F%^&ed up the a$$ by the AFL

[SuperDuper]

This bull%^&t with the AFL not telling us the Goddard compensation until half way through the trade period, is a disgrace.

1. They should have told us as soon as he was offered a contract at Essendon.
Why? Because then we could make an INFORMED decision on whether to keep him.
Maybe if they said we get a 3rd rounder, we would say.. stuff that we will match the Bombers offer.
Now, this may be slightly exaggerating as I doubt we will get 3rd round, but clubs need this information to actually make INFORMED CHOICES ..

Same goes for Port, which illustrates this better... they were not sure whether to match Richmonds offer to Chaplin, and should have been told what they were going to get.
In fact, they should also have been told: look, you will get 2nd rounder for Pearce.. and a 2nd rounder for Chaplin, OR because there are 2 players, you have lost Pearce and will get a 2nd rounder for him, but losing Chaplin as well will means for the two combined you get a first rounder...
i.e. is 2 players = 2 picks or.... 2 players = a higher pick?

NOW I dont care what the formula says... BUT it is ONLY FAIR that the club can make INFORMED CHOICES

Maybe Port could think... oh, we rather a first round draft pick than Chapiln... OR.. hang on the AFL are only giving as round 2 + round 3 for Pearce + Chapiln.. we are better off matching Chaplins offer....

2. I KNOW: that the formula changes if St. Kilda takes an uncontracted player itself, so they cant give us the FINAL RESULT until after free agency......
That is even MORE REASON to tell us what the pick would be AS IT STANDS...
Why not tell St. Silda: look, you get 13 for Goddard, but this will change if you take someone... ???????????

Then, IF St. Kilda were contemplating Maloney for example, or Rivers, they SHOULD BE ABLE to go to the AFL and say.. look, you told us we will get 13 as it stands, but if we take Rivers, what will we end up with? The afl can say.. 2nd rounder (pick 38)..
SO THEN saints can decide: 13 VERSUS Rivers+38.. ie make an INFORMED CHOICE


We are shafted losing Goddard, all we want is INFORMATION so we can actually weigh up options

As it stands, we are too scared to participate further in Free agency, because we are scared it will affect the goddard compensation
What happens if the AFL tells us on 19 Oct.. Oh, Goddard is > 27 years old, therefore you only get 2nd rounder... and we have sat on our asses during Free agency because we HOPED to get pick 13

The lack if trasparency is A DISGRACE and is DISTORTING THE TRADE PERIOD

3. The fact we do not know our compensation before half way through the trade period is EVEN worse when we try to use our compensation pick to actually trade and get somewhere... Geelong gets the jump on us with Caddy, because we wont have anything to actually offer.. and wil have to SIT ON OUR HANDS FOR A WEEK hoping to get pick 13


THIS IS A DISGRACE AND THE AFL NEEDS TO FIX IT NOW!!! NOT NEXT SEASON

[gringo]

They will get around to it by next year. We will be the ones burnt then they will use us as an example of why they need to fix it so collingwood and essendon aren't inconvenienced next season when they lose players they can't afford to fit next to Ball and Goddard.

[8856brother]

Love the passion. Not sure about the heading.

[Enrico_Misso]

I agree.
It's a disgrace.
It should be an open and transparent process.

Instead we have to wait and wait.
Then that dirty little $#%$#@ER Ander@#um will make some random decision with no explanation or intellectual rigour and we will be expected just to cop it.
A ludicrous third world banana republic make it up as you go lunacy from the man who tried to solve the interchange problems with post-it notes.

Simply wouldn't happen in a properly organised competition.
But then again a lopsided biased draw would be untenable in a properly organised moral competition.

Don't be surprised if we wind up totally shafted with no explanation.
But if a club in one of their "preferred marketing zones" is in a similar situation they will bend over backwards to look after them.

Fourth rate administration looking after a first rate game.

[St. Luke]

Again it looks like the most vulnerable clubs will be hit hard by free agency

[The OtherThommo]

Again it looks like the most vulnerable clubs will be hit hard by free agency

I refuse to accept we are "vulnerable". I don't like the fact the AFL makes it up as they go along, but we're nobody's victim.

Many had us dead and buried when Lyon left, we'd made a loss, nobody wanted to be at Seaford, etc, etc. There's no point in lauding mobs like Sydney if you learn jack shyte from what they do.

The loss we made last year was due to the Moorabbin write offs (we made a cash profit). Yet, most, including so called accountants, couldn't even read our financial statements. There's been bugger all acknowledgement about the CEO influencing the AFL to the point where we are now a "growth corridor" club, with the accompanying development payments.

