EDFL Premier Division

[front and square]

G

Guys lets stay rational here this is where forums become a waste of time for everyone, at least me.

I take your point milkman its often the way things roll, but I reckon in life you don't have to give up and follow the lowest common denominator.

In sport, business and society in general what defines the quality of a country/community/sport is the rule of law, a structure that enables people to deal with each other reliably so we can make plans, investments and generally run our lives because we trust the system to stand up for our collective rights when an individual chooses to break those agreements/laws. As opposed to a lawless society where contracts and the paper they are written on are worthless and everyone gives up trying to hold people to account through the law and it turns into a corrupt, violent society, think lots of African nations, Afghanistan etc.. etc.. Then people can't trust each other and only the most violent and corrupt in society win.

Contracts matter in all walks of life, including the EDFL Premier League, they allow all clubs to make plans and trust that the parties will see each others end of the bargain out. As always there will be people/businesses/clubs in society who choose to flaunt the system and all of the community in this instance the local footy clubs and the administrative bodies like AFL Victoria have a responsibility to enforce the system that we all use to give us stability.

As I'm typing what seems to me to be the ABC's of footy business at all levels, I feel myself slipping into the classic Forum disease of the pyrrhic victory but for the sake of bonhomie I will take one for the Forum.!

My personal rules for protection from the Forum disease of the Pyrrhic Victory:

• Stay on point, don't use obscuration as a tool to win a debate.
• Use the art/tool of Analogy properly, if it is miss used and people start drawing long bows or ones that have no correlation to the facts at hand, that signals the death of any real intelligent debate, from there it becomes school yard mud slinging. Who yells the loudest wins crap.

Exhibit 1.1
So pacco think they are Man United and want transfer fees for contracted players
What do you think a club should do when a contracted player says I want to leave mid contract, you think if they give the sign on back the contract should evaporate? If you say yes you are really saying lets not have contracts at all because they would form no binding function on one of the parties. A transfer fee is hurdle/compensation for the party disadvantaged by having a contract broken and happens in all areas of society. e.g exit fees on all sorts of contracts in life exist because there needs to be a hurdle for the person or entity breaking the contract otherwise all contracts would be worthless.

Exhibit 1.2
let's be honest contracts in local footy are worthless
No they are not worthless at all that's just an emotional statement with no grounding, there have been many cases at AFL Victoria that I have been personally privy to where the player contract, when used correctly has been ruled to be binding, in fact AFL Victoria welcome these opportunities because they see it as a chance to send a signal to people like yourself that hold the view that contracts are not worth the paper they are written on.

Milkman and anyone else reading this, this is where Forums lose a chance to facilitate good debate and make good reading for us all. I have been sucked in here and spent too much time trying to counter what really is just a nothing comment/post but what usually happens anyone who has got a rational opinion looks at the junk responses that get thrown up at people and think TOO HARD I will leave that to the Forum mugs.

Lift the the level of debate fellas and we all win!

 

[milkman99]

KeepItSimple I'll love to have your job because by the length of your response you have far to much time on your hands, but don't take it the wrong way l really enjoy reading them.
If a player wants to leave a club & there still under contract 90% of the time they get to where they want to go .

 

[theboyslightup]

KeepItSimple I'll love to have your job because by the length of your response you have far to much time on your hands, but don't take it the wrong way l really enjoy reading them.
If a player wants to leave a club & there still under contract 90% of the time they get to where they want to go .

Pointless blocking a player if he doesn't want to play there anymore.

 

[KeepItSimple]

I imagine he meant that (as you highlighted previously) Sherman has a rep for this kind of thing. It's similar to how if a girl cheats to be with you, you can't really complain if she does the same to you.
As for players leaving, by all means make sure that you get back a sign on before clearing them but it was widely discussed that Paco were actually looking at profiting off a couple of the departing players.

Why be wasteful I say, a bit of cut and paste never hurt anyone!

My personal rules for protection from the Forum disease of the Pyrrhic Victory:

• Stay on point, don't use obscuration as a tool to win a debate.
• Use the art/tool of Analogy properly, if it is miss used and people start drawing long bows or ones that have no correlation to the facts at hand, that signals the death of any real intelligent debate, from there it becomes school yard mud slinging. Who yells the loudest wins crap.

