2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ludwig]

There are a few interesting clauses in the standard player contracts that I read on one of the Big Footy Resource pages:

22.1 (e) All Standard Playing Contracts shall expire on 31 October in the final year of the Player’s contract unless the contract has been varied or renewed, in which case the contract shall expire on 31 October in the final year of the varied or renewed contract.

https://www.aflplayers.com.au/app/uploads/2020/11/AFL_CBA_2017-2022.pdf

Trigger clauses may be included in playing contracts, but neither the club nor the player can enforce a trigger clause for a contract extension without the agreement of the other.

CBA 2017-2022 said:

21.1 (g) An AFL Club and a Player shall not include provision in a Standard Playing Contract which would entitle either party to unilaterally exercise an option to extend the term of a Player’s contract.

https://www.aflplayers.com.au/app/up..._2017-2022.pdf

I was thinking about this in relation to Bell's contract and why it may have not been finalised. I also thought about how it might have pertained to the infamous trigger clauses in Tippett's contract.This was not the way I had understood the operation of a trigger clause before reading this.

[liz]

Not much point in a trigger clause if it's not enforceable on the other party.

[rb4x]

There are a few interesting clauses in the standard player contracts that I read on one of the Big Footy Resource pages:



I was thinking about this in relation to Bell's contract and why it may have not been finalised. I also thought about how it might have pertained to the infamous trigger clauses in Tippett's contract.This was not the way I had understood the operation of a trigger clause before reading this.

I saw some time ago that there was some sort of dispute over Bell's contract as to whether games he played as an unused medi sub would count for the trigger clause.

[Ludwig]

Not much point in a trigger clause if it's not enforceable on the other party.

Have you ever heard a footy journo say something like: so and so has a trigger clause but it doesn't matter because it's not enforceable anyway.

There's so much stuff that's presented inaccurately in the media. You would think there would be some true experts out there amongst them that can be relied upon. There are a few, who are not bad, but still fall short of where they should be.

American sports have Dave Zirin, for one, who does some top level investigative reporting and has written several books on important contemporary issues. Not just fluff.

[ugg]

Was just catching up the AFL Exchange podcast from the last day of the trade period. Not sure if someone else posted this earlier but according to them the pick 17 (Bulldogs) trade involved us sliding from 39 to 44 and swapping future third rounders. Also said St kilda would get a future 4th but wasn’t mentioned who would be giving it

[bloodspirit]

I saw Amartey and, I think, Clarke, walk past while I was getting my hair cut yesterday. Is that a promising sign for Clarke in terms of being re-signed? (He hasn't been re-signed yet, has he?)

[bloodspirit]

One of the first phantom drafts I've seen: AFL Phantom Draft 2021: Round 1 begins to take shape (theinnersanctum.com.au). Looks alright until they get to us. First they have the Tigers taking van Rooyen the pick before us. And then they have us taking Goater, which I can't see happening. Sadly there are a few good players that go between the (first round) pick we had and the (first round) pick we have now.

[Thunder Shaker]

Boring bagging Dawson at every opportunity. Get over it and move on. Dawson did nothing seriously wrong. If he lied big deal. He might not have wanted his intentions known till post season. That's understandable. He was uncontracted and perfectly entitled to leave for whatever reason. Notion that he owed us is garbage. Any time and effort we put into him was done to potentially benefit us not for altruistic reasons. We do not know for a fact that he deliberately leaked the meeting with Horse. Could have told someone who subsequently leaked. Plus who knows if what the media reported was even accurate. And even if he did leak it and it was accurately reported Big Whoop. Wasn't going to make any difference.
Notion of loyalty is rubbish. We offloaded a terrific player like Hannaberry because he busted and on big money. We could have kept a loyal servant like Hewett and offloaded Stephens instead or not pursued Ladhams if we needed more salary cap space. Instead we chose what was is in the best interests of the club. Can't have it both ways.
Presumably you object to players from other clubs joining us if their club wants to keep them.
Problem with the PSD has existed for years. I don't like the way it can be abused either but shouldn't whinge just because this year we were the ones hard done. Whilst I agree with what Pridham said the difficulty lies in fixing the problem.
Time to look forward to the draft ,an exciting 2022 and hopefully big crowds.
Cheer Cheer ...

