AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

[AnnieH]

It would seem the admission that the Swans had done nothing wrong was part of the deal. We take a limited sanction and they concede that we were not at fault. I think the Swans' management calculated that this softly-softly approach was the best strategy for the moment. We'll have to see if it works out that way in the long run. The changes in the AFL Commission personnel seem to line up more in our favour. Maybe this was part of the calculation.

I didn't realise that we were going to lose some mighty big players this year. Do you know who they are?

i really can't see Goodesy going on for another year...

[Ludwig]

i really can't see Goodesy going on for another year...

Yes. But I think most of us had expected that since 2012. Many have suggested that we would be better of if he retired. And not too many think that he is critical to the Swans future. I think every year he plans on is just a bonus.

[Auntie.Gerald]

and noted will be the competition Goodes now faces at 34 with busted knees......... ie we have some serious young players in Mitchell, Jones, Heeney, Harry, Lloyd all wanting a piece of the action in the 22 and rightfully now !

Towers and BJack could also start to put pressure on now they have been here a couple of years etc with time, knowledge and Swans style of footy becoming their DNA

heck young Hiscox, Aliir and X are breathing down the necks of the best 22 also

Young Hiscox could find a bench spot and have a massive impact for a qtr

Adam Goodes and Shaw may find themselves in a ROK position in 2015

ROK decided to continue on and was over taken in the end by some serious talent due to his speed and lateral movement slowing down to a level that was not working in his favour in a 22 squad such as ours

[Mr Magoo]

Am I being too simplistic but isnt a simple way to beat the new trade rules just to say to a player , we will offer you a one year contract worth the average , but have a gentlemens agreement in place to upgrade it almost immediately for another X years at a siginficantly inflated rate to match the lower amount offerred in year one.

Sure that would make it hard to pick up any free agents but it wouldnt prevent you trading for other players as per normal.

[mcs]

and noted will be the competition Goodes now faces at 34 with busted knees......... ie we have some serious young players in Mitchell, Jones, Heeney, Harry, Lloyd all wanting a piece of the action in the 22 and rightfully now !

Towers and BJack could also start to put pressure on now they have been here a couple of years etc with time, knowledge and Swans style of footy becoming their DNA

heck young Hiscox, Aliir and X are breathing down the necks of the best 22 also

Young Hiscox could find a bench spot and have a massive impact for a qtr

Adam Goodes and Shaw may find themselves in a ROK position in 2015

ROK decided to continue on and was over taken in the end by some serious talent due to his speed and lateral movement slowing down to a level that was not working in his favour in a 22 squad such as ours

I'm not convinced by BJ, I think he neesd to have a breakout season in 2015 or he will be gone. I think Shaw is at greater risk than Goodes - who I'm sure will be fairly carefully managed this season (maybe only playing 15-16 regular games).

[JPK12]

Goodes aint ROk. As good a servant as ROK was, he wasnt considered as a spirtual leader of the club nor did he have the same skillset as Adam. While we the fans might not agree or think he should retire he has consulted a fair few at the club and everyone has told him to keep going. I think they know more about where he is at than most of us.

Sorry but ROK was a 2D player. Yes we missed his hardness last year, especially in the GF, but we didnt miss other aspects of his game that better skilled players have covered, like NOT bloody bombing it high at every stoppage..argh.

And i am sure Goodes would have consulted Horse about it. If Horse didnt think he had a bit more to offer then horse would have told him to retire.

[CureTheSane]

I'm glad Goodes has decided to play on.
But he, like every player, has chance to end up as ROK did if either
...they aren't playing well enough to get into the side or
...there are other players who are playing better than them/in a more specific and desired way and are keeping him out

Please delete this post if it is off topic...

[0918330512]

Am I being too simplistic but isnt a simple way to beat the new trade rules just to say to a player , we will offer you a one year contract worth the average , but have a gentlemens agreement in place to upgrade it almost immediately for another X years at a siginficantly inflated rate to match the lower amount offerred in year one.

Sure that would make it hard to pick up any free agents but it wouldnt prevent you trading for other players as per normal.

Only as simplistic as goswannies was 9 days ago

How about we sign a free agent (a young one that has say 4 good years in them, & because they are a FA they can go where they want) on the AFLs pitifully pathetic compromised salary restrictions for a 1 year deal on the understanding with that player that they will be offered a 3 year contract extension during that year that will reflect their true worth.

[Mr Magoo]

Only as simplistic as goswannies was 9 days ago

Just shows that great minds think alike and my mind fails to remember every post in the thread.

[Xie Shan]

I didn't see it, but did anyone catch Gil's attempted 'explanation' for the Swans' trade ban on On The Couch this evening? Apparently he made it sound like it was the Swans' idea?!

[ernie koala]

He gave Healy a clip, said the issue wasn't black and white as Healy had portrayed it.
To me, Gil was just deflecting attention away from the fact there is no reasonable explanation as to why the Swans were banned from trading.
He just pressed the point that the AFL had had numerous discussions with the Swans about winding up COLA....Which explains nothing.
He chose attack, as his form of defence....Probably the best way to defend the indefensible.

[Hotpotato]

He reckoned they had had numerous discussions with The Swans over the issue, emphatically told Gerard Healey that his version (tthat no satisfactory explanation has ever been given ) was wrong , and there had always been ongoing dialogue with The Swans to reach the descision ...
Then Dunstall promptly switched topics to The Etihad roof ..

[Xie Shan]

And he expects us to believe that? Why would Andrew Ireland then come out and say we weren't happy with being penalised for following AFL rules?

[annew]

Was a politician's answer to a question ie no answer at all.

[Xie Shan]

Very true that.