Exhibit 1.1
As for players leaving, by all means make sure that you get back a sign on before clearing them but it was widely discussed that Paco were actually looking at profiting off a couple of the departing players.
What do you think a club should do when a contracted player says I want to leave mid contract, you think if they give the sign on back the contract should evaporate? If you say yes you are really saying lets not have contracts at all because they would form no binding function on one of the parties. A transfer fee is a hurdle/compensation for the party disadvantaged by having a contract broken (rug pulled from under them) not a profit as you call it and happens in all areas of society. e.g exit fees on all sorts of contracts in life exist because there needs to be a hurdle for the person or entity breaking the contract otherwise all contracts would be worthless. If the party breaking the contract or the next club who will benefit from the player breaking the contract don't want to play ball when breaking the contract then DON'T BREAK IT, simple stuff really and see out your contract end of story.

Exhibit 1.2
Sherman has a rep for this kind of thing. It's similar to how if a girl cheats to be with you, you can't really complain if she does the same to you.
Not following here BlueJet that's a classic miss use of an Analogy, in fact its a pure no correlation to the facts use of the Analogy which is a sure signal that the debate is dead. I will explain why, for your Analogy to hold water Pascoe Vale FC would have had to signed Sherman when he was under contract with Willy which he wasn't, he was a free agent, that is on public record http://www.williamstownfc.com.au/williamstown-press-release-justin-sherman/ . So Pascoe Vale FC weren't party to a cheating scenario like say Kyabram FC are now, where they know a player they have signed is under contract and have sited that contract, in that case your analogy would hold water because Ky FC shouldn't cry poor if Sherman signs with another club next year whilst under contract with Ky FC, because Ky facilitated the same cheating first time around.

Keep it simple and stay sane in the process

 

[KeepItSimple]

KeepItSimple I'll love to have your job because by the length of your response you have far to much time on your hands, but don't take it the wrong way l really enjoy reading them.
If a player wants to leave a club & there still under contract 90% of the time they get to where they want to go .

Ha ha good point Milkman too much time or truth is sucked in, like we all get sometimes and should use my time better! Or get a life as they say

Your right they do get to where they want to go but the truth is the clubs where they are trying to go, do play ball, even though AFL Victoria & the EDFL turn a blind eye and the rules state that no money should change hands for a player transfer. But as it goes, at law it's technically not a player transfer per se its a player breaking a contract which is different and why the clubs secretly play ball. It' usually only the good players who break contracts because clubs wouldn't play ball for average players.

If you blokes stop potting me I wouldn't get sucked in as much and I will stop posting and save you all from my waffle!

 

[KeepItSimple]

Pointless blocking a player if he doesn't want to play there anymore.

I understand what your intent is here and the truth is you don't really want a bloke wearing the jumper who doesn't want to be there, BUT far from being pointless its ESSENTIAL that the system and rule of law is fought for, otherwise don't have contracts at all, and all clubs agree not to give any players sign ons unless its for 1 year only because you will have no certainty as a club.

None of those things will happen, but if a club wants to run like that and not fight for its rights and let blokes walk away from their commitments and with sign ons in their back pockets who am I to argue.

 

[BlueJet]

Why be wasteful I say, a bit of cut and paste never hurt anyone!

My personal rules for protection from the Forum disease of the Pyrrhic Victory:

• Stay on point, don't use obscuration as a tool to win a debate.
• Use the art/tool of Analogy properly, if it is miss used and people start drawing long bows or ones that have no correlation to the facts at hand, that signals the death of any real intelligent debate, from there it becomes school yard mud slinging. Who yells the loudest wins crap.

Exhibit 1.1
As for players leaving, by all means make sure that you get back a sign on before clearing them but it was widely discussed that Paco were actually looking at profiting off a couple of the departing players.
What do you think a club should do when a contracted player says I want to leave mid contract, you think if they give the sign on back the contract should evaporate? If you say yes you are really saying lets not have contracts at all because they would form no binding function on one of the parties. A transfer fee is a hurdle/compensation for the party disadvantaged by having a contract broken (rug pulled from under them) not a profit as you call it and happens in all areas of society. e.g exit fees on all sorts of contracts in life exist because there needs to be a hurdle for the person or entity breaking the contract otherwise all contracts would be worthless. If the party breaking the contract or the next club who will benefit from the player breaking the contract don't want to play ball when breaking the contract then DON'T BREAK IT, simple stuff really and see out your contract end of story.

