If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Agency?

[Bomber57]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

So if all the young players only wanted to play for 2 clubs you'd have no problem with that? Seems weird to me but fair enough....

I think free agency could work if you did something along these lines:
- Hold the draft as normal, drafted players are signed to entry level contracts (2-4 years duration)
- Once the entry level deal is completed they become a restricted free agent. If they can't work out a deal with their club other clubs can make an offer. If the player accepts the offer then the club that losses him is compenstaed by draft pick (the exact picks depend on the size of the contract)
- After a certain age (say 27) the player can become an unrestricted free agent and can sign wherever he wants for whatever he wants.

All this is based on the NHL Free Agency model which i think works very well

It worked fine for 100+ years, then we have the draft and trade controlled by the AFL to have a equal playing field, to say that all the young players would want to go to only a small number of clubs is wrong, that never happened before.

 

[matta]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Firstly I think free agency is not a good idea - and that's coming from a WCE fan which is one of the teams to most benefit from it. The draft system is a unique system that levels the comp.. I for one like seeing different teams compete for the flag rather than 4 or 5 year in year out. The system also brings into acocampaigner a further variation being the emphasis on the recruitment staff which would not exist (at least not to the same degree) if there was free agency and you didn't have to take risks on untried youngsters.

Next, the reason the free agency arguement was put forward at the start of this post was that WCE wouldn't deal with Collingwood. I just dont see this happening despite the history between the to sides. Would the Eagles prefer Judd to go to a cellar dweller like Carlton - probably yes - but they won't refuse to deal with a contender if the result of taking this action is they get nothing. IMO the major threat to the Pies getting Judd is the Pies themselves refusing to offera fair trade - as their history shows they have a habit of doing. Of course what is fair is debatable but if the Pies run their usual course they will argue a fair trade is a 3rd round pick or something ridiculous like that.

Finally, all this posturing of Collingwood being the huge club bent on world domination is just wrong. I think they need to llook at some hard facts which show they are not quite in the postion of strength they thing they are. Fact - the Courts would probably strike down the draft as it is a restarint of trade. Fact - Collingwood do generate a lot of income for the AFL (a lot of which flows to the poorer Vic clubs). But fact is the Pies need the rest of comp to be in the comp. The league is not one club and the Pies need to remember this.

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Finally, all this posturing of Collingwood being the huge club bent on world domination is just wrong. I think they need to llook at some hard facts which show they are not quite in the postion of strength they thing they are. Fact - the Courts would probably strike down the draft as it is a restarint of trade. Fact - Collingwood do generate a lot of income for the AFL (a lot of which flows to the poorer Vic clubs). But fact is the Pies need the rest of comp to be in the comp. The league is not one club and the Pies need to remember this.

Manchester United have no salary cap, can buy the best players from around the world and win all the time yet the EPL is the biggest and most popular soccer league in the world. So whether a competition is competitive or not doesn’t affect its popularity.

The Collingwood football club put up with a lot of shite to allow an even competition. If they wanted to blow the competition out of the water they could easily do it. The fact that they adhere to the AFL rules and also suplement most of the clubs through the equalisation fund is proof that they have been willing to deal on the AFL competitions' terms to their own detrement.

Collingwood suffer from being a big fish in a small esentially legislated pond.

If Australian Rules football was played throughout the world like Association Rules Football (soccer) is, the AFL would not be able to put up a protective framework to emphasis a team with a $30M budget competiting with a team with a $300M budget. But that is a whole other debate.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

F

However to say, like in Nick Stevens and Kane Johnson’s case, if you come home to Victoria, you have to play for the bottom team, is a nonsense. Those players have wasted 3 or 4 years of their careers while the teams they play for keep rebuilding. A player only has about 6-8 top years of footy in him on average.

Stevens and Johnson have missed out on potential glory and related rewards because the system says that they most go to the biggest misfit club in Victoria at that time.

