AFL slaps trade ban on Swans

[magic.merkin]

Even if the lift or soften the ban it probably will be too late for us to snare anyone of any worth as they all will have been snapped up by other clubs.

Maybe, I think/hope the swans have been active behind the scenes on both fronts (Player and the AFL) with current knowledge of how it is/will play out.

[Doctor J.]

I think he's one of the bigger duds I've seen in footy. Spin doctor. No substance.

Couldn't agree much more with this statement.

[i'm-uninformed2]

A total bed wetter

[stevoswan]

A 'C-bomb!!'

[707]

A bum boy for Maguire ands Newbold, total wimpish tosser!

[jono2707]

I've heard that the stupid ban has been modified to allow for a like for like replacement in terms of $$$'s.

[churry]

Here's the update.
AFL statement - Trade restrictions update - sydneyswans.com.au

"AFL General Counsel Andrew Dillon said the Swans had raised with the AFL that the upcoming Exchange Period and List Lodgment dates may present a number of potential eventualities including losing a player whose contract was beyond the average-wage mark and the club would not be able to adequately replace that player with the restrictions in place."

"Mr Dillon said the club and the AFL had agreed that the Swans would be permitted to replace one player who leaves the club as either a free agent or as part of a trade, with a contract offer of up to $450,000 per year. If the club chooses to replace a departing player with this option, the Sydney Swans? transitional COLA amount of $600,000 for the 2016 season will be lowered by 9.8 per cent of the traded-out player?s contract, if that player was contracted for 2016."

[YvonneH]

So we can replace one player with another with a contract of up to $450,000. Whoopi.
In my humble opinion this is still not good enough as we should never have been banned in the first place, but it is better than nothing I suppose.

[Meg]

And the justification for the figure of $450,000 is ....?? And the justification for any form of restriction (other than the deduction of the COLA amount that applied to the outgoing player) is .....??

Pathetic!

[Ludwig]

This was a pragmatic compromise that effectively lifts the trade ban on the Swans. There are 2 main points:

1. The AFL admitted that the Swans had not broken any rules. So it places the trade ban clearly into a ruling based on vindictiveness and retribution. It can hardly be argued otherwise.
2. We can now bring in a player up to what was almost certainly the effective maximum in compensation that we could afford, given the squeeze on salary cap created by the loss of COLA. We probably went through the available candidates we might have interest in and what we might be able and willing to offer and this was the number we came up with.

The AFL saved face (undeservedly) and the Swans saved the anguish of continuing the battle for no practical gain.

We can move on now, but the memories will linger.

[Meg]

Yes I agree with all of the above Ludwig. Still makes me angry though.

[dimelb]

Ludwig, like Meg I agree with all you say, but the remaining problem is that there is no acknowledgment of misapplied authority and thus no public recognition that the same, or a similar, misuse of authority may happen again. I still wish we had rolled out a suitable lawyer (acting pro bono, and they apparently did offer) as a hedge against future misuse of power.

[stellation]

$450k seems kinds of cheap to me for Leuenberger.

[troyjones2525]

I still feel its incredibly weak by the Swans! Yes we may not have the money but it effectively still puts us out of the running for anyone with high end talent, even if they wanted to come to us. It sounds as though we are only a week or 2 from Jetta announcing a desire to leave the club so looks like it'll be Jetta out and possibly Leunberger in. Doesn't fill me with much hope for 2016 with the gaping holes on our list being that of genuine speed and most notably skills!

[Mel_C]

Hang on so if we don't trade a player out what are we allowed to do?? Does the amount go back to $350,000?

It's probably 99% likely that Jetta is going and that's why they have changed the salary amount but even still this is a disgrace. We are still being punished for doing nothing wrong. And the AFL have admitted in their statement that we have followed the rules!!