Exhibit 1.2
Sherman has a rep for this kind of thing. It's similar to how if a girl cheats to be with you, you can't really complain if she does the same to you.
Not following here BlueJet that's a classic miss use of an Analogy, in fact its a pure no correlation to the facts use of the Analogy which is a sure signal that the debate is dead. I will explain why, for your Analogy to hold water Pascoe Vale FC would have had to signed Sherman when he was under contract with Willy which he wasn't, he was a free agent, that is on public record http://www.williamstownfc.com.au/williamstown-press-release-justin-sherman/ . So Pascoe Vale FC weren't party to a cheating scenario like say Kyabram FC are now, where they know a player they have signed is under contract and have sited that contract, in that case your analogy would hold water because Ky FC shouldn't cry poor if Sherman signs with another club next year whilst under contract with Ky FC, because Ky facilitated the same cheating first time around.

Keep it simple and stay sane in the process

I don't care enough to do the research let alone respond with a long rambling reply as I've got work to do.
My analogy is on point, that you disagree with it is another matter entirely.
You listed a bunch of times that Sherman had left clubs prior to his contract being up (1yr to go on his Willy deal so yes he had broken a contract to get there) you have changed your tune to suit your argument.
I do agree that contracts shouldn't be signed without the intent of seeing them out and clubs shouldn't just bend to the will of a player.
That's me for now, until the standard of conversation lifts anyway.

 

[KeepItSimple]

I don't care enough to do the research let alone respond with a long rambling reply as I've got work to do.
My analogy is on point, that you disagree with it is another matter entirely.
You listed a bunch of times that Sherman had left clubs prior to his contract being up (1yr to go on his Willy deal so yes he had broken a contract to get there) you have changed your tune to suit your argument.
I do agree that contracts shouldn't be signed without the intent of seeing them out and clubs shouldn't just bend to the will of a player.
That's me for now, until the standard of conversation lifts anyway.

My analogy is on point, that you disagree with it is another matter entirely. I can only lead the horse to water.......... Bluejet there is nothing to disagree with you are presenting what you call a Circular Reasoning Approach. The only safe thing to do when debating with someone doing that is DON'T.Basically your underlying premise is broken so all else that follows is irrational or trash talk. Not being rude mate just honest.

You listed a bunch of times that Sherman had left clubs prior to his contract being up (1yr to go on his Willy deal so yes he had broken a contract to get there) you have changed your tune to suit your argument. Bluejet he wasn't under contract and had left his employment with Willy before even opening dialogues with the PVFC don't know how it can be any clearer cut? If Pascoe Vale had come to terms with Sherman to break his contract and he became a free agent before signing with KY that would be the same thing and you would have a point? Any bending here is of the mind trying to follow your logic

I do agree that contracts shouldn't be signed without the intent of seeing them out and clubs shouldn't just bend to the will of a player. All agreed

That's me for now, until the standard of conversation lifts anyway. Tip it hasn't

Keep it simple, "The Measure of a Man's Intelligence is the Ability to Change" Albert Einstein

 

[Prophetic]

"In sport, business and society in general what defines the quality of a country/community/sport is the rule of law..."

That include tax law keepitsimple? That might cause a little bit of unrest in the competition...

 

[KeepItSimple]

"In sport, business and society in general what defines the quality of a country/community/sport is the rule of law..."

That include tax law keepitsimple? That might cause a little bit of unrest in the competition...

We are all F.......d if that gets a run!

 

[LavertonMagpie]

G

Guys lets stay rational here this is where forums become a waste of time for everyone, at least me.

I take your point milkman its often the way things roll, but I reckon in life you don't have to give up and follow the lowest common denominator.

