EDFL Division 1 - 2012

[Jasper Jones]

Is it in the spirit of the game to sign a contract and walk out on it?? I see this alot on this board, this club is poor because they won't release players from a contract.. Where is the duty of care on the player? He signed a contract. Good on KP for standing their ground.

Good call, if you want to be able to move clubs freely don't sign multi-year contracts or don't sign a contract at all and play for nothing if we want to talk about the spirit of the game.

 

[The Scribe]

Is it in the spirit of the game to sign a contract and walk out on it?? I see this alot on this board, this club is poor because they won't release players from a contract.. Where is the duty of care on the player? He signed a contract. Good on KP for standing their ground.

Absolutely valid arguement IMS, difficult to dispute that players should honour contracts. Having said this I would of thought there is a duty of care on both the club & player. Unfortunately KP was dysfunctional for a lengthy period late last year/early this year. I would have thought it was reasonable to suggest they were not holding up their end of the bargain.

Bigger picture, regardless of the decision behind not releasing players it seems it's doing there reputation more harm than good.

My initial point was that personally I think it is poor form for a club to not release a player who has relocated and where travelling back to the club is not a viable option.

 

[Itsmyshow]

Absolutely valid arguement IMS, difficult to dispute that players should honour contracts. Having said this I would of thought there is a duty of care on both the club & player. Unfortunately KP was dysfunctional for a lengthy period late last year/early this year. I would have thought it was reasonable to suggest they were not holding up their end of the bargain.

Bigger picture, regardless of the decision behind not releasing players it seems it's doing there reputation more harm than good.

My initial point was that personally I think it is poor form for a club to not release a player who has relocated and where travelling back to the club is not a viable option.

I understand, especially in the case of a player that has relocated, or even faces difficult situations at home etc that needs to move on, in those cases the club and player should be able to negotiate terms for termination of contract.. But players are trying to move on willy nilly these days, for more money.. The key ones being players that have signed on for 2 years, any local player that does so has rocks in their heads. Situations and circumstances change regularly, especially at a local level. Perhaps AFL Victoria should look into making a mandatory ruling on contracts only being for a period of one season.

The other point of KP being dysfunctional, this can also happen at many local clubs. This is where local players need to be more diligent when agreeing to a contract, 12 months at most and out clauses that suit them, after all, contracts are a negotiation for the player as well. As long as KP are paying the agreed amount and there is no other stipulations in the contract, they are holding up their end of the bargain.

 

[Back at ya]

Don't see clubs going to players and asking for payment reduction during the season when they are not getting a kick. Clubs hold up their end of the bargain and pay the contract as agreed. Players need to do the same. Unlucky at KP with off field changes.

The contract is with the club - deal with it players or sit the year out. Contract is not with a coach.

Or as someone else has suggested don't play for money.

Good on KP for protecting themselves - players are cleared too easily these days and this needs to be reviewed.

 

[Dasher_23]

KP sent out a flyer with the timeline of events that had occurred over the summer. They had periods without a coach and no executive. What are players meant to do in this situation? The words fold and merge were included in this flyer. I dont think any reasonable person can begrudge the players for finding a new club when by KP own admission they basically had no club.

 

[ackp]

Don't see clubs going to players and asking for payment reduction during the season when they are not getting a kick. Clubs hold up their end of the bargain and pay the contract as agreed. Players need to do the same. Unlucky at KP with off field changes.

The contract is with the club - deal with it players or sit the year out. Contract is not with a coach.

Or as someone else has suggested don't play for money.

Good on KP for protecting themselves - players are cleared too easily these days and this needs to be reviewed.

Well said

 

[ackp]

KP sent out a flyer with the timeline of events that had occurred over the summer. They had periods without a coach and no executive. What are players meant to do in this situation? The words fold and merge were included in this flyer. I dont think any reasonable person can begrudge the players for finding a new club when by KP own admission they basically had no club.

This information is so in true KP will field all sides this year thats great news with a new ground and lights ready for round 4. Also 3 to 4 guys that where trying to get out of there contracts are back at the playing.

 

[ackp]

This information is so in true KP will field all sides this year thats great news with a new ground and lights ready for round 4. Also 3 to 4 guys that where trying to get out of there contracts are back at the playing.

Should read This information is not true ( dam iPhone )

 

[ackp]

Don't see clubs going to players and asking for payment reduction during the season when they are not getting a kick. Clubs hold up their end of the bargain and pay the contract as agreed. Players need to do the same. Unlucky at KP with off field changes.

