We shall see. Pies, by the way, were one of the teams that have argued it would be ridiculous to move the goalposts now.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Blues G-U-I-L-T-Y
- Thread starter The Ewok
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Yes I can see Collingwood helping Carlton by enabling Carlton to keep their first two draft picks and keeping draft pick 16 when they could have 14.
Yes Collingwood are going to help Carlton.
Just pointing out the Pies have already complained. Basically teams that traded out of the first round will complain, those who stand to benefit will no doubt be ringing Demetriou pressing the need for urgent action. Thus the keen interest of Roos supporters.
mellowyellow
𝑅𝐹𝒞
a thougght out of left field
Its all specualtion at the minute but the blues might salvage something positive out of the current events.Lets assume that they dont loose there draft picks but instead loose a sufficient amount of premiership points that ensures they again finish bottom and pick up next years top 2 picks.
An unlikely scenario but gee would that be just punishment or a long term reward for rorting
Its all specualtion at the minute but the blues might salvage something positive out of the current events.Lets assume that they dont loose there draft picks but instead loose a sufficient amount of premiership points that ensures they again finish bottom and pick up next years top 2 picks.
An unlikely scenario but gee would that be just punishment or a long term reward for rorting
- Jul 20, 2002
- 18,184
- 10,243
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Blyth Spartans, Dallas Cowboys
Re: a thougght out of left field
Here's hoping the AFL are sensible enough to see that and if they use premiership points just make it hard enough for them to make the finals but unlikely to do exceptionally well in draft picks.
Originally posted by mellowyellow
Its all specualtion at the minute but the blues might salvage something positive out of the current events.Lets assume that they dont loose there draft picks but instead loose a sufficient amount of premiership points that ensures they again finish bottom and pick up next years top 2 picks.
Here's hoping the AFL are sensible enough to see that and if they use premiership points just make it hard enough for them to make the finals but unlikely to do exceptionally well in draft picks.
Pagan --------->
Roos fans ---->
Just on the fine print, what did Richmond and Collingwood trade? Did Richmond trade their #4 pick OR their first round draft pick. If the trading fine print is the former (#4 pick), then they might have some legal ground for a challenge. However, if it's the latter (the more general "first round draft pick"), then there may be an assumption that all first round picks are "equal", and hence, their grounds for legal action would be reduced.
You mean Carlton cheated and still got last? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
On a more serious note:
I assume that Shinboners is right in saying that all first round draft picks would be considered equal in this regard.
On a more serious note:
I assume that Shinboners is right in saying that all first round draft picks would be considered equal in this regard.
Re: a thougght out of left field
That could possibly happen in the AFL. I dont see the AFL punishing Carlton before the draft. So that leaves the posibility any punishment will carry over for next season, by loosing points or draft picks next year, or even both.
Originally posted by mellowyellow
Its all specualtion at the minute but the blues might salvage something positive out of the current events.Lets assume that they dont loose there draft picks but instead loose a sufficient amount of premiership points that ensures they again finish bottom and pick up next years top 2 picks.
That could possibly happen in the AFL. I dont see the AFL punishing Carlton before the draft. So that leaves the posibility any punishment will carry over for next season, by loosing points or draft picks next year, or even both.
Choppy,
Age last Saturday:
>Richmond's new football boss, Greg Miller, said last night: ``We traded pick four on the understanding that four was four and not No. 2. We thought long and hard about that and figured that the AFL, by not moving back the trade period, had decided that Carlton would not be penalised in time for the draft.
``For that to change would be not right. In fact it would be wrong and we would have something to say about that.''
>Herald-Sun Tuesday:
Collingwood coach Mick Malthouse: "There is no possible way the AFL can now change the pecking order.''
And (same article): One AFL club official said there would be legal action involving almost every club if the AFL attempted to impose this penalty."
Plus, if nothing else, Jack has wasted so much money he is just as likely to book yet another day in court.