In sport, business and society in general what defines the quality of a country/community/sport is the rule of law, a structure that enables people to deal with each other reliably so we can make plans, investments and generally run our lives because we trust the system to stand up for our collective rights when an individual chooses to break those agreements/laws. As opposed to a lawless society where contracts and the paper they are written on are worthless and everyone gives up trying to hold people to account through the law and it turns into a corrupt, violent society, think lots of African nations, Afghanistan etc.. etc.. Then people can't trust each other and only the most violent and corrupt in society win.

Contracts matter in all walks of life, including the EDFL Premier League, they allow all clubs to make plans and trust that the parties will see each others end of the bargain out. As always there will be people/businesses/clubs in society who choose to flaunt the system and all of the community in this instance the local footy clubs and the administrative bodies like AFL Victoria have a responsibility to enforce the system that we all use to give us stability.

As I'm typing what seems to me to be the ABC's of footy business at all levels, I feel myself slipping into the classic Forum disease of the pyrrhic victory but for the sake of bonhomie I will take one for the Forum.!

My personal rules for protection from the Forum disease of the Pyrrhic Victory:

• Stay on point, don't use obscuration as a tool to win a debate.
• Use the art/tool of Analogy properly, if it is miss used and people start drawing long bows or ones that have no correlation to the facts at hand, that signals the death of any real intelligent debate, from there it becomes school yard mud slinging. Who yells the loudest wins crap.

Exhibit 1.1
So pacco think they are Man United and want transfer fees for contracted players
What do you think a club should do when a contracted player says I want to leave mid contract, you think if they give the sign on back the contract should evaporate? If you say yes you are really saying lets not have contracts at all because they would form no binding function on one of the parties. A transfer fee is hurdle/compensation for the party disadvantaged by having a contract broken and happens in all areas of society. e.g exit fees on all sorts of contracts in life exist because there needs to be a hurdle for the person or entity breaking the contract otherwise all contracts would be worthless.

Exhibit 1.2
let's be honest contracts in local footy are worthless
No they are not worthless at all that's just an emotional statement with no grounding, there have been many cases at AFL Victoria that I have been personally privy to where the player contract, when used correctly has been ruled to be binding, in fact AFL Victoria welcome these opportunities because they see it as a chance to send a signal to people like yourself that hold the view that contracts are not worth the paper they are written on.

Milkman and anyone else reading this, this is where Forums lose a chance to facilitate good debate and make good reading for us all. I have been sucked in here and spent too much time trying to counter what really is just a nothing comment/post but what usually happens anyone who has got a rational opinion looks at the junk responses that get thrown up at people and think TOO HARD I will leave that to the Forum mugs.

Lift the the level of debate fellas and we all win!

Best post I have ever read on BIGFOOTY in over 10 years...
Clearly an intelligent person and would actually given time give ALL clubs back the power when devising and agreeing on okayer contracts and reduce the overall spending and paying 'overs' to players! Well done!
You will cop much hate from nuffies and deadbeats though for having a brain on here though....

 

[LavertonMagpie]

G

Guys lets stay rational here this is where forums become a waste of time for everyone, at least me.

I take your point milkman its often the way things roll, but I reckon in life you don't have to give up and follow the lowest common denominator.

In sport, business and society in general what defines the quality of a country/community/sport is the rule of law, a structure that enables people to deal with each other reliably so we can make plans, investments and generally run our lives because we trust the system to stand up for our collective rights when an individual chooses to break those agreements/laws. As opposed to a lawless society where contracts and the paper they are written on are worthless and everyone gives up trying to hold people to account through the law and it turns into a corrupt, violent society, think lots of African nations, Afghanistan etc.. etc.. Then people can't trust each other and only the most violent and corrupt in society win.

Contracts matter in all walks of life, including the EDFL Premier League, they allow all clubs to make plans and trust that the parties will see each others end of the bargain out. As always there will be people/businesses/clubs in society who choose to flaunt the system and all of the community in this instance the local footy clubs and the administrative bodies like AFL Victoria have a responsibility to enforce the system that we all use to give us stability.

As I'm typing what seems to me to be the ABC's of footy business at all levels, I feel myself slipping into the classic Forum disease of the pyrrhic victory but for the sake of bonhomie I will take one for the Forum.!

