AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jono2707
    Goes up to 11
    • Oct 2007
    • 3326

    Why didn't he just say that the AFL are still cranky with us stealing Buddy from under GWS's nose and be done with it?

    Comment

    • Doctor
      Bay 29
      • Sep 2003
      • 2757

      I saw it too. Dunstall changing the subject like he did was poor, but he may have been under time pressure and had a run sheet to get through.

      I'd say there is certainly more to it than we know, but McLachlan should have explained it. Gerard Healy is normally pretty fair and will explain something if both sides are available. While the AFL uses its current offensive or deflecting strategies, we'll all just go on assuming that we've been railroaded.

      I wish Mike Sheehan had been part of it. He wouldn't have allowed McLachlan to get away with that.
      Today's a draft of your epitaph

      Comment

      • Bloods05
        Senior Player
        • Oct 2008
        • 1641

        Originally posted by Doctor
        I saw it too. Dunstall changing the subject like he did was poor, but he may have been under time pressure and had a run sheet to get through.

        I'd say there is certainly more to it than we know, but McLachlan should have explained it. Gerard Healy is normally pretty fair and will explain something if both sides are available. While the AFL uses its current offensive or deflecting strategies, we'll all just go on assuming that we've been railroaded.

        I wish Mike Sheehan had been part of it. He wouldn't have allowed McLachlan to get away with that.
        McLachlan's demeanour was very defensive and he was clearly peeved about having to explain the decision. His reply was short on specifics and long on generalities. Basically all he said was that they had had a lot of discussions with the Swans about it. The content of the decision and its rationale were not even touched on. It was a very disheartening performance. His hostility was palpable and it made me wonder what else he has in mind for us.

        Comment

        • i'm-uninformed2
          Reefer Madness
          • Oct 2003
          • 4653

          You all know how to complete this question: How do you know when Gil is lying . . . ?
          'Delicious' is a fun word to say

          Comment

          • AnnieH
            RWOs Black Sheep
            • Aug 2006
            • 11332

            They've had discussions with the swans... according to the Chairman, we have lots and lots of little things that need to be sorted out.
            Maybe Gil was talking about those discussions.
            According to the Chairman, we still haven't done anything wrong.
            Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
            Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

            Comment

            • S.S. Bleeder
              Senior Player
              • Sep 2014
              • 2165

              Gillon was on 3AW yesterday morning. I rang the talkback and was going to ask him "the real reason" behind the swans trading ban. I was going to point out that if they banned the Swans from trading to protect them from exceeding the salary cap then they should ban all clubs in order to "protect them from themselves" I was next in line to speak to him on air but he had to go early and I missed out.

              I wonder if he saw on the screen what my question was going to be? Unlikely, but possible.

              Comment

              • S.S. Bleeder
                Senior Player
                • Sep 2014
                • 2165

                Originally posted by AnnieH
                ... according to the Chairman, we have lots and lots of little things that need to be sorted out.
                WTF does that mean? The Swans or the AFL should be telling us what these issues are. If these problems relate to us having difficulty getting under our new cap, that should be mentioned. The AFL probably won't want this made public however as it shows that they should have implemented the COLA reduction over a longer period rather than just two years.

                Comment

                • Mel_C
                  Veterans List
                  • Jan 2003
                  • 4470

                  What a disgrace Gil is. And after the Essendon decision I am even more infuriated that we were punished for doing nothing wrong. I really really really hope we smash the bombers on Saturday!!!!!

                  Comment

                  • CureTheSane
                    Carpe Noctem
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 5032

                    I've said since the Swans decided to be soft on this that there were other factors involved.
                    Likely wrong doings by the Swans which are embarrassing for the AFL.
                    Smacks of a cover up of some sort.

                    Regardless of the real reason, the way the Swans have acted has led me to form an opinion that they are hiding something.
                    The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.

                    Comment

                    • Dosser
                      Just wild about Harry
                      • Mar 2011
                      • 1833

                      Originally posted by CureTheSane
                      I've said since the Swans decided to be soft on this that there were other factors involved.
                      Likely wrong doings by the Swans which are embarrassing for the AFL.
                      Smacks of a cover up of some sort.

                      Regardless of the real reason, the way the Swans have acted has led me to form an opinion that they are hiding something.
                      +1

                      Comment

                      • Xie Shan
                        Senior Player
                        • Jan 2003
                        • 2929

                        Originally posted by CureTheSane
                        Regardless of the real reason, the way the Swans have acted has led me to form an opinion that they are hiding something.
                        But the Swans did contest the trade ban publicly, it's not like they copped it on the chin. Ireland said he couldn't understand it and is on record as describing the ban as "unfair" and restrictive". I think it's just a case of Occam's razor, we were probably interested in someone like Ryder or Patfull and the AFL, in their infinite wisdom, decided to make a pre-emptive strike. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought they were doing us a favour by helping our list management so we wouldn't run into salary cap trouble down the track.

                        Unless there is another issue that none of us know about...

                        Comment

                        • ugg
                          Can you feel it?
                          Site Admin
                          • Jan 2003
                          • 15970

                          Reserves live updates (Twitter)
                          Reserves WIKI -
                          Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

                          Comment

                          • Xie Shan
                            Senior Player
                            • Jan 2003
                            • 2929

                            It sounds like someone at the AFL genuinely thought this would solve the issue of how best to phase out the COLA when it's built into existing contracts, only they forgot the most important bit -- whether it actually made sense. That was just gibberish.

                            Comment

                            • graemed
                              Swans2win
                              • Jan 2003
                              • 410

                              I saw the interview slightly differently from most of the opinions being voiced and whilst I'm not positive what prompted the AFL to act in the first place (read that as the fat controller). I got the impression that the CEO wanted to say more but was cut off.
                              He was beginning to say something about the swans trading their way out of the situation when Dunstall butted in.
                              What wasn't clear to me from any part of the answer was why the AFL thought that the COLA threat would not suddenly became an impediment to the swans ability to service their salary cap. The AFL deliberately placed the swans in an untenable situation by threatening to withdraw COLA ahead of schedule and then blackmailed them into accepting a decision that was discriminatory and illegal.

                              Comment

                              • Ludwig
                                Veterans List
                                • Apr 2007
                                • 9359

                                Originally posted by graemed
                                What wasn't clear to me from any part of the answer was why the AFL thought that the COLA threat would not suddenly became an impediment to the swans ability to service their salary cap. The AFL deliberately placed the swans in an untenable situation by threatening to withdraw COLA ahead of schedule and then blackmailed them into accepting a decision that was discriminatory and illegal.
                                What was not mentioned (but often mentioned on RWO) was why the same rules did not apply to GWS who were under the same COLA transition rules.

                                Comment

                                Working...