Geelong rorting the system

[Purple Suit]

How do you know who your future sponsor is?

Also if you're getting player sponsorships in the cap you're basically banning them. I'll let you pitch that to the AFLPA

Have 3-5 year rule and put the old deal into the current year’s cap. It would make it a lot harder to rort.

Maybe exclude sponsors who are sports sponsors or promotional in nature & the players are doing the work in photo shoots etc. eg. Nike

It’s the ones like a Finance company which seem a huge stretch.

 

[iameviljez]

How do you know who your future sponsor is?

Also if you're getting player sponsorships in the cap you're basically banning them. I'll let you pitch that to the AFLPA

Well, you could time-limit it so that if, say, Rebel Sport comes on as a sponsor, they need to have a cooling off period of x months from any prior payments to players.

And yes, of course player sponsorships from club sponsors should be considered in the cap, regardless of what the AFLPA thinks. Otherwise you're opening yourself up to situations where player X comes to club Y for $800k under the cap, and also a lovely sponsorship from sponsor Z, which is contingent on you signing for that club.

 

[Flamin Joe]

What experience does Chris Scott have in finance? Were there any other candidates for the job? Was the position advertised?

Also, in what ways specifically are Geelong a really well run club?


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

"Job", come on that's a bit rich. Just look at the title, "Chief of Leadership and Performance". Pretty obvious it's a made up title which has zero to do with finance.

At most he probably does a few Zoom meetings and gives some "motivational talks" and shows up for the odd function. It's a good thing that in both situations people would have name tags as otherwise he wouldn't know these "co-workers" from a bar of soap.

 

[Sentinel]

This sounds great. Even though I complain often about the burden of my current gig, I'm going to 'prepare' for my next job by taking up a c-suite title role for my future employer whilst staying at my existing workplace for another couple of years.

 

[Purple Suit]

This sounds great. Even though I complain often about the burden of my current gig, I'm going to prepare for my next job by taking up a c-suite title role for my future employer whilst staying at my existing workplace for another couple of years.

I hope your current Boss understands and gives you enough spare time to have a 2nd job. You are going have to tell them about it since nearly every employment contract has it as a condition & they can say no too.

 

[Sentinel]

I hope your current Boss understands and gives you enough spare time to have a 2nd job. You are going have to tell them about it since nearly every employment contract has it as a condition & they can say no too.

If anyone were to question this, they'd just be a jealous hater of my non-traditional sponsorship model extra salary very legitimate preparation gig.

 

[The Jack]

Smith was out of contract, and before he did his ACL was clearly told he would not be getting the amount of inside mid time he wanted. Then after recovering from his ACL he was told he would not be selected. Who can be surprised he wanted out, and who can be surprised Geelong was interested in the talented midfielder?

I have a strong suspicion that the bolded is a guess at best, or even possibly made up.

Did the Bulldogs ostracize Smith, or did Smith ostracize himself from the Bulldogs? I personally think the plan had been in place for a considerable amount of time. The Cats can be very patient, and it pays off for them.

How the dodgy deal works we will never know.

 

[Elixuh]

If anyone were to question this, they'd just be a jealous hater of my non-traditional sponsorship model extra salary very legitimate preparation gig.


View attachment 2150751

'transcended the traditional sponsorship model' - doesn't sound like rorting at all.

Next question.

 

[blueboy25]

All those lawyers and they all forgot to talk about the charge. Im sure that happened.

Not one of them got sacked either. For something apparently grossly negligent.

Are you saying that the AFL got the tribunal to make a error in their case against Cripps, so the lawyers would get involved and drag the case out and so he could play the last two rounds. They must have also known that he would get 3 votes in the last game of the year to win the Brownlow by 1 vote?

Nostradamus or what!!!

 

[Sttew]

How?

Baker was not a free agent. Baker was out of contract. So he would have walked to the draft if a trade couldn't be done.

My bad. I misread an article that referred to Jack Graham and Baker

 

[HairyO]

Are you saying that the AFL got the tribunal to make a error in their case against Cripps, so the lawyers would get involved and drag the case out and so he could play the last two rounds. They must have also known that he would get 3 votes in the last game of the year to win the Brownlow by 1 vote?

Nostradamus or what!!!

They knew he was going to win the Brownlow. They also knew that he couldnt get away with it being a fine only - it was far too serious for that. The only way Cripps got away with it was if they screwed up the Tribunal.

 

[Sttew]

Baker was not a free agent so I have no idea what you are on about.

I acknowledged that in another post. Move on!

 

[blueboy25]

They knew he was going to win the Brownlow. They also knew that he couldnt get away with it being a fine only - it was far too serious for that. The only way Cripps got away with it was if they screwed up the Tribunal.