My personal rules for protection from the Forum disease of the Pyrrhic Victory:

• Stay on point, don't use obscuration as a tool to win a debate.
• Use the art/tool of Analogy properly, if it is miss used and people start drawing long bows or ones that have no correlation to the facts at hand, that signals the death of any real intelligent debate, from there it becomes school yard mud slinging. Who yells the loudest wins crap.

Exhibit 1.1
So pacco think they are Man United and want transfer fees for contracted players
What do you think a club should do when a contracted player says I want to leave mid contract, you think if they give the sign on back the contract should evaporate? If you say yes you are really saying lets not have contracts at all because they would form no binding function on one of the parties. A transfer fee is hurdle/compensation for the party disadvantaged by having a contract broken and happens in all areas of society. e.g exit fees on all sorts of contracts in life exist because there needs to be a hurdle for the person or entity breaking the contract otherwise all contracts would be worthless.

Exhibit 1.2
let's be honest contracts in local footy are worthless
No they are not worthless at all that's just an emotional statement with no grounding, there have been many cases at AFL Victoria that I have been personally privy to where the player contract, when used correctly has been ruled to be binding, in fact AFL Victoria welcome these opportunities because they see it as a chance to send a signal to people like yourself that hold the view that contracts are not worth the paper they are written on.

Milkman and anyone else reading this, this is where Forums lose a chance to facilitate good debate and make good reading for us all. I have been sucked in here and spent too much time trying to counter what really is just a nothing comment/post but what usually happens anyone who has got a rational opinion looks at the junk responses that get thrown up at people and think TOO HARD I will leave that to the Forum mugs.

Lift the the level of debate fellas and we all win!

Best post I have ever read on BIGFOOTY in over 10 years...
Clearly an intelligent person and would actually given time give ALL clubs back the power when devising and agreeing on player contracts and reduce the overall spending and paying 'overs' to players! Well done!
You will cop much hate from nuffies and deadbeats though for having a brain on here though....

 

[hank2]

So pacco think they are Man United and
want transfer fees for contracted players, let's be honest contracts in local footy are worthless & until a player runs out in your jumper round 1 you shouldn't believe you have signed him

Why don't clubs just scrap sign-on fees altogether? With the way local footy is going in terms of dollars dished out, it is becoming more common that players take multiple thousand dollar sign on fees and end up playing at a different club. I think it's a joke that players demand several thousand dollars just for scribbling on some paper.

Most clubs are almost clean out of money after August/September, with players demanding thousands up front in October/November, puts so much pressure on the club and committee. It's getting harder and harder for clubs lower on the financial ladder, sign-on fees are one of the biggest problems, especially when half of the time players take it and are then never to be seen again.

It's not the players' problem though, if they can get away with it why wouldn't they?

 

[Silver Tongue]

Keep it simple, "The Measure of a Man's Intelligence is the Ability to Change" Albert Einstein[/QUOTE]

Liking your logic Simple and the oxymoronic pun is definitetly intended although your arguments are the antithesis of ideas of simple or moronic. I have been reading this forum with interest since being alerted to the Sherman issue on the Goulburn Valley website and must concur with your observations in relation to contracts, dairy farms and 'milking'. I am not a Kyabram man, but i find it implausible that the same stewardship at a club that had legendary Goulburn Valley Coach Dave Williams (coached 23 consequitive years at Rochy then Ky for 10 GF appeaeances) there for the past 7 years, could then make this blunder? It seems unfathiomable. I am pleased Rochester declined the Sherman entreaties. I too suspect his is going to get messy!

 

[Ruben James]

morale of the story is!
Loads of players in the last two / three years have left pacco early whilst in contract!
Fair to say what gets sold to players isn't real club is not in good shape as evident on player turnover (it ain't going to improve) signing blokes like Sherman

 

[KeepItSimple]

morale of the story is!
Loads of players in the last two / three years have left pacco early whilst in contract!
Fair to say what gets sold to players isn't real club is not in good shape as evident on player turnover (it ain't going to improve) signing blokes like Sherman

This Forum is a real eye opener sometimes lets just say some posting takes journalistic licence to a new level

Loads of players in fact = 2 Boys named Sam Leech who went to the Mores (won a flag) & Jason Williams who went home to Diggers Rest.
Background= Antony Crowther who mutually left Pascoe Vale FC (rumour is was let go for internal issues, some of which were player unrest and a split in the camp) Was introduced to the PVFC by young Sam Leech who was in business with Antony Crowther in a burger shop, and Jason Williams was also a part time employee at that shop and had come to PVFC from Keilor FC with Antony. When Antony left/sacked? the two boys wanted to leave mid contract in protest to the decision.

