List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion 2022-->

[Anzacday]

Key dates attached so we know what’s going on when.

• Friday 30 September at 9.00am

• AFL Restricted Free Agency and Unrestricted Free Agency Period commences

Monday 03 October at 9.00am

• AFL Trade Period commences – Players & Selections

Friday 07 October at 5.00pm

• Close of AFL Restricted Free Agency Offer and Unrestricted Free Agency Period.

Monday 10 October

• AFL Draft Nominations open (9am)
• AFL Restricted Free Agency Matching Offer 3 Day Period Ends (5pm)

Wednesday 12 October at 7.30pm

• AFL Trade Period closes – players and selections

Thursday 03 November at 9.00am

• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (1) commences

Wednesday 09 November at 5.00pm

• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (1) closes

Friday 11 November at 9.00am

• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (2) commences

Tuesday 15 November by 5.00pm

• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (2) closes
• AFL Trade Period closes – selections only

Monday 21 November by 3.00pm

• AFL Draft Nominations close

Monday 28 November at 7.10pm

• 2022 AFL Draft Round One (Venue TBC)
• Father/Son, Academy & NGA and Players Bidding opens.

Tuesday 29 November

• AFL Trade Period – selections only (5.45pm to 6.30pm)
• 2022 AFL National Draft Round two until completion (7pm)
• Rookie Upgrade Period opens (10pm)
• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (3) commences (10pm)
• Rookie Upgrade Period closes (11pm)
• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (3) closes (11pm)

Wednesday 30 November

• AFL Pre-Season Draft (3pm, online)
• AFL Rookie Draft (3.20pm, online)

Thursday 01 December by 4.00pm

• Final AFL Club List Lodgement

 

[Bramax]

There's a lot of stereotyping around indigenous players in here. Gotta stop comparing every single indigenous player to Shai Bolton.

Bolton taken at pick 29 and we had pick 30 dammit.

 

[Pistol Night]

There's a lot of stereotyping around indigenous players in here. Gotta stop comparing every single indigenous player to Shai Bolton.

Hey? I compared him to Bolton because he actually moves like him. But thanks for the racism accusation drive by.

 

[Apex36]

You could be right but I think that may have been a bit of lip service by Cameron.

I did read it was very much a lifestyle decision for him and he took up to $200k less than other clubs may have been prepared to pay him.

It was a lifestyle decision vs other VIC clubs. He very much enjoyed the lifestyle and relative anonymity that Sydney provided, it’s well documented.

 

[Harry O]

Bolton taken at pick 29 and we had pick 30 dammit.

And Tom Stewart at 40? Who Bucks over ruled the recruiters on?

 

[Apex36]

Hey? I compared him to Bolton because he actually moves like him. But thanks for the racism accusation drive by.

Seriously, right? Hill isn’t compared to Bolton just because he’s indigenous, he’s literally the closest thing to the type Bolton is in the AFL, albeit unfulfilled. I mean, are any of us comparing Johnson to Bolton because he’s indigenous??

 

[PIEWITHSAUCE]

Hey? I compared him to Bolton because he actually moves like him. But thanks for the racism accusation drive by.

I posted exactly the same a day or two back - I looked at his highlights and within seconds thought of Bolton. Nothing to do with stereotyping.

 

[Pragmatic Shill]

So the garden tap connects to the tap adaptor.

The tap adaptor connects to the tap timer.

The tap timer connects to the hose connector.

The hose connector connects to the Pope hose.

The Pope hose connects to the sprinkler.

AND THAT'S HOW YOUR GARDEN GROOOOOWS.

On SM-G981B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[WakeUpPies]

So the garden tap connects to the tap adaptor.

The tap adaptor connects to the tap timer.

The tap timer connects to the hose connector.

The hose connector connects to the Pope hose.

The Pope hose connects to the sprinkler.

AND THAT'S HOW YOUR GARDEN GROOOOOWS.

On SM-G981B using BigFooty.com mobile app

Is De Goey the hose or the sprinkler?

 

[slugger01]

No - the afl rules specify the matching elements- length, base payments, match payments, additional services, individual incentives.

By not referencing any other elements/terms, the matching is limited to the above.

However, I imagine that if we were to seek to match but with behavioural clauses included, it would be pretty simple to apply to the General Counsel to determine that the offers aren’t “matched” in reality. AFL rules allow for various discretions to be exercised by the GC. This would likely be one of those times.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

The specific rule is as follows:

To qualify as a matching offer, the player’s current club must make an offer on the same terms as the new offer tabled by the player including:

• Contract length;
• Base payments;
• Total match payments;
• Total ASA payments;

So, offering a contract for 5 years, on the condition that the player need to abide by specific rules in the first 2 years (behaviour, dress standard, make of car they drive, mates they hang out with, etc etc), is not the same as matching an unconditional 5 year contract. Those are restrictive clauses, and they do not constitute matching an unconditional clause.

The word "INCLUDING" gives a few examples of what is required. It does not say this is a comprehensive list of what constitutes matching the offer.

 

[LuckyLee]

Any chance we back out of the McStay deal if Jordy walks?

The argument for getting McStay is greatly weakened if doing so cancels a compo pick for a DeGoey departure, or if we have to trade a second-rounder to Brisbane to make sure we get that compo pick.

It would be poor form to leave McStay in the lurch after verbally committing to him but geez, losing a first or second round pick as a consequence of recruiting him was never the plan and is surely too high a price to pay?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[slugger01]

Good summary. Not everyone is missing the point.

Yeah, sorry. MASSIVE generalisation by me.....

 

[AmericanMustard]

Any chance we back out of the McStay deal if Jordy walks?

The argument for getting McStay is greatly weakened if doing so cancels a compo pick for a DeGoey departure, or if we have to trade a second-rounder to Brisbane to make sure we get that compo pick.