That is a restraint of trade.

In Kane Johnson,s case he wanted to go to Richmond.
In regards to Judd and the free agency.How long has Judd been at West Coast?
If there is to be a Free agency surely there would have to be rules in place on when a player can invoke this rule.
Realistic and fair option would be 10yrs at his first club.

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

If there is to be a Free agency surely there would have to be rules in place on when a player can invoke this rule.
Realistic and fair option would be 10yrs at his first club.

I actually agree with this (at least till a player is 26) but as the AFL and Players Association has dithered around with the free agency issue for 5 years, there are currently no agreed guidelines at all. So instead we have a completely inflexible system with very little chance for disgruntled players to pick the Club of their choice to seal their future, they must nominate a price and go to the bottom club.

The only chance a player has at the moment is to take the system to Court and if that happens the AFL will have missed the boat to set up Free Agency on their own terms and it will be totally open slather for uncontracted players.

 

[Aussie Joe]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Stevens and Johnson have missed out on potential glory...

The any player who plays for Collingwood BOARD.

 

[Aussie Joe]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

I actually agree with this (at least till a player is 26) but as the AFL and Players Association has dithered around with the free agency issue for 5 years, there are currently no agreed guidelines at all. So instead we have a completely inflexible system with very little chance for disgruntled players to pick the Club of their choice to seal their future, they must nominate a price and go to the bottom club.

The only chance a player has at the moment is to take the system to Court and if that happens the AFL will have missed the boat to set up Free Agency on their own terms and it will be totally open slather for uncontracted players.

Its not going to happen. Eddie doesn't have the stomach to do the deed.

If Elliot didn't do it back in 2002, then no one will.

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Its not going to happen. Eddie doesn't have the stomach to do the deed.

If Elliot didn't do it back in 2002, then no one will.

It is Judd doing the deed.

No Elliott wouldn't take the AFL to Court, he would just lie and cheat and steal premierships instead.

Carlton = Floyd Landis.

 

[westdog54]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Free agency does not mean the rich clubs get richer.

There is still a salary cap in place and the fact is Chris Judd or any other player might want to go back to the Club they supported as a kid rather than Collingwood or Essendon or Carlton.

Akermanis’s choice was the Western Bulldogs and plenty of players would have wanted to go to North Melbourne when they had Carey, Stevens and Archer firing

The Brisbane boys have all hung together and virtually none of them have gone home or been lured for the riches of the South.

Spider Everitt wanted to go to Swans because he saw that as the best fit for his skills and time of life.

Each situation for a player is UNIQUE

Collingwood have won one premiership in 50 years so they are hardly this big monster over the competition that everyone portrays them as

Essentially Western Australian ( eg Headland and Chick) and South Australian (eg Darren Jarman ) players already use the system to get back to the team in the state they want to live in and play for.

However to say, like in Nick Stevens and Kane Johnson’s case, if you come home to Victoria, you have to play for the bottom team, is a nonsense. Those players have wasted 3 or 4 years of their careers while the teams they play for keep rebuilding. A player only has about 6-8 top years of footy in him on average.

Stevens and Johnson have missed out on potential glory and related rewards because the system says that they most go to the biggest misfit club in Victoria at that time.

That is a restraint of trade.

Although I'm hesitant on the idea of Free Agency, this is a bloody good post.

The NHL and NBA are excellent examples of a Draft, Salary Cap and Free Agency working together.

I can understand your frustration and admire your passion but Free Agency will be one of the biggest changes to come to the game in the past couple of decades. The AFL and the AFLPA will come to an agreement on this, the AFL simply can't afford not to in the next few years. We can't allow a predicament involving one player (granted the player in question adds fire to the debate) to send us down a path that has an uncertain and potentially dangerous end.

Look at the Akermanis trade last year. Granted, the situation was different and the two players are at different stages of their career, but right up until trade week, Brisbane, through Michael Bowers, were adamant that Akermanis' wishes were irrelevant, and that they would decide where he ended up. In the end cooler heads and common sense prevailed, and the deal was done very early in trade week.

