Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

the AFL and AFLPA got this one wrong.

trying to implement an american system into an australian culture not driven by money.

As you all know it was suppose to send the players wanting more money to lower clubs, or midrangers getting low balled due to A++ players in their team getting all the $$.

but the power of a premiership cup or just to play in finals has opened up the Sea of players wanting Trades to top of the table teams.... Shows that players are currently getting paid enough, and want team success more.

the longer FA is left in its current form, the more likely we will have a comp with less than 18 teams.

The bottom feeders wont be able to survive.

woodys_world69 wrote:the AFL and AFLPA got this one wrong.

trying to implement an american system into an australian culture not driven by money.

As you all know it was suppose to send the players wanting more money to lower clubs, or midrangers getting low balled due to A++ players in their team getting all the $$.

but the power of a premiership cup or just to play in finals has opened up the Sea of players wanting Trades to top of the table teams.... Shows that players are currently getting paid enough, and want team success more.

the longer FA is left in its current form, the more likely we will have a comp with less than 18 teams.

The bottom feeders wont be able to survive.

And again what we have been saying for years: the draft itself is a restraint of trade. i.e. not being able to select your employer of choice when entering the system, at least for the first two years.

Do we care about the "bottom feeders" as such?
The comp should never have expanded past 16 teams, IMO.

Nobody, apart from that stupid fat Greek wanted the Greatest Waste of Space, or The Beach Boys to enter the comp.

I've zero sympathy for the AwFuL after 2018GF fiasco. None whatsoever.

Yes, it's a disaster. And it's helped Hawthorn (despite the loss of Buddy) and Richmond.

piedys wrote:The comp should never have expanded past 16 teams, IMO.

Agree, Dyso.

16 teams was more than enough and expanding to 18 teams has diluted the competition and arguably weakened it.

In relation to free agency, the byproduct of it is it's empowered players to dictate the terms of their playing arrangements compared to the clubs. It's led to a competition of distrust and one whether supporters are unable to get invested in their players anymore.

Though, it's here to stay so we better start accepting it. I don't see the AFLPA ever agreeing to relinquishing it after fighting hard for it in the first place.

K wrote:Yes, it's a disaster. And it's helped Hawthorn (despite the loss of Buddy) and Richmond.

I think Hawthorn benefiting from free agency is a bit of myth. The only player they signed in their premiership years that was a free agent was James Frawley from Melbourne.

What benefited Hawthorn indirectly was the inclusion of Gold Coast and GWS. The draft was diluted in 2010-2012, which hurt the ability of other club to compete with them and free agency was only in its infancy then.

I was vaguely thinking of Lake, but I see he was traded to Hawthorn at the end of 2012...

But wait...

It looks like they traded him for not much under threat of looming free agency:


Free agency stopped Lake 'being held to ransom'

https://www.afl.com.au/news/445709/free ... -to-ransom

woodys_world69 wrote: And again what we have been saying for years: the draft itself is a restraint of trade. i.e. not being able to select your employer of choice when entering the system, at least for the first two years.

Why hasn’t this been challenged in court? Surely it needs to tested in law?

Lazza wrote:

piedys wrote: And again what we have been saying for years: the draft itself is a restraint of trade. i.e. not being able to select your employer of choice when entering the system, at least for the first two years.

Why hasn’t this been challenged in court? Surely it needs to tested in law?

I'm waiting for the day bro!

It seems you must abide by the terms and conditions when nominating for the draft, i.e. accepting the contract of the team that drafts you for a minimum of two years, or... stand out of AFL system until that period has expired.
Which in itself is perhaps extortion?

Thing is, don't they have a similar draft in the NFL and NBA in the USA, as well as the baseball leagues, and college football?
We don't ever hear of those being challenged, and the dollars at stake are far larger over there, and lawyers aren't in short supply either.

So no, I cannot answer why legal challenges fails to occur in AFL...