The contract is with the club - deal with it players or sit the year out. Contract is not with a coach.

Or as someone else has suggested don't play for money.

Good on KP for protecting themselves - players are cleared too easily these days and this needs to be reviewed.

Totally agree with that about time club stand up

 

[StreetTalk]

This information is so in true KP will field all sides this year thats great news with a new ground and lights ready for round 4. Also 3 to 4 guys that where trying to get out of there contracts are back at the playing.

If this is true, then why waste time and money trying to keep players that don't want to be at your club? Seems silly that it has to come to this in B Grade footy. these guys are just weekend warriors who want to have a kick. What will the club achieve by making these players sit out?

 

[BlueJet]

If this is true, then why waste time and money trying to keep players that don't want to be at your club? Seems silly that it has to come to this in B Grade footy. these guys are just weekend warriors who want to have a kick. What will the club achieve by making these players sit out?

If they were just wanting to have a kick Keilor Park is as good a place to do this as anywhere. If people are going to sign contracts and accept payment, they then should be obliged to complete said contract.

 

[The Count]

If this is true, then why waste time and money trying to keep players that don't want to be at your club? Seems silly that it has to come to this in B Grade footy. these guys are just weekend warriors who want to have a kick. What will the club achieve by making these players sit out?

Been reading through all the posts and agree with most. However this one is worth a reply in agreeance.

All good and well to hold your ground and not let players move on but what happens in 2013???

APW let blokes go last season that had signed and are now thriving. Clubs are bigger than players.

 

[blues12]

Perhaps AFL Victoria should look into making a mandatory ruling on contracts only being for a period of one season.

.

Contract rules from AFL Vic state that a club can only sign a maximum of 8 players on a 2 year contract.
I agree that if a player signs for 2 years they should honour the commitment.

How many clubs would have more than 8 players on a 2 year deal? and would that be grounds for a club to lose an appeal if it could be proven?

 

[snax]

Been reading through all the posts and agree with most. However this one is worth a reply in agreeance.

All good and well to hold your ground and not let players move on but what happens in 2013???

APW let blokes go last season that had signed and are now thriving. Clubs are bigger than players.

Clubs are bigger than players ...
Im sure KP are looking after thier best interests atm , and so they should be...

Can anyone tell me what a contract is worth?, obviously not the paper its written on , but every "contract" would have to be dealt with differently if players wanted out , work/moving etc.
But if a player signs a 2 Year deal & wants to go to another club in the same league after 1 year, guess that poses some different issues .
Is it worth it , or should you just let them go & wipe hands , move on forward for the best
if another club wants a player enough, they will pay out

As IMS said above, i think clubs maybe should make it Mandatory 1 Year contracts , & re-assess after 1 year...

 

[ackp]

But players are trying to move on willy nilly these days, for more money.. The key ones being players that have signed on for 2 years, any local player that does so has rocks in their heads. Situations and circumstances change regularly, especially at a local level. Perhaps AFL Victoria should look into making a mandatory ruling aon contracts only being for a period of one season.

All these players did sign one year contracts at end of 2011 season

 

[Itsmyshow]

Clubs are bigger than players ...
Im sure KP are looking after thier best interests atm , and so they should be...

Can anyone tell me what a contract is worth?, obviously not the paper its written on , but every "contract" would have to be dealt with differently if players wanted out , work/moving etc.
But if a player signs a 2 Year deal & wants to go to another club in the same league after 1 year, guess that poses some different issues .
Is it worth it , or should you just let them go & wipe hands , move on forward for the best
if another club wants a player enough, they will pay out

As IMS said above, i think clubs maybe should make it Mandatory 1 Year contracts , & re-assess after 1 year...

It's one of the biggest myths in local football that a contract isn't worth the paper it is written on.. It certainly is, that is why these players would have to sit out the season if KP, or any club, holds their ground. Players have abused this for years, then the response always comes out "Why doesn't the club just wipe its hands and move on", it is always the club that is made to look bad. These players agreed to a contract, if they have agreed to 2 years and want to break it, that is their problem, we expect our local clubs to run like a business, professional. Yet when they take a stand against someone who wants to break a binding contract, we slap the club. It's ridiculous. The only people here that should be slapped about are the players that AGREED and signed on for that period. Why should they be let out?? Does your mobile phone provider say "Sure, you can cancel your signed contract because you found a better offer"? They certainly don't, you pay a price for wanting to do so!!!

