AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • i'm-uninformed2
    Reefer Madness
    • Oct 2003
    • 4653

    Here's the AFL denial, its neither completely convincing on trying to rort the rules (note the big caveat of talking about the period AFTER the 2013 season, not what Colless inferred, in season skull duggery), and of course, completely silent on the clear fact the COLA and trading ban were payback for us scooping Buddy.


    The AFL wishes to state for the record it completely rejects allegations made in some media outlets today the AFL had sought to circumvent its own rules around Total Player Payments, Free Agency and Player Movement, regarding player Lance Franklin after the conclusion of the 2013 Toyota AFL Premiership Season.

    AFL General Counsel Andrew Dillon said the circumstances of Lance Franklin?s move from Hawthorn to the Sydney Swans at the time had been the subject of a detailed examination, with formal interviews with the key parties involved in his move under the Free Agency Rules.

    As the nine-year deal was an unprecedented commitment of TPP funds to a single player over such a contract length, the AFL sought a number of written guarantees from all members of the Sydney Swans? Club Board, as well as its senior management, and these requirements were publicly detailed at the time.

    The AFL was not involved in any dealings that player Franklin and his management may have had with any other club in the competition as a potential move for him under the Free Agency Rules, before the player made his final decision to accept an offer from the Sydney Swans.

    Under Free Agency Rules, a player may consider offers from multiple clubs, and may have discussions with multiple clubs, but only one offer from another club may be formally lodged with the AFL.
    'Delicious' is a fun word to say

    Comment

    • mcs
      Travelling Swannie!!
      • Jul 2007
      • 8168

      Originally posted by i'm-uninformed2
      Here's the AFL denial, its neither completely convincing on trying to rort the rules (note the big caveat of talking about the period AFTER the 2013 season, not what Colless inferred, in season skull duggery), and of course, completely silent on the clear fact the COLA and trading ban were payback for us scooping Buddy.


      The AFL wishes to state for the record it completely rejects allegations made in some media outlets today the AFL had sought to circumvent its own rules around Total Player Payments, Free Agency and Player Movement, regarding player Lance Franklin after the conclusion of the 2013 Toyota AFL Premiership Season.

      AFL General Counsel Andrew Dillon said the circumstances of Lance Franklin?s move from Hawthorn to the Sydney Swans at the time had been the subject of a detailed examination, with formal interviews with the key parties involved in his move under the Free Agency Rules.

      As the nine-year deal was an unprecedented commitment of TPP funds to a single player over such a contract length, the AFL sought a number of written guarantees from all members of the Sydney Swans? Club Board, as well as its senior management, and these requirements were publicly detailed at the time.

      The AFL was not involved in any dealings that player Franklin and his management may have had with any other club in the competition as a potential move for him under the Free Agency Rules, before the player made his final decision to accept an offer from the Sydney Swans.

      Under Free Agency Rules, a player may consider offers from multiple clubs, and may have discussions with multiple clubs, but only one offer from another club may be formally lodged with the AFL.
      Haha typical dribble from the AFL.
      "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

      Comment

      • stellation
        scott names the planets
        • Sep 2003
        • 9721

        I made the mistake of looking at BigFooty out of idle curiosity to see the view taken by the huddled masses; it was a perfect example of the childish, blinkers on, pointless hatred that has lead me to rarely post on message boards anymore.
        I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
        We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time

        Comment

        • annew
          Senior Player
          • Mar 2006
          • 2164

          Originally posted by stellation
          I wonder if the timing of Richard releasing this information has anything to do with a player earning over the league average wanting either in or out of Sydney.
          I wondered this too also wondered if maybe Jetta does want to leave and we won't be able to trade him for a player of the same value cos of trade restrictions

          Comment

          • Mug Punter
            On the Rookie List
            • Nov 2009
            • 3325

            Originally posted by annew
            I wondered this too also wondered if maybe Jetta does want to leave and we won't be able to trade him for a player of the same value cos of trade restrictions
            If Jetta does leave, and I hope he stays, then I'd think we'd be happy to bank the first round pick so we don't go into the next year's draft with carry over points.

