Coach Fages and the coaching group

Remove this Banner Ad

p4p1 said:
I did an intro to contract law in uni, so I am by no means an expert but from memory, it comes down to it being illegal for an employer/ex-employer barring someone from plying their trade/expertise to earn a living.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. Actually now I think about it I think the nuance is more about "yes we can't stop you going to a rival firm but you're not allowed to steal our clients".
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Grasshopper17 said:
Fair dinkum? I have a few colleagues and ex-colleagues in the finance sector who would probably be interested in this!
Click to expand...
Yeah - they can do "gardening leave" where they continue to pay you and you don't work at a competitor, but they can't prevent you from joining another company if the contract has ceased.

That doesn't prevent many companies from including unenforceable clauses in contracts (mine actually does for example) and making threats with the hope that the idea of legal action will effectively work even if it legally can't.
Grasshopper17 said:
Makes sense. Actually now I think about it I think the nuance is more about "yes we can't stop you going to a rival firm but you're not allowed to steal our clients".
Click to expand...
There's definitely other rules about poaching customers. I think it's broadly legal but if and only if you approach them after ceasing employment with your previous employer. If you make any approaches or expressions of interest prior to quitting and joining/starting a new firm, you're in trouble. However often customers will walk to the new company of their own regard if they value that personal relationship sufficiently - and that's legal too.
 
dlanod said:
There's definitely other rules about poaching customers. I think it's broadly legal but if and only if you approach them after ceasing employment with your previous employer. If you make any approaches or expressions of interest prior to quitting and joining/starting a new firm, you're in trouble. However often customers will walk to the new company of their own regard if they value that personal relationship sufficiently - and that's legal too.
Click to expand...
My understanding of this one is that it is a very grey area. There is some no no's that I know of like, informing a client who would've signed a contract previously that you are ending your employment there in a few weeks and they should hold off signing etc. Something that is actively working against the company that is employing you.
But customers following you to your new company because they prefer their relationship with you rather than the company is fine but can result in, as you have said threats of legal action etc.
 
dlanod said:
Yeah - they can do "gardening leave" where they continue to pay you and you don't work at a competitor, but they can't prevent you from joining another company if the contract has ceased.

That doesn't prevent many companies from including unenforceable clauses in contracts (mine actually does for example) and making threats with the hope that the idea of legal action will effectively work even if it legally can't.

There's definitely other rules about poaching customers. I think it's broadly legal but if and only if you approach them after ceasing employment with your previous employer. If you make any approaches or expressions of interest prior to quitting and joining/starting a new firm, you're in trouble. However often customers will walk to the new company of their own regard if they value that personal relationship sufficiently - and that's legal too.
Click to expand...

Lots of contract law/intellectual property law cases about things like client lists/databases. Most litigation ends up being about that stuff.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Grasshopper17 said:
Fair dinkum? I have a few colleagues and ex-colleagues in the finance sector who would probably be interested in this!
Click to expand...
Macquarie Bank tried coming after me after I left and started calling my clients....they back off when my new employer pushed back. I've seen it enough times now that its all just a way to delay you from calling clients up.
 
Nunez said:
Did you know we have not lost a game since Dew joined the club?

Coincidence?

I think not.
Click to expand...

What happened to Dews head in your avatar?? Are you ashamed of dews face. You coward!
 
Grasshopper17 said:
Wonder how kosher it would be for Fages to catch up with Simmo for a coffee on Saturday morning...
Click to expand...
I think Simmons needs a break away for a while. He's looked mentally cooked for a bit now. I'm not saying we wouldn't be interested in him joining us, but for everyone's sake he looks like he needs a long holiday before he starts coaching again
 
May be Fages and team came in this year preparing for Pies with the uncontested marking gameplan. Others appear to be cashing in.

www.foxsports.com.au

Brothers’ secret plan to ignite Pie plight; Tigers return to bad old days in 20-year low: Talking Pts

Brothers’ secret plan to ignite Pie plight; Tigers return to bad old days in 20-year low: Talking Pts
www.foxsports.com.au www.foxsports.com.au

‘NOT RUNNING OVER THE TOP’: SCOTT BROTHERS’ TACTIC COOLS PIES


Have the Scott brothers devised a game plan to shut down Collingwood and its ability to produce comebacks?

There was a feeling of deja vu at the MCG on Friday night, with Collingwood losing in a similar fashion for two-straight weeks at the hands of Essendon and Geelong.

Indeed, the same tactic was used against Collingwood across two weeks to great effect — with a high uncontested marking brand diffusing the Pies from being able to play their natural chaos game.

Heck, Craig McRae’s side couldn’t get its hands on the ball at stages in both matches.

In fact, Geelong took a whopping 70 extra marks to the Pies including controlling the ball in the fourth term to hang onto its lead and never let Collingwood even look like challenging.


It marked the Cats’ third-highest amount of marks in a game ever (145) and their most ever uncontested marks ever (139).

And it came off the back of Essendon taking 50 extra marks against the Pies the week prior, with Brad Scott’s Bombers racking up 139 marks — 129 uncontested. Even in Collingwood’s narrow Round 15 win over North Melbourne it was -45 in marks.

“This is probably the talking point,” Demons legend Garry Lyon said on Fox Footy after Geelong’s win over the reigning premiers.

“When you watched (the Cats) execute in the manner they did, this is why Craig McRae has said they can’t keep coming back.

“They’re not going to keep rolling over the top of teams because (opposition) will go to school on the way they play.

“What Geelong did was: ‘You’re not running over the top of us when we’re taking 139 uncontested because you’re not going to have the ball’.”
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Coach Fages and the coaching group

Similar threads

JasRulz63
  • Sticky
List Mgmt. List changes, contract status and key dates - 2024 🏆
Replies
19
Views
852
JasRulz63
JasRulz63
AllHart
Premiership celebrations at Brunswick St Oval Fitzroy yesterday (Sunday) - a sea of maroon, blue and gold
Replies
0
Views
190
AllHart
AllHart
G
Analysis Season 2024 - Statistics and Analytics Thread
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
284
Views
20K
JasRulz63
JasRulz63
Gadzorks
  • Locked
Do we have a heart and a soul
2 3
Replies
52
Views
6K
ZoBlitz
ZoBlitz
AllHart
2024 Grand Final Parade - my home video from start to finish featuring all participants - filmed from the footbridge to the MCG
Replies
0
Views
157
AllHart
AllHart
Son of Superboot
Mark and Goal of the year
Replies
2
Views
675
McIvor
McIvor
The Dr
Podcast Historic AFL podcast - the build of the Brisbane Bears
Replies
2
Views
261
Jim Stynes11
Jim Stynes11

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top