Clubs need to do their due diligence, by signing players for 2 years it is perceived that they are locked away, again I don't blame a club for doing this. A player should never allow himself to be signed for more than one year at a time, things change, why lock yourself away like that? But with the amount of times that this does occur, I think that AFL Vic should look at it as part of their review into local football and make it mandatory that contracts can only run for 1 season at a time.

 

[Itsmyshow]

But players are trying to move on willy nilly these days, for more money.. The key ones being players that have signed on for 2 years, any local player that does so has rocks in their heads. Situations and circumstances change regularly, especially at a local level. Perhaps AFL Victoria should look into making a mandatory ruling aon contracts only being for a period of one season.

All these players did sign one year contracts at end of 2011 season

That's all good, I am not sure of all the facts involved, I was just responding to the point someone made about 2 year contracts as part of a bigger picture.
I'm not just defending KP here, I have nothing to do with the club at all, I am defending all clubs that sign players to a playing contract. It just continually frustrates me that players sign a contract and then treat that contract and the club with complete contempt. I can't wait for the day when clubs take a collective stand and when a player approaches them to move across who is contracted, the club they want to go to tells them to sort out their issues with the former club first and then come to us. Unfortunately it will never happen.

And make no bones about it, I am just as guilty of this as any club, last season I was involved in a process to try and get a club to break the players contract so that he could move to the club I was involved in. As a club, when you have a requirement, you do what you have to do to get the job done, though our attempts failed, the reality is, as clubs, we play a role in setting up this culture of players breaking contracts. So there is always the other side of the coin.

 

[The Scribe]

ACKP your posts suggests you're close to the inner sanctum at KP. Care to shed any light on the 'blanket approach' KP are taking with contracted players?

I acknowledge players move around for a number of reasons. But as another poster indicated I would've have thought individual circumstances would be considered in any decision to release a player - seemingly this is not happening?

Regardless of the outcome I'd be keen to hear your thoughts on what you believe the club stands to gain by holding firm on their position? Also in regards to comments about releasing players if their contracts were paid out as it seems to contradict the clubs stance on 'principle'.

 

[ackp]

ACKP your posts suggests you're close to the inner sanctum at KP. Care to shed any light on the 'blanket approach' KP are taking with contracted players?

I acknowledge players move around for a number of reasons. But as another poster indicated I would've have thought individual circumstances would be considered in any decision to release a player - seemingly this is not happening?

Regardless of the outcome I'd be keen to hear your thoughts on what you believe the club stands to gain by holding firm on their position? Also in regards to comments about releasing players if their contracts were paid out as it seems to contradict the clubs stance on 'principle'.

I have played at the club for a long time, but have not played there for a couple of years but still pop in quite alot. The club is a great club and has no bad words against it until now, because of a few players that want out of their contracts.

l believe that the club will not release any contracted players even if they could get their contracts payed out. These players are using every excuse in the book to get out of it.

If l was running the club l would do the same thing. These players need to learn if you signed a contract at the end of the 2011 season then change your mind because you been offered more money or that you just don't want play there anymore it just not on.

 

[Jasper Jones]

It's one of the biggest myths in local football that a contract isn't worth the paper it is written on.. It certainly is, that is why these players would have to sit out the season if KP, or any club, holds their ground. Players have abused this for years, then the response always comes out "Why doesn't the club just wipe its hands and move on", it is always the club that is made to look bad. These players agreed to a contract, if they have agreed to 2 years and want to break it, that is their problem, we expect our local clubs to run like a business, professional. Yet when they take a stand against someone who wants to break a binding contract, we slap the club. It's ridiculous. The only people here that should be slapped about are the players that AGREED and signed on for that period. Why should they be let out?? Does your mobile phone provider say "Sure, you can cancel your signed contract because you found a better offer"? They certainly don't, you pay a price for wanting to do so!!!

Great post, agree 100%

 

[pieeater12]

Alot of assumptions on here regarding the KP boys and clearances. How do we know that they are leaving for more money ?

2 of the boys i know have been at the footy club for the past 20 odd years. Have been loyal servants and have parents who are life members of the club. They know want to leave ( for much less money ) and are being blocked...