We're going OK. We need to revamp the list, sure, but managed to be very hard to beat in just about every game we played this year. We had a % better than about all bar 4 clubs. Our worst defeat was about 6 goals (Hawthorn, when Big Mac was late withdrawal and Fish was gone by half time). Other than that, we lost a fistful by under 2 goals.

F*** victimhood, I'm bullish. We're in a good spot, we're well managed and we've got good future.

[St Ick]

Look I think its a bit of an overreaction. The AFL have said they will give an indicitive pick to us which they probably have. But if we get someone or if Port lose 5 players that pick will change so it cant be finalised.

The thing I don't like is the fact we cant use it in a trade until half way through the two week trade period! Thats silly as I see no positives to come out of the fact free agency and trade week overlap.
One thing is for sure, if a deal for Caddy isnt done next week, we have him...

And I agree, despite the undoubted passion in the post, could have gone a more subtle title me thinks...

[noob]

Why does free agency need to be 3 weeks long? 2 should be enough. When its 3 you've got like 2-3 days (by the looks of it to trade it off) that's not enough time to assess your options if we don't actually know what the pick might be.

[plugger66]

Just because we dont know doesnt mean the Saints dont know. i would be just about 100% sure we know we are getting pick 13 unless we get another player through FA. They cant tell us exactly yet because it isnt finished so other FA main change the order. Why does it matter? It wont effect trading as clubs will know the approximate pick and arent going to pass up us bidding for a player if that means they get a worse trade. Clubs will wait.

[dragit]

Must be hard for Port right now…

Lost Chaplin & Pearce, interested in Monfries & Slattery.

Do you think Chaplin & Pearce combined would be worth a first round pick, they are both probably band 2-3 on their own I would imagine?

I see they are looking at making a trade instead of diluting their compo.

[howlinwolf]

The way I understand it is that our pick 12 is not set in stone and therefore our compensation pick directly after this may not be 13.
This can happen if a team that finished below us, i.e has a lower number pick loses a player like we did then our picks shuffle down.
The way they have engineered the process definite pick numbers for any clubs can't be determined until the dust has settled on FA.
I'm happy to be corrected

[dragit]

The way I understand it is that our pick 12 is not set in stone and therefore our compensation pick directly after this may not be 13.
This can happen if a team that finished below us, i.e has a lower number pick loses a player like we did then our picks shuffle down.
The way they have engineered the process definite pick numbers for any clubs can't be determined until the dust has settled on FA.
I'm happy to be corrected

If Port & Melbourne were awarded band 1 compensation for lost FA's (Chaplin/Pearce, Rivers), would our first pick 12 drift to 14?

So many scenarios.

[BigMart]

The system is flawed. A joke actually!

How can you possibly not know what compensation you're getting for a player you are bargaining for??? It could be the defining factor in your decision to match an offer??

And the club has stated it does not know what the compo is and is not happy, but not upsetting anyone as per usual...

And what do other FA players have to do with this deal?? Mutually exclusive.....

If we lose Goddard, we get pick 13... But if we get say, Brent Moloney in a seperate deal we might get pick 30??

Who works out that formula, or is it just a circus as usual??
If you lose a player, you should be compensated the worth of that player... If you get another player, the penalty you receive is space in your salary cap.... If you have room, good luck to you

How are Essendon Punished for picking up a star.... Do they lose anything???

But we will be punished if we pick up a player by FA by getting less compo for BJ.... But if we don't we get a better deal??

So leading into the trade period/draft we don't know our bargaining system..... Good system

[dragit]

Who works out that formula, or is it just a circus as usual??

usual circus indeed…

I love the term "AFL-determined-formula" which actually has no meaning unless they provide details. What is the formula?

[BigMart]

What ever supports the new clubs and the clubs that create the most income

[plugger66]

The system is flawed. A joke actually!

How can you possibly not know what compensation you're getting for a player you are bargaining for??? It could be the defining factor in your decision to match an offer??

And the club has stated it does not know what the compo is and is not happy, but not upsetting anyone as per usual...

And what do other FA players have to do with this deal?? Mutually exclusive.....

If we lose Goddard, we get pick 13... But if we get say, Brent Moloney in a seperate deal we might get pick 30??

Who works out that formula, or is it just a circus as usual??
If you lose a player, you should be compensated the worth of that player... If you get another player, the penalty you receive is space in your salary cap.... If you have room, good luck to you

How are Essendon Punished for picking up a star.... Do they lose anything???

