Essendon sign Mal Michael

[Smokin]

it actually doesnt matter when the contract ended.

As long as Essendon didnt coerce him prior to signing the ammended contract, it is of little consequence.

 

[DapperDon]

"If it bleeds, you can kill it"

go farrk yourselfs Brisbane, you made the mess we attacked and won out.

Bite Us

 

[*Danni*]

Unless the entire contract was rescinded by mutual agreement in early October with immediate effect, as reported.

He was a listed player until list lodgement on 31 October, that means his contract expired then. There are no AFL provisions to alter lists prior to that date, and no reports of applications being made to do so or exceptions being granted. The terms of the contract dissolution would have included things like he wasn't going to start pre-season training etc for 2 weeks then suddenly stop, and that sort of stuff, but the contract is not terminated completely until he is delisted on the AFL records, which was 31 October. Prior to that he was a listed and contracted player.

 

[Smokin]

There are so many mistakes in this im not sure where to start!

start then.

 

[Silvagnis]

Brisbane legally, cant expect much here. They are lying in a bed they made.

If I am working for somebody under contract, and for any reason at all that is terminated, UNLESS my employer specifically has me under contract for not working for, or starting up a competing business for X years, I can do what I like.

There are provisions in law to protect Brisbane in this case, however their legal team was either too inempt, or truly trusted Mal, and didnt use it. Their loss.

Besides, Mal will claim he wanted to re-negotiate his contract (terms) in relation to training, and Brisbane said no, effecitvely meaning he couldnt play for them. They then both mutually agreed to terminate. It wasnt just for retirment, Brisbane KNEW he was keen to play under revised conditions.

It's all Brisbane's loss Im afraid.

The Lions cancelled his contract on the proviso he had retired from senior footy.

They would have traded him if this wasn't the case.

 

[campbell]

What a mess.

 

[don4eva]

Re: Essendon sign Mal Michaels

Yeah, good news, sure, lets sign a player who will train when he feels like it, isn't 100% committed. The old man has certainly lost his marbles, and i can not express how glad I am that he isn't coaching Richmond.

So am I. Then he'd have 4 flags at Richmond not Essendon.

 

[Smokin]

The Lions cancelled his contract on the proviso he had retired from senior footy.

So what?

Under contract law, nothing protects them unless the had contracted it.

Their only case would be in equity, but Mal Michael can simply state he changed his mind.

Brisbane didnt protect themselves.

Anyone here ever bought and sold a company? there are tones of contracts and examples regarding future restraint of trade. Brisbane should have used one of em.

 

[ant555]

Re: Essendon sign Mal Michaels

Were the other 15 clubs aware of Michael's decision to come out of retirement to enter the PSD as an uncontracted player?

If the other clubs were aware of this then there may have been a few Vic clubs chasing his services and the Lions would have received something in exchange for a contracted player. That's the system the AFL have in place for ensuring an even competition and this was a way of getting around that to gain the services of a senior player. If he is nominating Carlton and every other club should have had the chance to get him in a trade or in the PSD. The AFL won't do jack here because they don't have the balls to hit Essendon with sanctions.

If he gets away with this it has the potential to compromise the drafts and the AFL might be giving a signal that free agency is on the way.

This all depends on when he made the decision to play again. If it is proven that he made the decision before trade week and it was planed then sure penalties should apply. If we approached him on Nov 2 and he took a few weeks to decide what have we done wrong? All we have done is contact an uncontracted player to see if he was available to play.
All this will do is ensure that clubs in the future will make sure they are protected against this sort of situation. All this compromise the draft and free agent stuff is paraniod BS.

 

[Jimmy C]

Re: Essendon sign Mal Michaels

Well put Embers - thats sums it up for mine I can't believe Im agreeing with you !!!!

This is a perfect example of what the Brisbane football club was built upon.

Yes a great side 3 in a row - fantastic effort.

But spare me the crap about about 'all working together' , 'a tight unit' , 'great leadership', 'great bond' , 'We all play for each other' , etc blah blah blah,

In the last two years all their 'great' players are jumping off the sinking ship, they are mercenaries who sh#t on each other when the chips are down - no concern for the club who delivered them 3 flags - nup 'I'm off theres no success here in the next few years'

Mal Michael - lied to Collingwood , now lied to Brisbane

Sh#thouse , sucked in Brisbane you cocky loudmouths

Would love to be a fly on the wall at those premiership reunions - 3 or 4 blokes standind around telling each other how good they are - and the rest not talking to each other

Aker was right

 

[Smokin]

the fact of the matter is Mal probably did shaft Brisbane, because like a whole host of Brisbane players, he hates the clubs guts.

This will never get proven though!

Brisbane have bigger problems on their hands than this.

 

[campbell]

the fact of the matter is Mal probably did shaft Brisbane, because like a whole host of Brisbane players, he hates the clubs guts.

This will never get proven though!

Brisbane have bigger problems on their hands than this.

So what might those problems be?

 

[Longy413]

Re: Essendon sign Mal Michaels

Were the other 15 clubs aware of Michael's decision to come out of retirement to enter the PSD as an uncontracted player?