Fair call re Pacco not doing better research on Sherman's background as the character of an individual, especially leaders define club cultures, so true Ruben.

Pacco not in good shape is debatable:
Gavin Urquardt is a definite Panther as well.
http://leader.newspaperdirect.com/e...05/8a0cd8e7-52f5-4435-b2a6-401134164f05//true

It's been a rocky road no doubt and like a lot of clubs Pacco has struggled to be super competitive in Premier in the last 2 years after a good year before that. But I think with the calibre of the individual's, the playing talent & leadership they will bring suggests that improvement to competitiveness in 2015 is a reasonable goal Ruben.

 

[KeepItSimple]

Keep it simple, "The Measure of a Man's Intelligence is the Ability to Change" Albert Einstein

Liking your logic Simple and the oxymoronic pun is definitetly intended although your arguments are the antithesis of ideas of simple or moronic. I have been reading this forum with interest since being alerted to the Sherman issue on the Goulburn Valley website and must concur with your observations in relation to contracts, dairy farms and 'milking'. I am not a Kyabram man, but i find it implausible that the same stewardship at a club that had legendary Goulburn Valley Coach Dave Williams (coached 23 consequitive years at Rochy then Ky for 10 GF appeaeances) there for the past 7 years, could then make this blunder? It seems unfathiomable. I am pleased Rochester declined the Sherman entreaties. I too suspect his is going to get messy![/QUOTE]

Appreciate that Silver Tongue I enjoyed your play on words!

All jokes aside it is really an odd choice by Ky especially signing knowing a player is under contract, very risky considering these clearances etc.. don't get dealt with well into the New Year 2015. Ky are a genuine chance to be left without a coach and Justin Sherman being stood out of football for 2015 which would be a disaster for all concerned. As silly and potentially unethical Justin has been to Ky by not making them aware he was contracted you want to see players on the park.

Hopefully things sort themselves out.

That Dave Williams sounds like a real legend up your way, footy needs more of them!

 

[Dirt Giggler]

Guys just pleased to announce that Micheal Fateni is tullarine president for 2015 has done a great job in juniors . The club is very excited with a record amount going on general commitee things are looking up for this proud club and many thanks to Andy Fisher who has to have a break but still there as VP , congrats to life members Steve Macca and Helen Ward bring on 2015 lets beat the new Greenvale Craigeburne

 

[KeepItSimple]

Why don't clubs just scrap sign-on fees altogether? With the way local footy is going in terms of dollars dished out, it is becoming more common that players take multiple thousand dollar sign on fees and end up playing at a different club. I think it's a joke that players demand several thousand dollars just for scribbling on some paper.

Most clubs are almost clean out of money after August/September, with players demanding thousands up front in October/November, puts so much pressure on the club and committee. It's getting harder and harder for clubs lower on the financial ladder, sign-on fees are one of the biggest problems, especially when half of the time players take it and are then never to be seen again.

It's not the players' problem though, if they can get away with it why wouldn't they?

You are spot on especially re the bad timing of October/November for clubs to pay sign ons. Really is a shit situation and the AFL are genuinely trying to find a way to shut this all down, with a variety of systems etc.. points, salary caps etc.. etc.. all of which have the main enemies of:

• Cash is hard to track
• Benefactors organise jobs off the club books sometimes jobs that players don't even work at but draw a wage
• Clubs will run two books like the NRL Storm scandal
• It will cost too much to police these fixes
• Some clubs will play fair, some won't and eventually the clubs doing the right thing will get sick of it and if you can't beat em, join em will win out

Really is a very hard problem to solve is my opinion

 

[KeepItSimple]

It is FACT that pascoe vale fight for ANYTHING when it comes to contracts. When all there home grown players left last year for fresh starts or weren't happy with how the club was going, they were getting anything they could out of clubs. Cash, kegs, slabs etc. shocking way to work. Burning bridges isn't the way to do it. How many home growns would be at pascoe vale over the age of 23? I'd say 2 or 3 at the absolute maximum. They ask the "home grown" to play for absolute peanuts because it's all about "your love for the club" and pay overs to these recruits who hang around for 1 year and boot off. (Sherman and vespremi to name 2) Grim future ahead for that club. Short term success for long term pain !