            Comment

            • Legs Akimbo
              Grand Poobah
              • Apr 2005
              • 2809

              I know this is really stretching it, but it makes you wonder about some of the umpiring.
              He had observed that people who did lie were, on the whole, more resourceful and ambitious and successful than people who did not lie.

              Comment

              • 707
                Veterans List
                • Aug 2009
                • 6204

                Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
                I know this is really stretching it, but it makes you wonder about some of the umpiring.
                Ooh, nice conspiracy theory! How do we keep getting more than our share of some of those flog umpires, how do Hawthorn keep getting Hawks supporter Stevic number 9

                Comment

                • grarmy
                  Warming the Bench
                  • Aug 2010
                  • 406

                  Without muddying the waters, and it has been covered in another thread, is it not possible to give up the COLA at year end, wear the additional cost - assessed as $650k - and then trade as we want? The $650k could surely be covered off out of revenues. If so, would the trade ban still prevail?
                  "Play like you can’t lose."

                  Comment

                  • cherub
                    Warming the Bench
                    • May 2010
                    • 239

                    Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
                    I know this is really stretching it, but it makes you wonder about some of the umpiring.
                    Stretching how?

                    Comment

                    • cherub
                      Warming the Bench
                      • May 2010
                      • 239

                      Colless is a smart businessman. He wouldn't leave himself open to accusations of slander. You would think there would be some corroborating evidence of Fitzpatrick's attempted illegal dealings for Lance.

                      Comment

                      • liz
                        Veteran
                        Site Admin
                        • Jan 2003
                        • 16778

                        Originally posted by grarmy
                        Without muddying the waters, and it has been covered in another thread, is it not possible to give up the COLA at year end, wear the additional cost - assessed as $650k - and then trade as we want? The $650k could surely be covered off out of revenues. If so, would the trade ban still prevail?
                        It's not about covering the cash cost. It's the salary cap impact. It means there would be an immediate decrease in our salary cap for 2016 of $650k. Given the club had been led to believe there would be a reasonable phasing out period of the COLA element to the cap, in recognition of the fact that it had committed to contracts that extended beyond the decision to eliminate COLA, I imagine that it would be hard to stay within the cap with such an immediate and unplanned for reduction. It would mean the club would be unlikely to be able to fit anyone new in under the cap unless, making the lifting of the trade ban somewhat irrelevant.

                        Comment

                        • DA_Swan
                          Warming the Bench
                          • Feb 2010
                          • 322

                          Colless should have done it while he was Chairman if he wanted to take the moral high ground , things obviously have'nt gone the way he wanted or he would not have come out the way he did - the corroborating evidence is no doubt within the confines of the "AFL Family" and it would appear that Richard Colless wants to incite something that our current admin do not want to finish.

                          Comment

                          • bennyfabulous
                            Warming the Bench
                            • Apr 2009
                            • 351

                            We can surely trade players out for draft picks right?

                            Comment

                            • Doctor J.
                              Senior Player
                              • Feb 2003
                              • 1310

                              Originally posted by stellation
                              I made the mistake of looking at BigFooty out of idle curiosity to see the view taken by the huddled masses; it was a perfect example of the childish, blinkers on, pointless hatred that has lead me to rarely post on message boards anymore.
                              I made that same mistake too.

                              What is frustrating is the huddled masses, see this as entirely a Swans issue. They are too stupid to realise its a competition wide issue, corruption of the governing body!!

                              People wonder why Ponzi schemes and internet scams are alive and thriving. Read Big Footy, there's your answer right there.

                              Comment

                              • Mug Punter
                                On the Rookie List
                                • Nov 2009
                                • 3325

                                Originally posted by bennyfabulous
                                We can surely trade players out for draft picks right?
                                Correct but we cannot bring players in except as draft picks - so if we wanted to trade Jetta to the Eagles (spit, clears mouth) for a player who would help us we cannot do that unless the player coming in is on average wage or less.

                                Doesn't matter if he is on the same money or less than Jetta.

                                It is most unfair and blatant payback by Fitzpatrick and his band of cronies because we had the temerity to sign Franklin. Anyone that thinks anybody south of the border will care about this is deluded....

                                Comment

                                Working...