Surely 20 odd years of service to the footy club is pretty loyal. Think they should be treating each case on its merrits other wise the may have alot of life long people of KP want nothing to do with the club in years to come.

 

[Itsmyshow]

Alot of assumptions on here regarding the KP boys and clearances. How do we know that they are leaving for more money ?

2 of the boys i know have been at the footy club for the past 20 odd years. Have been loyal servants and have parents who are life members of the club. They know want to leave ( for much less money ) and are being blocked...

Surely 20 odd years of service to the footy club is pretty loyal. Think they should be treating each case on its merrits other wise the may have alot of life long people of KP want nothing to do with the club in years to come.

Are they contracted?? If so, then they should be blocked. They clearly were happy to take the money and play for the club when they signed the contract... If this is an example of why KP are screwing over the players its a poor one. "We have been loyal so you should clear us", if you were loyal, you wouldn't be walking out on a CONTRACT that you signed.
If there was no contract, it's a non issue. KP can't hold them.

 

[retired57]

From previous experiance below are my comments,
-My view is that contracts are in place (1 or 2 year max) are the way to go. Much better way of doing buisness yes buisness if you ask for $ then expect that some return to the club is expected. The 2 year deal is good as no club wants all their list available for rape & pillage from other clubs each year. Clubs should have 1/2 list 1 year 1/2 list 2nd year so contuninity can be acheved. Also club gaim plans take time to settle in and no club want to be a 1 year wonder falling because of player movements. Clauses and comments can be added to contracts such as if the current eg: current coach is not reoppointed then contract if voided. Or if i move more than 2 hours from the club then void. You see what i mean is is flexable as you want. Funny that some players go bush and travel 4 hours at times to play but some use excuse that i moved address so please let me out of the contract. I tottally agree with the coment that if you buy a car, house, phone etc and decide to opt out then that is ok. I think not.
-The old system was that without a contract players held the club to ranson each yer and appeals upon apeals were the normal way of settling matters. Big backlog in Feb March April at Football Victoris (Now AFL) with 95% going the players way.
-Now if the player is registered to the club and contracted then is bound to play out his contract or sit out of football simple.
-Only Player > Club > AFL Victoria can break an existing contract (Not EDFL)
-The K/Park issue is a tricky issue as I can understand the players frustration of no committee, coach or training facility to allow thenm a fair crack at 2012 however if the flood gates are allowed to open for a few clearances then the club could fold and knowbody wants to see that. It will be interesting to see how this plays out?

 

[pieeater12]

Are they contracted?? If so, then they should be blocked. They clearly were happy to take the money and play for the club when they signed the contract... If this is an example of why KP are screwing over the players its a poor one. "We have been loyal so you should clear us", if you were loyal, you wouldn't be walking out on a CONTRACT that you signed.
If there was no contract, it's a non issue. KP can't hold them.

Its not that simple. It may seem black and white from the surface but its not.

Alot of things have changed since the contracts were signed...

If you signed a contract to work somewhere and then on your first day at work all of the conditions under which you signed were different would you just cop it on the chin and stay or look for another job ?

prob a poor comparrsion but you get my drift. Maybe the guys are quilty of not having clauses in their contracts.

Believe me i agree that if you sign a contract stiff. Club has to be protected. But in this particualar case given the family history with the club and what the family has done for the club over a 20 year period i think they should be set free and then will always return..

 

[Itsmyshow]

Its not that simple. It may seem black and white from the surface but its not.

Alot of things have changed since the contracts were signed...

If you signed a contract to work somewhere and then on your first day at work all of the conditions under which you signed were different would you just cop it on the chin and stay or look for another job ?

prob a poor comparrsion but you get my drift. Maybe the guys are quilty of not having clauses in their contracts.

Believe me i agree that if you sign a contract stiff. Club has to be protected. But in this particualar case given the family history with the club and what the family has done for the club over a 20 year period i think they should be set free and then will always return..

That is where the players haven't done their own due diligence, every player should put their own clauses in that makes them comfortable, it is a negotiation after all and if those clauses are refused, don't sign there.

I understand that things have changed from when these agreements were signed, KP has been through a rough period, it is up to KP, or any club, to make the call on what they want to do... I just don't think that the club should be smacked about for it, they have the contracts, they are honoring the contract, so without the player submitting clauses, they have the right to execute the contract.

I do understand what you are saying, there are factors.. But as far as a contractual agreement, it most certainly is Black and White.