15 AFL clubs, 16 including Brisbane, have the contact details of his manager.

If he is nominating Carlton and every other club should have had the chance to get him in a trade or in the PSD.

Every club did have the chance to trade for him, or at least offer a trade.
Carlton had the chance to sign him in the PSD, they signed someone else.

The AFL won't do jack here because they don't have the balls to hit Essendon with sanctions.

Maybe that's because there is nothing they can do.

 

[UpTheGuts]

He was a listed player until list lodgement on 31 October, that means his contract expired then. There are no AFL provisions to alter lists prior to that date, and no reports of applications being made to do so or exceptions being granted. The terms of the contract dissolution would have included things like he wasn't going to start pre-season training etc for 2 weeks then suddenly stop, and that sort of stuff, but the contract is not terminated completely until he is delisted on the AFL records, which was 31 October. Prior to that he was a listed and contracted player.

I'll defer to you Danni, though it doesn't accord with Essendon's press conference etc.

Cheers

 

[campbell]

Could his contract have been terminated early for some reason.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

the fact of the matter is Mal probably did shaft Brisbane, because like a whole host of Brisbane players, he hates the clubs guts.

This will never get proven though!

Brisbane have bigger problems on their hands than this.

Sadly, this is the issue I've been dancing around. Why is it so? Brisbane supporters need to understand that there are issues surrounding this.

 

[royals1922]

This situation demonstrates exactly why the Lions were given a retention allowance and why the Victorian clubs were so keen to get rid of it.

Personally I hope Michael does a cruciate in his first practice match. It will give him many months to consider what loyalty is.

 

[campbell]

This situation demonstrates exactly why the Lions were given a retention allowance and why the Victorian clubs were so keen to get rid of it.

Personally I hope Michael does a cruciate in his first practice match. It will give him many months to consider what loyalty is.

You are a disgrace.

 

[*Danni*]

I'll defer to you Danni, though it doesn't accord with Essendon's press conference etc.

Cheers

It's the suttle differences.

To most, announcement of retiremnet effectively means exactly that. What the contractual terms actually are though are never thought of by the general public.

To say he retired at a certain date isn't incorrect. To assume there is no contractual obligation as of that date, or more specifically no contract as of that date, is the issue. There very well may be no contractual obligations left from him or the club - let's say he was paid out and he returned any property or whatever he had to before 31 October. That doesn't mean the contract expired then unless it was stated as doing so in the dissolution. The AFL fiscal and contractual year ends on 31 October. That is also the date of list lodgement. You are a listed player with that club until the AFL accepts a list without your name on it and the appropriate paperwork showing how and why you are not on it, and then they publish it. Prior to that you are listed.

I know it's a technicality - but it's there. Intent, agreement, blah blah blah, mean nothing until that paperwork date is reached and it all becomes a reality.

 

[Vader]

There is no doubt that what Michael & Essendon have done is morally wrong. The question of whether or not it is legally wrong is another matter - one which I have no doubt the Lions will pursue.

Worst of all, it sets a dangerous precedent - one which the AFL will be keen to stamp out as it puts at risk the whole draft system.

If it is determined that this move IS legal, then the AFL will have to close the loophole. They will just change the Laws of the game, so that any player who chooses to retire while still under contract is precluded from playing for any other team until that contract expires.

This would mean that Essendon would be unable to draft him until the 2007 PSD.

 

[Longy413]

This situation demonstrates exactly why the Lions were given a retention allowance and why the Victorian clubs were so keen to get rid of it.

Who says we'll be paying him anymore than what he was on at Brisbane?

Isn't he from Brisbane anyway?

Personally I hope Michael does a cruciate in his first practice match. It will give him many months to consider what loyalty is.

Fool.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

This situation demonstrates exactly why the Lions were given a retention allowance and why the Victorian clubs were so keen to get rid of it.

Personally I hope Michael does a cruciate in his first practice match. It will give him many months to consider what loyalty is.

rubbish. This situation should illustrate to you what issues there are in your club when players like Michael etc can't wait to get out of there It ain't a money issue. I can pretty much guarantee he's on less money now. How would your retention allowance have helped, exactly?

As for wishing a knee injury on a player that's given your club years of service and helped win you premierships...you're pathetic, have a sook

 

[_RT_]

Still yet to hear why a player that has been released by a club is getting so much attention. Again is this only a story because of the name associated or because it is the Bombers. I suppose the Lions fans would llike him back on their list with his big $ contract that would force them to get rid of some promising kid.

 

[Silvagnis]

Re: Essendon sign Mal Michaels

I wonder whether Carlton would prefer and undersized, underperforming ruck or a FB who can teach THornton, Ohailpin, Bower, Flint.

Like Mick Martyn?

 

[*Danni*]

Still yet to hear why a player that has been released by a club is getting so much attention. Again is this only a story because of the name associated or because it is the Bombers. I suppose the Lions fans would llike him back on their list with his big $ contract that would force them to get rid of some promising kid.

Still yet to hear? How about you think about it for yourself instead of waiting for someone to tell you? It's not just about Mal Michael, the Lions and Essendon and the AFL. It's about what precedent this sets for the future, and about 'what if it was your club', which by the looks of the situation with no "can't do it" explicit legislation on the books it could have happened to ANY club.