Band 1 compensation

[Big Max]

I'm still puzzled that Battle has reportedly gone to Hawthorn for less money.

This just doesn't sit comfortably with me, as it may imply there's a 'brown paper bag' involved.

I'm surprised this question hasn't been raised either by the club or the media.

When the 'restricted free agency' was introduced, it was my understanding the club had the option to 'match' the rival clubs offer.

[diddley]

When the 'restricted free agency' was introduced, it was my understanding the club had the option to 'match' the rival clubs offer.

“A restricted free agent is a player who has served eight or more years with one club, is out of contract, and is in the top 25 per cent of wage earners at their club. An offer to a restricted free agent may be matched by their club.”

Simply put, Battle was not in Saints top 25% paid players in 2024, so did not have the right to match.

[D.B.Cooper]

I'm still puzzled that Battle has reportedly gone to Hawthorn for less money.

This just doesn't sit comfortably with me, as it may imply there's a 'brown paper bag' involved.

I'm surprised this question hasn't been raised either by the club or the media.

When the 'restricted free agency' was introduced, it was my understanding the club had the option to 'match' the rival clubs offer.

Big Max, there are posters on this site writing Battle left for less money than we offered as fact, yet I am still to see any evidence supporting this theory, other than something from the ever reliable and accurate Tom Morris.

I have asked a couple of the posters who write this theory as fact to validate, but none of my questions have been responded to.

My best guess is the posters perpetuating this, read Morris Minor’s comment and now quote it as fact.

[King Max]

I'm still puzzled that Battle has reportedly gone to Hawthorn for less money.

This just doesn't sit comfortably with me, as it may imply there's a 'brown paper bag' involved.

I'm surprised this question hasn't been raised either by the club or the media.

When the 'restricted free agency' was introduced, it was my understanding the club had the option to 'match' the rival clubs offer.

Big Max, there are posters on this site writing Battle left for less money than we offered as fact, yet I am still to see any evidence supporting this theory, other than something from the ever reliable and accurate Tom Morris.

I have asked a couple of the posters who write this theory as fact to validate, but none of my questions have been responded to.

My best guess is the posters perpetuating this, read Morris Minor’s comment and now quote it as fact.

from afl.com.au

Battle has signed a lucrative six-year deal at Hawthorn until the end of 2030, but is understood to have left more money on the table by rejecting St Kilda's counter-offer.

The defender grappled with the decision across most of the 2024 season and was torn between staying the course at the Saints or joining a new project at the Hawks.

[St Dave]

Well done by the pres for his preemptive swipe at the AFL this week. It appears to have hit the mark

Would not have had any impact

Appears that it did

I don't think part of the compo calculation relates to 'has the president had a public sook'

It’s good that he is speaking for the club and trying to get a more level playing field. I think it was calculated and smart.

I am happy for advocating for the club, but in this instance I feel it came across as a sook at best (because he already raised this issue earlier in the year when the afl changed part of the rules, so why is he still raising it when things have changed, they aren't going to change things again without seeing the impact of their current changes) and excuse making at worst so he has something to complain about in a few years if we underperform.

Smart is the lobbying he did earlier in the season along with other presidents to actually get the rules changed.

[SaintPav]

Did you listen to Basset’s whole speech?

[saynta]

Opposition fans 'seething' according to the biased (against us) press.

So suck it up ladies because we don't really give a s***.

Laughing my effing head off.

[SaintPav]

Envy rots the bones (Prov 14:30)

[Yorkeys]

Just watched channel 9 panel discussion. Barrett, Cornes, Morris, Bartell.
Morris early characterises our President as a whinger - none of the others suggest thats a bit disrespectful and incorrect.
Barrett then talks to a multi year multi club list of compensations, trying to reconcile them in hindsight- they can't so declare the system a farce.
Now these men present themselves as knowledgeable experts, and while I can't pretend I understand the several considerations involved in setting compo, I know a third party's hindsight opinion about the ability of the subject player is not relevant.
They don't particularly rate Josh so the compensation is too generous they say with confidence.
But even in my state of ignorance I have gathered that the key element is how much money the competing contracts involve, that is what the market's assessment is, not the subjective opinions of paid clickbaiters. Really are there any decent AFL commentators?