News brad ebert quits west coast

[no_remorse28]

This wasnt about a kid who never intended to stay - it was about a kid who was told where his opportunities in 2012 were going to be & then deciding the guarantees he'd benn offered elsewhere were much better. The decision to go home isnt the problem, here its the fact that that everyone nowdays is nominating 1 club thereby forcing the hand. For the good of the competition the AFL needs to stop this happening.

The difference between the approach of Clark & Ebert is substantial & stems from the fact how one player is acknowledging the interests of his current club & one isnt. Itsthevsame with Gunstan from Adelaide, how dare he quote homesickness & then say in the same breath he' ll only go to Hawthorn.

How would the AFL govern that ? On one hand they have a trade system that all clubs are available to use. On the other you have a professional sportsperson who should have a say in where they earn there living, not all players being traded seek out specific clubs, some are happy to be an AFL player, but on the other hand the ones who do wish to go to a certain club have every right to express that. IMO

 

[42DM]

How would the AFL govern that ? On one hand they have a trade system that all clubs are available to use. On the other you have a professional sportsperson who should have a say in where they earn there living, not all players being traded seek out specific clubs, some are happy to be an AFL player, but on the other hand the ones who do wish to go to a certain club have every right to express that. IMO

Tend to agree with that, dont see any harm in the player leaving indicating where he would like to be traded. After all its only a request and I believe most clubs do all they can to assist the outgoing player and I think WCE will do that in the case of Ebert.

 

[BOND 007]

How would the AFL govern that ? On one hand they have a trade system that all clubs are available to use. On the other you have a professional sportsperson who should have a say in where they earn there living, not all players being traded seek out specific clubs, some are happy to be an AFL player, but on the other hand the ones who do wish to go to a certain club have every right to express that. IMO

I dont know how they would govern unless they rate the players like they did with those heading to GC & GWS and applying a "value" according to their new clubs offer of pay & contract tim. Whilst your points are valid - & it seems like clubs now are coming off second best - as though the players are more important than the club.
Its all being driven by the player managers who are obviously under pressure to earn their pay.

Perhaps its in the interests of the clubs long term to nip this in the bud by not blinking & sending players to the PSD & hope they get collected by other teams. Note in most circumstances it is the teams finishing down the bottom who seem to be at the heart of the problem.

 

[The_Panther]

I dont think the afl would have to do too much. Prob would just take a media release reinforcing the existing rules. This would dissuade players from going public in club preference.

I really don't like players like tarrant saying they'll refuse to play anywhere but Collingwood, so in similar situations in the future a minimum 6 month/ half year ban would at least disincentivise the club of choice picking that player.

 

[Obeanie1]

Well starting next season the AFL will have in place something that has never occured before.

At least two teams in each state.


GWS and Sydney being the new factor.

From now on the AFL basically states any player changing teams must accept the bids of at least two clubs and the club with the best exchange terms wins. Obviously the terms for the player must be matched by both interested parties and then the decision on who gets the player is that of the trading club.

Player gets the best deal and we have a truely competitive bidding process.

 

[mark121]

Well starting next season the AFL will have in place something that has never occured before.

At least two teams in each state.


GWS and Sydney being the new factor.

From now on the AFL basically states any player changing teams must accept the bids of at least two clubs and the club with the best exchange terms wins. Obviously the terms for the player must be matched by both interested parties and then the decision on who gets the player is that of the trading club.

Player gets the best deal and we have a truely competitive bidding process.

All players would need to do is name one team that doesnt want them and the team they want to get too, there are very few who dont have at least one team who either dont want them or cant afford them.

 

[David_Brent]

If its true that Port have pulled 28 off the table, then you should not bother dealing with them at all.

Just put the way Port have dealt with you in the memory bank and when they have the same issue holding onto a young WA player, show them no mercy.

 

[Adz2332]

"If its true that Port have pulled 28 off the table, then you should not bother dealing with them at all.

Just put the way Port have dealt with you in the memory bank and when they have the same issue holding onto a young WA player, show them no mercy. "

But port offered or wanted to offer players on top and WC said there not interested... so it works both ways....
Were not interested in handing over 6 or 28 but happy to give players.
WC arent interested in players but want 6 or 28.

So again it works both ways!

 

[Max zero]

"If its true that Port have pulled 28 off the table, then you should not bother dealing with them at all.

Just put the way Port have dealt with you in the memory bank and when they have the same issue holding onto a young WA player, show them no mercy. "

But port offered or wanted to offer players on top and WC said there not interested... so it works both ways....
Were not interested in handing over 6 or 28 but happy to give players.
WC arent interested in players but want 6 or 28.