I'm curious, as a Collingwood supporter, which players do you regard as 'untouchable' in terms of the Judd trade. You're going to have to cough up a lot if you want him.

 

[West Coast 06]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

The Collingwood football club put up with a lot of shite to allow an even competition. If they wanted to blow the competition out of the water they could easily do it. The fact that they adhere to the AFL rules and also suplement most of the clubs through the equalisation fund is proof that they have been willing to deal on the AFL competitions' terms to their own detrement.

Collingwood suffer from being a big fish in a small esentially legislated pond.

Are you serious? For one, Collingwood get the easiest deal of all the clubs when it comes to fixturing and travelling. For another this competition is far from even.

How exactly would you blow the competition out of the water? Do you think Collingwood only follow the rules of the competition out of the kindness of their hearts or something? Or maybe, to be allowed to be a part of the AFL that they have to follow the rules as does every other club?

Perhaps you would like it more if you left the AFL and set up the Collingwood Football League, then you really could believe that your club is the centre of the universe!

For a mob of feral nuffies, you Collingwood supporters sure do have delusions of grandeur!

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Are you serious? For one, Collingwood get the easiest deal of all the clubs when it comes to fixturing and travelling. For another this competition is far from even.

How exactly would you blow the competition out of the water? Do you think Collingwood only follow the rules of the competition out of the kindness of their hearts or something? Or maybe, to be allowed to be a part of the AFL that they have to follow the rules as does every other club?

Perhaps you would like it more if you left the AFL and set up the Collingwood Football League, then you really could believe that your club is the centre of the universe!

For a mob of feral nuffies, you Collingwood supporters sure do have delusions of grandeur!

If Collingwood left the AFL and set up their own league by bringing in Glenelg and Norwood, West Perth, South Fremantle, Glenorchy, Launceston, a team out of the Albury/Wagga Wagga area, Southport and Balmain and then went and signed every player coming into this years' draft at twice the rookie contract rate, and then signed a contract with Channel 9 to televise the league, pretty soon the AFL would be the second level competition in Aussie Rules.

At very least it would blow the AFL apart and probably sink about 5 clubs. Collingwood effectively pump about a third of the revenue into the equalisation fund and the coffers of teams playing them at the MCG and that is something people don't understand.

Remember the war between the Foxtel rugby league and the NRL, is that what you want, a total war that kills everyone.

I think there is nothing dumber than Western Australians who have been in the VFL for about 10 minutes and don't know their place in the world. In the pecking order you are way down the bottom as you are a selfish lot looking after yourselves.

West Coast supporters has very little knowledge of football except their own little small minded team who have been in the competition for five minutes.

Ask a Western Australain who Jack Regan or Chicken Smallhorn are and the go......"Whe...Whe...What???"

Small little city Perth which has very little relevance to the AFL league and the game of Aussie Rules.

West Coast - a team created for television purposes only without any history or tradition at all.

And you have a shite club song.

 

[EscapeHere]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

If Collingwood left the AFL and set up their own league by bringing in Glenelg and Norwood, West Perth, South Fremantle, Glenorchy, Launceston, a team out of the Albury/Wagga Wagga area, Southport and Balmain and then went and signed every player coming into this years, draft at twice the rookie contract rate, and then signed a contract with Channel 9 to televise the league, pretty soon the AFL would be the second level competition in Aussie Rules.

At very least it would blow the AFL apart and probably sink about 5 clubs. Collingwood effectively pump about a third of the revenue into the equalisation fund and the coffers of teams playing them at the MCG and that is something people don't understand.

Remember the war between the Foxtel rugby league and the NRL, is that what you want, a total war that kills everyone.

You could do that, sure. But you wouldn't be called Collingwood. The AFL own all Collingwood's trademarks, Collingwood don't.