But we will be punished if we pick up a player by FA by getting less compo for BJ.... But if we don't we get a better deal??

So leading into the trade period/draft we don't know our bargaining system..... Good system

Well it could be like other FA around the world and get nothing. If people on here dont think the club know their pick then they are kidding themselves. The only issue as BM points out is getting another player under FA but again the club would contact Ken Wood and find out what that would cost them and then they make a decision.

And of course clubs arent punished for picking up players otherwise it is a trade. I must say I dont understand the reasoning for maybe giving a club less if they lose someone in FA and then gain someone but maybe there is a logical reason.

[Dis Believer]

Actually, what Bigmart has just pointed out, is a major flaw (and again an unintended consequence from the masters of them).

If a club recruit a free agaent, and lose no-one themselves, there is no penalty other than salary cap space paid by that club.

However if you are unfortunate enough to lose a free agent yourself, you also pay a second penalty of having your compensation diluted. Why should one team pay a penalty for recruiting a free agent and the other not?

What it means is that (if the opportunity presents), you should only be trying to recruit free agents in seasons where you will not lose any yourself in order to maximise your return on any that you lose.

The other thing that needs to happen quick smart is that all teams need to be on the same salary cap! Both the two newbies ASAP, and Sydney. The fact that Sydney have a "cost of living" extra 10% ($900k) is a joke. Melbourne's no cheaper these days, and they are bidding $900k for Tippet supposedly (what a coincidence). Funny how Sydney always seem to get their man........

[oh when the]

Didn't the club know the rules before they got rid of Goddard , or is Afl rules on the run ¿

[ozrulestrace]

Didn't the club know the rules before they got rid of Goddard , or is Afl rules on the run ¿

I'm reposting my post from Monday night after Scott's phone call to SEN and as much as I don't want to say "I told you so." I'm going to say "I told you so"

Scott said they would be "astounded" if the club wasn't given pick number 13 as compensation, well if we're waiting for the AFL to decide after the trade is done then standby for a rank decision that will well and truly screw the St Kilda Football Club. I'm not sure the AFL is that clear about the rules themselves and loopholes and backroom deals will destory the whole thing
Some day, one day, this will end up as a Supreme Court action.
ozrulestrace

[St Chris]

Clubs can ask the AFL what band of compo they are going to get, and I believe the only thing that will change that band is signing free agents themselves.

I have no doubt we know exactly what we are going to get, and will happily discuss trades based on that info, its just that none will be officially signed off until the official free agent period ends.

[joffaboy]

Scott said they would be "astounded" if the club wasn't given pick number 13 as compensation,

Actually, he said he woudl be astounded if the Saints didn't get a first round pick. I know it sounds like splitting hairs but there is a significant difference.

[plugger66]

Actually, what Bigmart has just pointed out, is a major flaw (and again an unintended consequence from the masters of them).

If a club recruit a free agaent, and lose no-one themselves, there is no penalty other than salary cap space paid by that club.

However if you are unfortunate enough to lose a free agent yourself, you also pay a second penalty of having your compensation diluted. Why should one team pay a penalty for recruiting a free agent and the other not?

What it means is that (if the opportunity presents), you should only be trying to recruit free agents in seasons where you will not lose any yourself in order to maximise your return on any that you lose.

The other thing that needs to happen quick smart is that all teams need to be on the same salary cap! Both the two newbies ASAP, and Sydney. The fact that Sydney have a "cost of living" extra 10% ($900k) is a joke. Melbourne's no cheaper these days, and they are bidding $900k for Tippet supposedly (what a coincidence). Funny how Sydney always seem to get their man........

There is no doubt there is an issue but there must be some logical reason why you are penalised if you recruit a FA after losing one. Cant think of a reason at the moment unless as you suggested they dont want to many players swapping clubs so they would rather you recruit one year and lose the next year. That may make some sense. As for the 10% for Sydney i dont mind that as it is dearer to live there but all players should just have 10% added to their contract and it shouldnt be used for recruiting. I dont buy that they had 900K spare on this years cap anyway. Like all succesful clubs I would think they are on 100%.

[satchmo]

adrian anderson will decide what we get based on how nice we have been to him, and whether or not we have access to the polaroids that eddie possess.

[Dave McNamara]

... How can you possibly not know what compensation you're getting for a player you are bargaining for??? It could be the defining factor in your decision to match an offer??...

The only reason I can think of, and this is far-fetched, but still possible...

