Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation Part 3

[cmndstab]

This is the strongest argument against what the AFL have done to the GWS players. Their staggering inconsistency, in choosing when & who to charge, is a massive problem.

Should the GWS players have been suspended? Probably.
Should De Goey also have been suspended? Definitely.

The fact that De Goey wasn't suspended, and the GWS players were, is a massive problem for the AFL.

Far be it from me to try to get inside the head of the AFL, but I suspect the thinking has to do with this "Wacky Wednesday" function being, at least nominally, an AFL/club event. They're there as a group, representing the AFL, and they pull a bunch of offensive shit that the AFL doesn't like. So the AFL decides to get ahead of the fallout.

Whereas in the De Goey case, I imagine the AFL would be at pains to say, that has nothing to do with us. Let the courts handle that one.

As always, the AFL is primarily (solely?) motivated by protecting their brand.

 

[Vader]

Far be it from me to try to get inside the head of the AFL, but I suspect the thinking has to do with this "Wacky Wednesday" function being, at least nominally, an AFL/club event. They're there as a group, representing the AFL, and they pull a bunch of offensive shit that the AFL doesn't like. So the AFL decides to get ahead of the fallout.

Whereas in the De Goey case, I imagine the AFL would be at pains to say, that has nothing to do with us. Let the courts handle that one.

As always, the AFL is primarily (solely?) motivated by protecting their brand.

The AFL can & do take action when a player does something that brings the game into disrepute in their private time.

In the De Goey case, his actions were apparently consensual, so there's no case to answer.

As you say, the AFL is motivated by protecting their brand, and all decisions made need to be seen through this lens. Having senior players unavailable is a 2-edged sword - it can send a powerful message, but it also detracts from bums on seats revenue if they're missing from the action. The AFL likes to have it both ways, by hammering lesser players, while allowing the stars to skate through - the infamous McAdam suspension is another example of this.

 

[Slime Roy]

Looks like that on mine too

& for me

 

[50BC]

Player Agents have a duty to their clients, not to hold grudges and settle scores.

If Port held their nerve and pissed off Paul Connors, and next year Connors was looking after a player where the best deal for him is at Port, then Connors has a duty to deal with Port for his client. If he doesn't, then his license should be taken away.

Well that's the theory. Some agents, particularly the ones with lots of clients have too much power and aren't really held accountable. Have been stories about Connors essentially blackmailing clubs for ages

 

[50BC]

This is the strongest argument against what the AFL have done to the GWS players. Their staggering inconsistency, in choosing when & who to charge, is a massive problem.

Should the GWS players have been suspended? Probably.
Should De Goey also have been suspended? Definitely.

The fact that De Goey wasn't suspended, and the GWS players were, is a massive problem for the AFL.

does seem Melb based players are held to one standard and interstate based to another. Cant upset the darling clubs

 

[Vader]

does seem Melb based players are held to one standard and interstate based to another. Cant upset the darling clubs

There's the Vic vs non-Vic bias, and also a nobodies vs stars bias - with the latter being infinitely more significant.

 

[CutAboveTheRest]

Is that drafting or development ??

You tell me?

 

[50BC]

There's the Vic vs non-Vic bias, and also a nobodies vs stars bias - with the latter being infinitely more significant.

True but an overlap I guess as the Melb media focuses on Vic based players

 

[feenix67]

There's the Vic vs non-Vic bias, and also a nobodies vs stars bias - with the latter being infinitely more significant.

I'd say it's the AFL owned v non AFL owned bias.

Nobody at GWS is going to take action against the AFL. Collingwood, on the other hand...