Please ....... is this really happening! I had to read your post twice before I could believe it.

It is FACT that pascoe vale fight for ANYTHING when it comes to contracts. And your point is? Not too? Some of these comments are just so amateurish it is just mind numbing. So a quality way to run a footy club is to roll over every time a player wants to break a player contract and leave with sign ons and leave a club high and dry (club being good people that put money in like ALL CLUBS). If fighting for your rights to protect your sponsors and supporters hard earned cash is not something you think is worth doing then I think you are unclear on what it takes to run a professional EDFL Premier League Team these days, its just got to be run more like a business for good or for bad. The only people burning bridges are the people breaking contracts, contracts are commitments people make to other people. In business and life you can't always be liked, the EDFL Premier comp is not a popularity contest its a competition and for the clubs and experienced administrators in the know, they would expect nothing less than a fair fight and if they were lucky enough to be dealing with a club that rolled over in the amateurish way you are suggesting, they would be nice to your face and be laughing all the way to the proverbial bank behind your back, saying what a loser that bloke and his club was, no wonder we smash them every time we play them.

If you or anyone else are confused about how the business of footy works when players/coaches want to leave whilst under contract read yesterday's news. Just stop, think, then post is a good place to start!

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...odney-eade-heads-to-suns-20141028-11d82h.html

"Rodney's a wonderful person and we won't stand in his way. We wish him well and we understand he did not put his hand up for the job. Gold Coast came to him. But he remains in contract and everything's negotiable.

"Our expenses in hiring and fulfilling his role would need to be compensated. These clubs who sack their coaches when they are contracted and come out of nowhere and disrupt our football department plans, which were well in place ... put it this way, we look forward to having a chat with a few people."

Port Adelaide levelled a $150,000 compensation claim at the Saints, who finished up paying Port just $20,000. Thomas said Port then forwarded about $15,000 of that amount to the Gold Coast after the Power in turn poached Shaun Hart to replace Richardson.

While the AFL refused to buy into McGuire's compensation claim, the Magpies received strong support from Port Adelaide, which last November lost its coaching director Alan Richardson to St Kilda.

Advertisement
The Richardson appointment by the Saints came after that club, like the Gold Coast, sacked a contracted senior coach. "I believe there's a strong argument for it," said Port chief Keith Thomas. "When clubs act this late - it's after the trade period - you really are inconveniencing the other club."

 

[BlueJet]

My analogy is on point, that you disagree with it is another matter entirely. I can only lead the horse to water.......... Bluejet there is nothing to disagree with you are presenting what you call a Circular Reasoning Approach. The only safe thing to do when debating with someone doing that is DON'T.Basically your underlying premise is broken so all else that follows is irrational or trash talk. Not being rude mate just honest.

You listed a bunch of times that Sherman had left clubs prior to his contract being up (1yr to go on his Willy deal so yes he had broken a contract to get there) you have changed your tune to suit your argument. Bluejet he wasn't under contract and had left his employment with Willy before even opening dialogues with the PVFC don't know how it can be any clearer cut? If Pascoe Vale had come to terms with Sherman to break his contract and he became a free agent before signing with KY that would be the same thing and you would have a point? Any bending here is of the mind trying to follow your logic

I do agree that contracts shouldn't be signed without the intent of seeing them out and clubs shouldn't just bend to the will of a player. All agreed

That's me for now, until the standard of conversation lifts anyway. Tip it hasn't

Keep it simple, "The Measure of a Man's Intelligence is the Ability to Change" Albert Einstein

Summary
3 Two or Three Year Contracts Signed by Justin Sherman in 3 years
2012 10 Games Bullies Signed for 3 Stayed for 2
2013 3 Games Willy Signed for 2 Stayed for 1
2014 5 Games Paco Signed for 2 Stayed for 1

As stated you were the one listing him as departing Willy prior to the agreed upon time, note: I never commented on when he broke the contract or whether Paco induced him to do so, just that it happened.
Mixed analogies, 'wires crossed' or otherwise, that is the basis of what I was saying but I digress, seeing as though you have a better knowledge of what goes on at Paco than I, how do you see this whole situation playing out?