So again it works both ways!

We don't want your list cloggers. Our list space is tight as it is. Why would we want players even you don't want?

 

[Scooter#10]

"If its true that Port have pulled 28 off the table, then you should not bother dealing with them at all.

Just put the way Port have dealt with you in the memory bank and when they have the same issue holding onto a young WA player, show them no mercy. "

But port offered or wanted to offer players on top and WC said there not interested... so it works both ways....
Were not interested in handing over 6 or 28 but happy to give players.
WC arent interested in players but want 6 or 28.

So again it works both ways!

Do you really think we want players such as Motlop or Pettigrew? Seriously? and dont even bother trying to give us defenders. We have an endless surplus of them already

 

[Adz2332]

^^ And we rate pick 6 and 28 then we do Ebert...

See what im getting at?

We've put forward somethin we think is fair WC dont, Wc put something forward they think is fair we dont.

No need for this - Just put the way Port have dealt with you in the memory bank and when they have the same issue holding onto a young WA player, show them no mercy

 

[triplejdude]

Apparently Port have offered pick 28, SportsNewsFirst tweeted it just before.

Then again, that site is anything but reliable, so take it as you will.

 

[greennick]

^^ And we rate pick 6 and 28 then we do Ebert...

See what im getting at?

We've put forward somethin we think is fair WC dont, Wc put something forward they think is fair we dont.

No need for this - Just put the way Port have dealt with you in the memory bank and when they have the same issue holding onto a young WA player, show them no mercy

If you barely rate Ebert at all, why are you willing to pay him so much??? You're just trying to screw us over, that is all. I don't think it will end up like that though, as Bigfooty isn't real life.

 

[Adz2332]

^ i hope not for both teams sake.
People beating there chests on here is along way from real life dealings!! lol

 

[swannies]

If you barely rate Ebert at all, why are you willing to pay him so much??? You're just trying to screw us over, that is all. I don't think it will end up like that though, as Bigfooty isn't real life.

Thank goodness for that, eh?

 

[greennick]

Apparently Port have offered pick 28, SportsNewsFirst tweeted it just before.

Then again, that site is anything but reliable, so take it as you will.

As I said in another thread, it is funny watching all these Port supporters now claiming pick 28 is paying over as that is what their club's initial opening statement was. They do realise that was merely an initial negotiating statement and we will meet somewhere in the middle?? It is making them unbearable in the other thread as their claiming this is what his value is. Surely they can't all be that stupid???

 

[archiemoses]

As I said in another thread, it is funny watching all these Port supporters now claiming pick 28 is paying over as that is what their club's initial opening statement was. They do realise that was merely an initial negotiating statement and we will meet somewhere in the middle?? It is making them unbearable in the other thread as their claiming this is what his value is. Surely they can't all be that stupid???

I think you'll find they are.

 

[greennick]

I think you'll find they are.

God damn it, just re-read my quote and realised I messup up my their/they're.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I thought you got it right...

Archie was saying "I'll think you'll find they are that stupid"

 

[greennick]

I thought you got it right...

Archie was saying "I'll think you'll find they are that stupid"

Yer, I know what he meant.

But, no, no I didn't:

As I said in another thread, it is funny watching all these Port supporters now claiming pick 28 is paying over as that is what their club's initial opening statement was. They do realise that was merely an initial negotiating statement and we will meet somewhere in the middle?? It is making them unbearable in the other thread as their claiming this is what his value is. Surely they can't all be that stupid???

It is a pet hate, but sometimes the voice-over in my head when I am typing gets the better of me. Luckily it is only the internets and not my Year 12 English exam again.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Ah, I only saw the first "their".

 

[sTeeL]

Please Ban all Port supporters from our board. They obviously have no ****ing idea and should consider themselves lucky Brad is even reasonably being considered for pick28.

 

[Amstaff_]

Oh dear.... Any idiot will know that the club that is losing a player who wants to go to another club gets shafted. Its happened to us and it will happen to everyone... Get over it!!!

 

[greennick]

Oh dear.... Any idiot will know that the club that is losing a player who wants to go to another club gets shafted. Its happened to us and it will happen to everyone... Get over it!!!

Doesn't make it any less palatable. And not every club gets shafted. Mainly only those trying to trade with cellar dwellers who refuse to deal fairly.

 

[Marlin01]

Doesn't make it any MORE palatable. And not every club gets shafted. Mainly only those trying to trade with cellar dwellers who refuse to deal fairly.

Whilst you're kicking yourself about the "their" mistake.