It would be poor form to leave McStay in the lurch after verbally committing to him but geez, losing a first or second round pick as a consequence of recruiting him was never the plan and is surely too high a price to pay?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Nah that’s a simplistic media view that people like ‘Llordo’ etc spruik because they don’t quite understand how free agency works still and how clubs work together. We would simply trade a somewhat equivalent pick to Brisbane for McStay

 

[tranquilli lace]

And Tom Stewart at 40? Who Bucks over ruled the recruiters on?

Well this just ruined my day.

 

[sideswipe]

The specific rule is as follows:

To qualify as a matching offer, the player’s current club must make an offer on the same terms as the new offer tabled by the player including:

• Contract length;
• Base payments;
• Total match payments;
• Total ASA payments;

So, offering a contract for 5 years, on the condition that the player need to abide by specific rules in the first 2 years (behaviour, dress standard, make of car they drive, mates they hang out with, etc etc), is not the same as matching an unconditional 5 year contract. Those are restrictive clauses, and they do not constitute matching an unconditional clause.

The word "INCLUDING" gives a few examples of what is required. It does not say this is a comprehensive list of what constitutes matching the offer.

You get 0 out of 10 for statutory interpretation. Why? Because you were too lazy to go to the actual rule, in Annexure D of the CBA. “Including” isn’t included. And even if it was, you would probably want “including but not limited to”. “In relation to each of” is pretty specific.

Here is the relevant part of Annexure D. Read it and come back with another try.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[LuckyLee]

Nah that’s a simplistic media view that people like ‘Llordo’ etc spruik because they don’t quite understand how free agency works still and how clubs work together. We would simply trade a somewhat equivalent pick to Brisbane for McStay

We would have to give Brisbane a pick at least as good as the (2nd round?) compo pick they’d receive from the AFL.

That surely wasn’t part of the thinking when the idea of recruiting McStay first arose.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Apex36]

The specific rule is as follows:

To qualify as a matching offer, the player’s current club must make an offer on the same terms as the new offer tabled by the player including:

• Contract length;
• Base payments;
• Total match payments;
• Total ASA payments;

So, offering a contract for 5 years, on the condition that the player need to abide by specific rules in the first 2 years (behaviour, dress standard, make of car they drive, mates they hang out with, etc etc), is not the same as matching an unconditional 5 year contract. Those are restrictive clauses, and they do not constitute matching an unconditional clause.

The word "INCLUDING" gives a few examples of what is required. It does not say this is a comprehensive list of what constitutes matching the offer.

You’re a brave man going in to argue about contract law with a (former) solicitor who specialised in contract law.

 

[Jen2310]

We would have to give Brisbane a pick at least as good as the (2nd round?) compo pick they’d receive from the AFL.

That surely wasn’t part of the thinking when the idea of recruiting McStay first arose.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

No, it may not have been in the plans at the time. But its too far gone now. We are all in, so you just work through a way in getting him through. Brisbane would be lenient, as they would only be after points and they know he has indicated he wants to go.

They would likedly get a pick in the 30's anyway with compo, so find a pick with that and its done.

 

[AmericanMustard]

We would have to give Brisbane a pick at least as good as the (2nd round?) compo pick they’d receive from the AFL.

That surely wasn’t part of the thinking when the idea of recruiting McStay first arose.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Definitely not in the plan but we’ll pivot we don’t even have a second round pick so it will be pick in the mid-late 40s by the time academy/father sons etc come through, so it’s really a nothing pick anyway that we probably wouldn’t even use in the draft.

De Goey isn’t leaving anyway so I’m guessing this isn’t something we would need to worry about anyway

 

[Everybody Panic]

Seriously, right? Hill isn’t compared to Bolton just because he’s indigenous, he’s literally the closest thing to the type Bolton is in the AFL, albeit unfulfilled. I mean, are any of us comparing Johnson to Bolton because he’s indigenous??

Lately we've had Narkle compared to hill. We've had suggestions that Stacks heads not in it. There's a clear stereotyping of indigenous players. To take one example of many and suggest there's validity in comparison doesn't disprove the constant.

 

[Prexm]

Any chance we back out of the McStay deal if Jordy walks?

The argument for getting McStay is greatly weakened if doing so cancels a compo pick for a DeGoey departure, or if we have to trade a second-rounder to Brisbane to make sure we get that compo pick.

It would be poor form to leave McStay in the lurch after verbally committing to him but geez, losing a first or second round pick as a consequence of recruiting him was never the plan and is surely too high a price to pay?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

McStay could be all sorted out on Friday as a FA while we are still awaiting on what will happen with JDG into next week

 

[biggiemediums]

Lately we've had Narkle compared to hill. We've had suggestions that Stacks heads not in it. There's a clear stereotyping of indigenous players. To take one example of many and suggest there's validity in comparison doesn't disprove the constant.

Nothing you mentioned is racist in the slightest. You're allowed to compare players. Especially when they're mostly small forwards..

 

[thebaldfacts]

And Tom Stewart at 40? Who Bucks over ruled the recruiters on?

Please explain?????
When and how did Bucks overrule and what is your source?

 

[Apex36]

Lately we've had Narkle compared to hill. We've had suggestions that Stacks heads not in it. There's a clear stereotyping of indigenous players. To take one example of many and suggest there's validity in comparison doesn't disprove the constant.

Ok, everyone is a racist

 

[Everybody Panic]

Nothing you mentioned is racist in the slightest. You're allowed to compare players. Especially when they're mostly small forwards..

I didn't say racism. I said stereotyping. Must have missed all those games that Narkle played small forward. My bad.

 

[ThePhantom777]

We're not giving up a first round pick for Mitchell are we?