for 2016 is cut by the relevant amount.

3. Announced now the salary cut off point and conditions for payment of housing assistance and started to pay it from 2015 to qualifying players.

4. Any players recruited through trade or other means for the 2015 season and beyond who do not qualify for the housing assistance get nothing on top of their negotiated salary.

How could these arrangement have "perpetuated the problems" whatever they are supposed to be??

[Mel_C]

"?In the context of the transition, you have made the decision to exit it in its current form, you can?t have a transition that then perpetuates the problems with it."

What on earth does that mean? (And I love the 'you have made the decision' - who was the 'you'?

I'm confused what does he mean by "stark"? And they still have not answered the question WHY this ban was introduced. All I have heard is that it is because of the phasing out of COLA...so why hasn't GWS received the same ban?? This still doesn't make any sense!!

[annew]

I'm confused what does he mean by "stark"? And they still have not answered the question WHY this ban was introduced. All I have heard is that it is because of the phasing out of COLA...so why hasn't GWS received the same ban?? This still doesn't make any sense!!

I know it is a load of rubbish, pathetic excuse that is totally ridiculous.

[The Big Cat]

Ireland has said all the COLA is tied into existing contracts. He has said that when an existing player leaves (such as Malceski) his COLA will not be reallocated to new players but will come off the amount that has to be phased out.

[Meg]

The only perpetuation of the problem would have been the screams of outrage from McGuire, Gordon, Newbold etc. if we had traded in a player.

It is interesting listening to the Sen interview with Andrew Ireland that Ireland actually said the Swans could have accepted a ban on recruiting a free or restricted free agent, but they can't accept the total ban on trading. And that is what is completely absurd. For example, having lost Malceski we were not able to even consider (should we have wanted to ) trading in a lower paid player to replace him. Totally absurd!

Also, as far as I'm aware nothing has been announced about the COLA treatment of the players that we draft. We already know there will be at least three new (Academy) players. Will they get 9.8% COLA for two years and then move on to whatever replaces it? Crazy if that is the case (that does perpetuate the COLA principle). They should be put straight on to the new housing assistance package. But as far as I am aware that hasn't yet been announced.