Age last Saturday:
>Richmond's new football boss, Greg Miller, said last night: ``We traded pick four on the understanding that four was four and not No. 2. We thought long and hard about that and figured that the AFL, by not moving back the trade period, had decided that Carlton would not be penalised in time for the draft.
``For that to change would be not right. In fact it would be wrong and we would have something to say about that.''
>Herald-Sun Tuesday:
Collingwood coach Mick Malthouse: "There is no possible way the AFL can now change the pecking order.''
And (same article): One AFL club official said there would be legal action involving almost every club if the AFL attempted to impose this penalty."
Plus, if nothing else, Jack has wasted so much money he is just as likely to book yet another day in court.
Lets see, most people believe we cant change the pecking order bcos it wont be fair. And how is it fair next year when Carlton lose their picks and there is a different order? Would StKilda have a similar argument to Richmond next year if they finished below Carlton? Taking picks away from Carlton next year will only benefit teams that finish above them, this year all teams benefit……just happens to be the year that the alleged offenses happened!
Port01
Norm Smith Medallist
Veteran
Port Adelaide - Riley Bonner Player Sponsor 2016
Port Adelaide - Brendon Ah Chee Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Jarrad Redden Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Matthew Broadbent Player Sponsor 2013
Port Adelaide - Captains Club 2012 Sponsor
Port Adelaide - John Butcher 2012 Player Sponsor
a) alleged offenses didn't happen this year.
b) punishing Carlton this year punishes Richmond, Hawthorn, Adelaide, Collingwood and anyone else that traded their 1st round pick more than it punishes the others. At least next year the clubs will have prior knowledge and not shoot themselves in the foot.
c) punishing Carlton is to punish Carlton, benefitting other teams shouldn't be a consideration, but not punishing other teams should be.
If the clubs went to court it would be unlikely that they would win because of two points.
1) They traded their 1st Round Pick. If you saw the trading board that the AFL had it clearly said Club X traded Joe Blow to Club Y for 1st Round Pick or word to that effect. The pick number wasn't put up.
2) The draft order is still to be finalised. By saying this in all draft related topics the AFL covered itself because it leaves room for changes, which because clearly stated the clubs knew about.
So if the club went to court they would lose.
1) They traded their 1st Round Pick. If you saw the trading board that the AFL had it clearly said Club X traded Joe Blow to Club Y for 1st Round Pick or word to that effect. The pick number wasn't put up.
2) The draft order is still to be finalised. By saying this in all draft related topics the AFL covered itself because it leaves room for changes, which because clearly stated the clubs knew about.
So if the club went to court they would lose.
Stand corrected here……..lets say then they are punished in the same year as it was discovered.
Not punishing Carlton this year, but next year, punishes any team that fisnishes below them next year. IF they have been found guilty before the draft. If not, I have no problem with next year.
And Carlton should be punished the same year they are found guilty (if possible)…..once again delaying this will benefit and disadvantage teams differently than if the were punished in the year they were found guilty!
I couldn’t give a toss either way, as long as IF they are guilty they are punished by way of draft picks. Im just trying to point out that there is now way to keep all clubs happy, as it will affect different clubs in different ways. But feel free to give me an A-Z on my flawed thinking.
I think the AFL will end up taking the easy way out anyway ... if anything, just banning the Blues from the 2003 draft, or part thereof.
Just like when Dunkley was suspended AFTER the '96 GF, when he actually did the striking BEFORE the GF ...
There is a chance that if the AFL WERE to take Carlton's Picks 1 & 2 in this years draft, it would void all dealings done at trade time. Eg. Under this scenario Pick 4 was not Richmond's to deal with - it was therefore actually Sydney's !! So anything gained from Pick 4 could then be annulled !
Just a thought ?
Just like when Dunkley was suspended AFTER the '96 GF, when he actually did the striking BEFORE the GF ...