Once again.....you are saying that the AFL made a deliberate error in their tribunal judgement knowing that the lawyers could get him off.

They did this because they could see in to the future and knew that Cripps who was behind going into the final round of the season was going to get 3 votes in the last game of the year to win by 1 vote?

 

[HairyO]

Once again.....you are saying that the AFL made a deliberate error in their tribunal judgement knowing that the lawyers could get him off.

They did this because they could see in to the future and knew that Cripps who was behind going into the final round of the season was going to get 3 votes in the last game of the year to win by 1 vote?

How many punishments were handed out to the MRP group, the lawyers and Tribunal group, and everyone else involved in the process?

None. They got the result they wanted. Its not how it ended either, its the results at the time of the report. He was ahead at that time, wasnt he?

And why did the AFL not contest this finding? They had the power to if they wanted.

 

[blueboy25]

How many punishments were handed out to the MRP group, the lawyers and Tribunal group, and everyone else involved in the process?

None. They got the result they wanted. Its not how it ended either, its the results at the time of the report. He was ahead at that time, wasnt he?

Cripps was leading at rd 20.

Incident agaisnt brisbane happened in rd 21. If it's true like you are saying, that the AFL knew who was leading the Brownlow at the time, you would have known that Lachie Neale got the 3 votes in rd 21. So the AFL so would have known Neale was in front at the time Cripps got handed his suspension.

 

[HairyO]

Cripps was leading at rd 20.

Incident agaisnt brisbane happened in rd 21. If it's true like you are saying, that the AFL knew who was leading the Brownlow at the time, you would have known that Lachie Neale got the 3 votes in rd 21. So the AFL so would have known Neale was in front at the time Cripps got handed his suspension.

I just edited my post so you may not have seen it.

"And why did the AFL not contest this finding? They had the power to if they wanted."

They let him get away with it because they wanted him to get away with it.

No-one will remember the circumstances surrounding this in a few years. But we still talk about Corey McKernan.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I acknowledged that in another post. Move on!

Just saw that, but it does demonstrate you are prepared to judge a situation in favour of your preferred argument regardless of the facts.

So rather than "move on" how about we go back to my original point that you were very keen to answer with a misinformed response. Why did Baker, a player who would be seen as less valuable, trade for more than Smith, who would be seen as more valuable? Both ucontracted, Baker 2 years older. There is no way Smith's value is the value of pick 19. He was pick 8 in a strong draft and is generally seen as having outperformed so far in his career, & is now entering his prime, when players are seen as being at their most valuable trade wise.

The difference is Smith made it known he was getting to Geelong at all costs, no matter the damage to his previous club. And Baker made it known he was only going to WC if a fair deal for Richmond could be arranged. So we are all wondering why Smith did this. It is not exactly difficult to connect dots and reason it is likely to be due to his relationship with Geelong sponsor Cotton On. More specifically, that they have induced him on Geelong's behalf. Which allows Geelong to effectively pay a player more than they could afford to within the salary cap. From an outsider's perspective that is a very obvious leap to make.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I just edited my post so you may not have seen it.

"And why did the AFL not contest this finding? They had the power to if they wanted."

They let him get away with it because they wanted him to get away with it.

No-one will remember the circumstances surrounding this in a few years. But we still talk about Corey McKernan.

We had an amazing situation there. The Tribunal guidelines were found to lack procedural fairness, the very thing they should obviously be formed around. So of course we might expect the AFL to get rid of their legal counsel whose area of responsibility this was, as it was a basic and embarrassing oversight.

He was subsequently promoted.

His name is Andrew Dillon. Elevated to CEO of the AFL.

As you say, for whatever reason, the AFL clearly wanted this to happen.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Have 3-5 year rule and put the old deal into the current year’s cap. It would make it a lot harder to rort.

Maybe exclude sponsors who are sports sponsors or promotional in nature & the players are doing the work in photo shoots etc. eg. Nike

It’s the ones like a Finance company which seem a huge stretch.

It would make it impossible to manage though. You're basically making player sponsorships impossible. Good luck getting that over the line.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Well, you could time-limit it so that if, say, Rebel Sport comes on as a sponsor, they need to have a cooling off period of x months from any prior payments to players.

And yes, of course player sponsorships from club sponsors should be considered in the cap, regardless of what the AFLPA thinks. Otherwise you're opening yourself up to situations where player X comes to club Y for $800k under the cap, and also a lovely sponsorship from sponsor Z, which is contingent on you signing for that club.

I think you'll find that contingency at the end there is not a legally enforceable part of a contract

 

[Sttew]

Just saw that, but it does demonstrate you are prepared to judge a situation in favour of your preferred argument regardless of the facts.