 

[KeepItSimple]

As stated you were the one listing him as departing Willy prior to the agreed upon time, note: I never commented on when he broke the contract or whether Paco induced him to do so, just that it happened.
Mixed analogies, 'wires crossed' or otherwise, that is the basis of what I was saying but I digress, seeing as though you have a better knowledge of what goes on at Paco than I, how do you see this whole situation playing out?

Bluejet the news is well known to everyone you don't have to be on the inside with this one.

Just like the post above re the Eddie McGuire/Eade news http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...odney-eade-heads-to-suns-20141028-11d82h.html the clubs will try and work it out, if they can't my understanding is Sherman will not be cleared by PVFC to KY FC for 2015, and Sherman either plays at PVFC or stands out of footy for 2015.

Ky will put in a clearance request in Feb when these things happen and it will get knocked back, then KY will look to appeal but will need to establish grounds, such as the contract was invalid because of X, Y & Z and it will end up at AFL Victoria because its an inter league matter. Last time I was privy to a matter identical to this, AFL Victoria ruled the player contract was valid and binding and said goodbye sort it out.

The club on the other side of the matter then decided once they couldn't get it to happen for free negotiated and it happened anyway. Most clubs bypass all that crap because they know where it ends up anyway and they just do the deal. Simple stuff really Bluejet.

Really it is in KY & Sherman's hands as far as I can tell as too which path this all heads down.

That's my take.

 

[Prophetic]

So keepitsimple, what is a ball park figure that is fair and reasonable to break a contract? This is where it is on all parties to sort something out and if two parties are willing to negotiate but if the third party is being unreasonable then it just gets silly and the unreasonable party's reputation suffers. Surely the sooner you get Sherman off your books the better?[/QUOTE]

 

[KeepItSimple]

So keepitsimple, what is a ball park figure that is fair and reasonable to break a contract? This is where it is on all parties to sort something out and if two parties are willing to negotiate but if the third party is being unreasonable then it just gets silly and the unreasonable party's reputation suffers. Surely the sooner you get Sherman off your books the better?

[/QUOTE]

Prophetic first thing to mention is their not my books, they are Pacco books, genuinely not part of the clubs inner sanctum, I know some people down there over the years. And I keep my ear to the ground!

Second you are intermating that PVFC is the unreasonable 3rd party? Wouldn't it be far to say the KY FC who as the rumour goes, has basically informed PVFC in writing that they are announcing Sherman as Captain Coach for 2015 and that they know Sherman is under contract but any contractual matters are between Sherman & PVFC and just washed their hands of it thinking it will go away? That's what you call 0 negotiation and 0 reasonableness. People need to just ground themselves in facts, stop, think clearly and this whole Sherman mess is really cut & dry. A bloke broke a contract, didn't tell his new club he was under contract, when they found out that he was, they sent a letter to PVFC stating they were appointing him anyway and any existing contractual matters are their problem.

What would you do if you were PVFC? Don't just fire off a quick gut reaction, stop and think you are the president, maybe 2 or 3 of your close friends paid the cash sign on to get him in the first place and he has just done a runner on you and the other club is playing dumb/hardball as is Justin? Most people get on forums like this and fire off shallow clichés and have never really been in the hot seat. Be really honest what would you really do?

In terms of what's fair compensation:
I reckon sign ons is a good place to start (which isn't compensation at all that's just out of pockets stuff) , my understanding is that's the main aim in these local situations, Eddie McGuire wants genuine compensation over and above that. If it was extra in these local situations it would hardly be for sheep stations, I don't know a $1K or 2K to deal with the risk that other players leave from a clubs list, mates of Sherman following to Ky risks, the time and effort in replacing a marquee player, the overs you often need to pay in sign ons to replace a marquee player.

In reality the club getting shat on never gets enough as per the age article today.

 

[Prophetic]

I was inferring that any party (player or either club) can be unreasonable if they are not willing negotiate an outcome.