There is a chance that if the AFL WERE to take Carlton's Picks 1 & 2 in this years draft, it would void all dealings done at trade time. Eg. Under this scenario Pick 4 was not Richmond's to deal with - it was therefore actually Sydney's !! So anything gained from Pick 4 could then be annulled !
Just a thought ?
Actually it would be the Bulldogs'.
Surely any punishment would have to be held over until next year. The Blues also have a suspended sentence affecting their second and third round picks but they have effected trades that move these around. To impose a penalty at this stage would surely invalidate the French trade.
All too hard now I reckon.
There is NO CONCIEVABLE chance that the AFL will strip the 1st and 2nd picks from Carlton.
The uproar from Richmond will be like nothing on this planet. They will tear down AFL HQ themselves.
The uproar from Richmond will be like nothing on this planet. They will tear down AFL HQ themselves.
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,860
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
As a Brisbane supporter, the arrangement of Carlton losing their draft picks looks fine to me.
If we get pick 3 out of the Caracella/Headland deal, I'll be very happy.
May there be more of it, just as long as we don't exceed the salary cap.
If we get pick 3 out of the Caracella/Headland deal, I'll be very happy.
May there be more of it, just as long as we don't exceed the salary cap.
I really dont see what the big deal is. Everyone knew that they were under investigation when the deals were done, they all knew that there was a chance that they could loose one or two draft picks. So whats the big deal? Of course the afl will give into the melbourne mafia as it always does. Picks will be taken next year, wouldnt it be ironic, if they had a reasonably good year and only lost say pick 10 instead of pick one this year? Wonder how collingwood would feel then?
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
the afl more or less stated that penalising carlton in this years draft would open up a huge can of worms so it wont happen!
as for a suitable punishment and considering they are already on a suspended setence from previous breaches id say the next 2 national drafts they forfiet their 1st and 2nd picks!
cheers!
as for a suitable punishment and considering they are already on a suspended setence from previous breaches id say the next 2 national drafts they forfiet their 1st and 2nd picks!
cheers!
NakedDeadGuy
Club Legend
If the AFL can allow certain clubs to pay over the salary cap (Brisbane & Sydney), perhaps they could impose a lower ceiling for Carlton - although how this would affect existing player contracts I don't know, and would probably bring in the player's association re restraint of trade or something about limiting potential earnings.
I'm not sure, but haven't the AFL instructed both WB and Roos to get player payments to 92.5 %, as well as limiting their football department costs to qualify for assistance from the Waverley sale? Perhaps if Carlton were restricted to say 85% from next season? Could someone post what % the Lions & Swans are allowed above the cap?
I think the concession pick should be lost, but they should keep their 'normal' pick for finishing last. I don't agree with the penalty of premiership points lost before the start of the season, but whatever happens Big Jack must have one foot out the door.
I'm not sure, but haven't the AFL instructed both WB and Roos to get player payments to 92.5 %, as well as limiting their football department costs to qualify for assistance from the Waverley sale? Perhaps if Carlton were restricted to say 85% from next season? Could someone post what % the Lions & Swans are allowed above the cap?
I think the concession pick should be lost, but they should keep their 'normal' pick for finishing last. I don't agree with the penalty of premiership points lost before the start of the season, but whatever happens Big Jack must have one foot out the door.
So you are saying Johnson is crap.
Whats the dif? Richmond has given up its 4th pick, thats done so from here on in theres two ways this can go: Either Carlton keeps its picks and Richmond doesnt get Goddard or Wells, OR Carlton looses its picks and Richmond doesnt get Goddard or Wells - but its other picks are two rungs up the ladder.
The second sceanrio seems better off for Richmond to me.
Richmond took a gamble in giving up pick 4 - no use whinging about it now.
So will Blues supporters...
Surely Carlton couldn't be as much over as Essendon and Melbourne were, and the AFL never even considered punishing them AFTER it happened AFTER trade week has occured