So rather than "move on" how about we go back to my original point that you were very keen to aswer with a misinformed response. Why did Baker, a player who would be seen as less valuable, trade for more than Smith, who would be seen as more valuable. Both ucontracted, Baker 2 years older? There is no way Smith's value is the value of pick 19. He was pick 8 in a strong draft and is generally seen as having outperformed so far in his career, & is now entering his prime, when players are seen as being at their most valuable trade wise.

The difference is Smith made it known he was getting to Geelong at all costs, no matter the damage to his previous club. And Baker made it known he was only going to WC if a fair deal for Richmond could be arranged. So we are all wondering why Smith did this. It is not exactly difficult to connect dots and reason it is likely to be due to his relationship with Geelong sponsor Cotton On. More specifically, that they have induced him on Geelong's behalf. Which allows Geelong to effectively pay a player more than they could afford to with the salary cap. From an outsider's perspective that is a very obvious leap to make.

OK!

Smith is not the first player to want out of a club at all costs and he won't be the last.

Maybe it was linked partially or totally to Cotton On? I'm more inclined to think he wanted to go to a club that has enjoyed recent success and is in dire need of an inside mid. At Geelong he is guaranteed maximum time where he wants to play - in the middle.

Fact 1. Before his ACL Smith was getting less time in the midfield at WB. Probably because of Treloar?
Fact 2. An ACL will always devalue a player. Smith may well have been top 10 pre ACL, but post ACL, I think 17 was about right.
Fact 3. Smith was not treated well by WB. Proof? The Club publicly thanked McCrae and Daniels, both of whom wanted out of WB just like Smith, for their service to the club, but said nothing about Smith. Was that an oversight? I doubt it. Smith was arguably fit to play finals in 2024, but was overlooked by the Club.

 

[Sentinel]

Fact 3. Smith was not treated well by WB. Proof? The Club publicly thanked McCrae and Daniels, both of whom wanted out of WB just like Smith, for their service to the club, but said nothing about Smith. Was that an oversight? I doubt it. Smith was arguably fit to play finals in 2024, but was overlooked by the Club.

"Fact"

 

[Bushdid911]

Geelong really let everyone take a breath from the Baz rort talk, and then Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

48

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

signs on with a key sponsor. I'm looking forward to the next completely above board announcement.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

OK!

Smith is not the first player to want out of a club at all costs and he won't be the last.

Maybe it was linked partially or totally to Cotton On? I'm more inclined to think he wanted to go to a club that has enjoyed recent success and is in dire need of an inside mid. At Geelong he is guaranteed maximum time where he wants to play - in the middle.

Fact 1. Before his ACL Smith was getting less time in the midfield at WB. Probably because of Treloar?
Fact 2. An ACL will always devalue a player. Smith may well have been top 10 pre ACL, but post ACL, I think 17 was about right.
Fact 3. Smith was not treated well by WB. Proof? The Club publicly thanked McCrae and Daniels, both of whom wanted out of WB just like Smith, for their service to the club, but said nothing about Smith. Was that an oversight? I doubt it. Smith was arguably fit to play finals in 2024, but was overlooked by the Club.

Any or all of those points you make could wholly or partially explain Smith's stance, though not necessarily justify it.

Smith might not be the first to want out of a club at all costs. But he is the first we know of to leave one club for another who is sponsored by a firm with whom he has a beneficial relationship.

Players come back from ACL's to regain their best all the time in the AFL. Taylor Walker just one example off the top of my head. If that wasn't the case Geelong would not be offering Smith such a long term contract. The stuff about not being thanked by the Dogs is not "proof" of Smith leaving because the Dogs did not treat him well. It is more likely to be a result of him not treating them well - ie forcing them into a sub-value trade. Being overlooked for finals is barely a shock for a player who had not played for 12 months.

Geelong have obtained Smith well under his market trade value simply because he insisted on being traded there. The Bulldogs would not have released him for that return unless their hands were tied. Smith's insistence on being traded to the Cats is highly likely to have bee triggered by him seeing some tangible financial benefit other clubs could not offer. He is not from the area, and could have chosen any one of a number of Melbourne based clubs who need midfielders.

 

[blueboy25]

We had an amazing situation there. The Tribunal guidelines were found to lack procedural fairness, the very thing they should obviously be formed around. So of course we might expect the AFL to get rid of their legal counsel whose area of responsibility this was, as it was a basic and embarrassing oversight.

He was subsequently promoted.

His name is Andrew Dillon. Elevated to CEO of the AFL.

As you say, for whatever reason, the AFL clearly wanted this to happen.

Again as I asked the previous poster.....how were they to know Cripps would win?

Could they see the future where Cripps would get 3 votes in the last round and Neale only 1and Cripps would win by a vote. Remember Neale was leading at rd 21.