I am as disappointed at his exit as anyone, but I accept that players can change clubs. Workers can change employers, players should be able to change clubs, and anything different is restraint of trade. Dawson didn't handle his exit very well, but I agree that we should move on.

[Steve]

Perhaps that’s the specific relevance of a ‘trigger’ - if a quantitative criteria is agreed at the commencement of a contract, then neither party is acting unilaterally to extend it if the trigger is met.

I read that clause as meaning you can’t include in a contract something like ‘player gets an extra x years if at the end of this contract they decide they want it’. Such as Josh Kelly, which is why that was described as a non-binding ‘understanding’.

As Liz said, it’s pointless to have the clause if it means both parties have to agree to go ahead with the trigger when the times comes anyway.

[Aprilbr]

Was just catching up the AFL Exchange podcast from the last day of the trade period. Not sure if someone else posted this earlier but according to them the pick 17 (Bulldogs) trade involved us sliding from 39 to 44 and swapping future third rounders. Also said St kilda would get a future 4th but wasn’t mentioned who would be giving it

It does not sound like we were giving up much on those other draft swaps! Its history now but it seems our final deal was very similar to that offered by the Crows early in the negotiating. I guess it comes down to comparing a likely similar pick in this year's draft to one next year.

[Aprilbr]

I see that the Pies delisted Rantall yesterday. The reason that I mention him is that we were potentially linked to him in his draft year, 3 years back. We ended up taking Stephens, Gould and Warner ahead of him (Warner was the player taken one before him at 40). I guess we got that one right!

[liz]

It does not sound like we were giving up much on those other draft swaps! Its history now but it seems our final deal was very similar to that offered by the Crows early in the negotiating. I guess it comes down to comparing a likely similar pick in this year's draft to one next year.

My understanding (and implied by CG without providing detail) is that the Crows didn't originally offer pick 17 on its own. There would have been other picks swaps in the Crows favour. So it was less than pick 17.

Even without those pick swaps, pick 17 this year will allow access to the player the picking club determines to be the 19th best in the pool, given the two early FS picks. Next year's Melbourne first round could be 18 or could be a lot higher. That makes the Dees' first round pick next year marginally more valuable than pick 17 this year. Maybe. Because it's a lot more complex than that ("time value of picks"; relative strength of each draft; differential evenness of each draft; types of players each draft is stronger on; etc etc etc).

[AB Swannie]

One of the first phantom drafts I've seen: AFL Phantom Draft 2021: Round 1 begins to take shape (theinnersanctum.com.au). Looks alright until they get to us. First they have the Tigers taking van Rooyen the pick before us. And then they have us taking Goater, which I can't see happening. Sadly there are a few good players that go between the (first round) pick we had and the (first round) pick we have now.

Nothing wrong with Goater.

Josh Goater highlights | 2021 NAB AFL Draft prospect | AFL - YouTube

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I see that the Pies delisted Rantall yesterday. The reason that I mention him is that we were potentially linked to him in his draft year, 3 years back. We ended up taking Stephens, Gould and Warner ahead of him (Warner was the player taken one before him at 40). I guess we got that one right!

For the sake of completeness, we must also have drafted Taylor ahead of him too.

[barry]

You mean his commission agent. Clubs are not supposed to talk directly to players.

The Injectors special agent was into Bobby Hill a month before he said he wanted out.

Poor old Bobby hill got played like a cheap banjo by the injectors. The pumped up his ego. He's not exactly " best 22" at any club, and has burnt a few bridges at the giants.
Dorodido is evil.