Tragic Joke decides to move to Somalia to perform aid work in repartation for the 'sins of his family'. (Good on him too.)
The Skunks, being desperate, offer free agent Jon Brown $1.5mil to takeover from Traj. (Yes, I know Brown is getting on, but the Skunks are confident that their mysterious blood 'infusing' and other techniques can keep him on the park.)
Brown accepts.
AFL declares Brown worth Band 1 compensation. They would, coz the Teddys are one of the AFL's artifically inseminated love children.
Everyone with a pick after the Teddys has that/those picks move back one notch.
Teddys finished lower than us on the ladder.
Our picks 12 & 13 suddenly become 13 & 14...

Yep, unlikely, but stranger things have happened... BBBB's infamous Preliminary Final indiscretion being ruled as low impact and within play, anyone...?

The other thing that needs to happen quick smart is that all teams need to be on the same salary cap! Both the two newbies ASAP, and Sydney. The fact that Sydney have a "cost of living" extra 10% ($900k) is a joke. Melbourne's no cheaper these days, and they are bidding $900k for Tippet supposedly (what a coincidence). Funny how Sydney always seem to get their man........

Totally agree TB!!!!!!!!!

This Bloods spirit stuff is total bull!

Give us an extra $900K to pay for the cost of living at the Seaford cafe strip,
we too could have boosted our 'bottom six',
and without the need for any AFL-Tribunal-Barry Hall type rigging the system,
we would have won at leat two flags also, quite possibly more.

I have no respect for the plastic Sydney Swines and their AFL manipulated hollow victories.

And to rub it in a bit more, Swines have just been 'handed' (I use that term on purpose) another cup, have yet to offload any players, yet the 'premiership' (I use that term loosely) club can suddenly turn around and 'find' close to $1mil to make Tippet realise that (like Clarke from the Teddys last year)... oh well, maybe I'm not so homesick after all...




PS: Re former 'Sydney champion and triple Brownlow medalist' Bobby Skilton handing over those ill-gotten medalions the other week... well I've checked the records, and I still can't find where the chimp ever played a single game for 'Sydney'...

[plugger66]

... How can you possibly not know what compensation you're getting for a player you are bargaining for??? It could be the defining factor in your decision to match an offer??...

The only reason I can think of, and this is far-fetched, but still possible...

Tragic Joke decides to move to Somalia to perform aid work in repartation for the 'sins of his family'. (Good on him too.)
The Skunks, being desperate, offer free agent Jon Brown $1.5mil to takeover from Traj. (Yes, I know Brown is getting on, but the Skunks are confident that their mysterious blood 'infusing' and other techniques can keep him on the park.)
Brown accepts.
AFL declares Brown worth Band 1 compensation. They would, coz the Teddys are one of the AFL's artifically inseminated love children.
Everyone with a pick after the Teddys has that/those picks move back one notch.
Teddys finished lower than us on the ladder.
Our picks 12 & 13 suddenly become 13 & 14...

Yep, unlikely, but stranger things have happened... BBBB's infamous Preliminary Final indiscretion being ruled as low impact and within play, anyone...?

The other thing that needs to happen quick smart is that all teams need to be on the same salary cap! Both the two newbies ASAP, and Sydney. The fact that Sydney have a "cost of living" extra 10% ($900k) is a joke. Melbourne's no cheaper these days, and they are bidding $900k for Tippet supposedly (what a coincidence). Funny how Sydney always seem to get their man........

Totally agree TB!!!!!!!!!

This Bloods spirit stuff is total bull!

Give us an extra $900K to pay for the cost of living at the Seaford cafe strip,
we too could have boosted our 'bottom six',
and without the need for any AFL-Tribunal-Barry Hall type rigging the system,
we would have won at leat two flags also, quite possibly more.

I have no respect for the plastic Sydney Swines and their AFL manipulated hollow victories.

And to rub it in a bit more, Swines have just been 'handed' (I use that term on purpose) another cup, have yet to offload any players, yet the 'premiership' (I use that term loosely) club can suddenly turn around and 'find' close to $1mil to make Tippet realise that (like Clarke from the Teddys last year)... oh well, maybe I'm not so homesick after all...




PS: Re former 'Sydney champion and triple Brownlow medalist' Bobby Skilton handing over those ill-gotten medalions the other week... well I've checked the records, and I still can't find where the chimp ever played a single game for 'Sydney'...

I thought he played for the Swans. I cant find a single game Ted Whitten played for Western Bulldogs.