AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

[DamY]

That argument is a little like telling someone in an abusive relationship that they should be nice and suck it up otherwise they might get abused again.

Except it the Swans left the relationship, there are no other partners for it, good or bad. Analogy is wrong

[barry]

Except it the Swans left the relationship, there are no other partners for it, good or bad. Analogy is wrong

The AFL need the swans as much as the swans need the AFL. TV rights deal would be dead if the swans pulled out of the AFL.

The AFL is bullying us. Basically they are trying to level the playing field in Sydney because the Giants havent been able to recruit a marqueue player (like Buddy) to make the smaller club, bigger. COLA is just an excuse because the Giants get COLA as well.

The same logic was applied to Melbourne. Hawthorn would be banned from trading because the Melbourne Demons need help to get/keep good players (eg Frawley).

This just shows the great injustice of it. Hawthorn would go mental if this happened.

Pridham is looking weak. Under his watch we have had:
- COLA gone / reduced.
- Given up 60% of Sydney to Giants
- Academy rules changed for the worse.
- Trade Ban applied.

This wouldnt have happened under Colless.

[mcsquirta]

There really isn't anything to gain by getting what we want - a viable trade mechanism that suits our needs - and going after revenge. Swans have only turned a profit in the past 2-3 years for the first time in 40+ years. Not quite $700k last year I think. As much as David Galbally QC has some nice things to say, he also has a Profile Agent so I don't think he comes free. I highly doubt we can take this to court and come out of it cheaply And with everything we want.
David Galbally - Profile Talent Management

The long term downside to legal action, as much as I'd love to see those vipers humiliated, far outweighs our short term gain. I think the legal term for it is "Pushing $1#T up hill". If, by some miracle (Nick Davis, just sayin), we do make the GF then the affect of court and AFL retribution on the players could well be worse than last year (if that is humanly possible).

If the Players Association had a really strong objection to the deal, maybe something else might come together for us.

[DamY]

The AFL need the swans as much as the swans need the AFL. TV rights deal would be dead if the swans pulled out of the AFL.

The AFL is bullying us. Basically they are trying to level the playing field in Sydney because the Giants havent been able to recruit a marqueue player (like Buddy) to make the smaller club, bigger. COLA is just an excuse because the Giants get COLA as well.

The same logic was applied to Melbourne. Hawthorn would be banned from trading because the Melbourne Demons need help to get/keep good players (eg Frawley).

This just shows the great injustice of it. Hawthorn would go mental if this happened.

Pridham is looking weak. Under his watch we have had:
- COLA gone / reduced.
- Given up 60% of Sydney to Giants
- Academy rules changed for the worse.
- Trade Ban applied.

This wouldnt have happened under Colless.

Sounds like you would draw the same conclusion and causality that when ice cream sales increase, so do drownings.

COLA needed to go.
Sydney has 20% more members than the year prior and 4 times as many members as GWS.
Academy drafting has been misconstrued by competing clubs not seeing the wood for the trees. And please, the trade ban would have gone through regardless of who was in charge. Swans played the long game, determining academy rules before tackling the trade ban to remove an opportunity of "payback". Andrew Ireland has been kicking about too so to lay this all on Andrew Pridham is a bit excessive.

[barry]

I dont buy this COLA had to go BS. Ask brisbane if they player retention allowance had to go?

[mcsquirta]

Colless hand picked Pridham for the board job and would've had the biggest say in handing the chair over to him too. There's obviously more to him than meets the eye.

[DamY]

I dont buy this COLA had to go BS. Ask brisbane if they player retention allowance had to go?

You're BS mate. Brisbane's issues are linked to firstly poor on-field performance, club administration and culture (player management).

[barry]

Hey - does anyone know if it's possible, as part of celebrating the AFL's inevitable backdown on this, if we can set fire to Fitzpatrick?

You're BS mate. Brisbane's issues are linked to firstly poor on-field performance, club administration and culture (player management).

Brisbane is where the VFL want the swans to be too

[Ajax]

Brisbane is where the VFL want the swans to be too

Totally agree. But they also need the Swans to be successful. On the one hand they need the Swans to succeed to keep the game expanding and the money coming in. But on the other hand they can't stand the idea of the Swans succeeding too much. They are suffering from what the shrinks call 'dissociative identity disorder'. That is, they have two distinct personalities. The problem is, as they are first to admit, 'you can't have everything'.

[111431]

Totally agree. But they also need the Swans to be successful. On the one hand they need the Swans to succeed to keep the game expanding and the money coming in. But on the other hand they can't stand the idea of the Swans succeeding too much. They are suffering from what the shrinks call 'dissociative identity disorder'. That is, they have two distinct personalities. The problem is, as they are first to admit, 'you can't have everything'.

fellow posters, I know the decision of the AFL and the Swans (lack of) initial reaction were hard to stomach but what is beginning to really annoy me is the small minded comments from above. Do you really think the AFL wants any of their clubs to fail, particularly when they have just signed a $2.5B deal ? Move on, there are far more important issues to debate other than bizarre conspiracy theories

[Ajax]

fellow posters, I know the decision of the AFL and the Swans (lack of) initial reaction were hard to stomach but what is beginning to really annoy me is the small minded comments from above. Do you really think the AFL wants any of their clubs to fail, particularly when they have just signed a $2.5B deal ? Move on, there are far more important issues to debate other than bizarre conspiracy theories

So, the trade ban is a bizarre conspiracy theory? That's great news!

[barry]

fellow posters, I know the decision of the AFL and the Swans (lack of) initial reaction were hard to stomach but what is beginning to really annoy me is the small minded comments from above. Do you really think the AFL wants any of their clubs to fail, particularly when they have just signed a $2.5B deal ? Move on, there are far more important issues to debate other than bizarre conspiracy theories

What has been done to Brisbane is an absolute disgrace to the code, and erodes all the gains of the 3-peat at the start of the century.
Its speaks volumes for the small mindedness of the Victorians centric model the VFL still operates under.

The VFL now have Sydney in the same sights.

[i'm-uninformed2]

As Ted said at his presser today: I know what the punishment is, but I don't know what the crime is.

Brilliant, old man.

[Go Swannies]

fellow posters, I know the decision of the AFL and the Swans (lack of) initial reaction were hard to stomach but what is beginning to really annoy me is the small minded comments from above. Do you really think the AFL wants any of their clubs to fail, particularly when they have just signed a $2.5B deal ? Move on, there are far more important issues to debate other than bizarre conspiracy theories

It wasn't a "decision" of the AFL - it was an unprecedented and unjustified move to limit an interstate team becoming stronger through and was accompanied by simultaneous approval for the Melbourne-based Premiers to become significantly stronger through trading. The Swans were knobbled, just as Brisbane was after the threepeat.

If the Hawks win their third this year - do you really think there will be any sanctions against them?

[Bloodthirsty]

fellow posters, I know the decision of the AFL and the Swans (lack of) initial reaction were hard to stomach but what is beginning to really annoy me is the small minded comments from above. Do you really think the AFL wants any of their clubs to fail, particularly when they have just signed a $2.5B deal ? Move on, there are far more important issues to debate other than bizarre conspiracy theories

Ah yes, the old 'conspiracy theory' tag. Helps people feel smart without doing any reasearch by blanket dismissal of those who actually bother to assess evidence. Anyone who questions something based on the balance of evidence is 'crazy' and 'delusional', but anyone who just accepts whatever they are told are 'sane' and 'smart'. Don't get me wrong though, it works.