The AFL have provisions in place to prevent a super league situation.

 

[Jackey J]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

If Collingwood left the AFL and set up their own league by bringing in Glenelg and Norwood, West Perth, South Fremantle, Glenorchy, Launceston, a team out of the Albury/Wagga Wagga area, Southport and Balmain and then went and signed every player coming into this years' draft at twice the rookie contract rate, and then signed a contract with Channel 9 to televise the league, pretty soon the AFL would be the second level competition in Aussie Rules.

I assume you're joking.

Sure you might get a few people wanting to see the Collingwood games, but the crowds at all the rest?

Glenelg V Wagga how many you expect for that?

Instead of paying 1/3 of the equalisation fund (if that is true) they would be paying 100%.

The only way it will happen is to get approx 50 % of the current clubs involved which will never happen as most clubs wouldnt want to help the Pies do anything.

 

[EscapeHere]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Manchester United have no salary cap, can buy the best players from around the world and win all the time yet the EPL is the biggest and most popular soccer league in the world. So whether a competition is competitive or not doesn’t affect its popularity.

The Collingwood football club put up with a lot of shite to allow an even competition. If they wanted to blow the competition out of the water they could easily do it. The fact that they adhere to the AFL rules and also suplement most of the clubs through the equalisation fund is proof that they have been willing to deal on the AFL competitions' terms to their own detrement.

Collingwood suffer from being a big fish in a small esentially legislated pond.

If Australian Rules football was played throughout the world like Association Rules Football (soccer) is, the AFL would not be able to put up a protective framework to emphasis a team with a $30M budget competiting with a team with a $300M budget. But that is a whole other debate.

Nobody cares about how great you think Collingwood is and how lucky the rest of the league should feel to have Collingwood in it. Collingwood may indirectly help some of the smaller Melbourne clubs but that's about as far as it goes.

Teams like Adelaide and West Coast are more supported than Collingwood, more successful than Collingwood and have a much greater earning capacity than Collingwood ever will. Deal with it. You're not as spectacular as you like to think you are. If the AFL was less regulated Adelaide & WC would each go halves and buy out Collingwood just so they could use the Lexus centre as our training and preparation facilities for our away games

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

I assume you're joking.

Sure you might get a few people wanting to see the Collingwood games, but the crowds at all the rest?

Glenelg V Wagga how many you expect for that?

Instead of paying 1/3 of the equalisation fund (if that is true) they would be paying 100%.

The only way it will happen is to get approx 50 % of the current clubs involved which will never happen as most clubs wouldnt want to help the Pies do anything.

Obviously there is a loss leader like there was in the first year of World Series Cricket but by middle of the second year of World Series Cricket there were more people going to the Super Tests and One Dayers than there was going to the establishment tests.

The same thing happened when the AFL in American Gridiron took on the NFL, people said it would never compete but before the two leagues merged, the AFL was getting better ratings than the NFL.

Every player coming out of contract in the AFL would be offered contracts higher than the ones they were being offered in the AFL and pretty soon the SA stars would be playing for Glenelg and Norwood not the Crows and Port. If you included a Northern Teritory team, you would get 20,000 to 30,000 to the footy every time they played in darwin and you would get most of the gunaboriginals who would love to play in their home environment.

You can make sweatners for just about everyone.

Tweek the rules slightly to make it all more exciting and make every game feel like a final.

If we build it, they will come.

 

[Jackey J]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Probably be worth considering if it means getting rid of Andy D and the hands in the back interpretation.

Cant see Channel 9 signing up tho as they will be feeling pretty confident of getting the rights back in 4 years time.

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Nobody cares about how great you think Collingwood is and how lucky the rest of the league should feel to have Collingwood in it. Collingwood may indirectly help some of the smaller Melbourne clubs but that's about as far as it goes.

Teams like Adelaide and West Coast are more supported than Collingwood, more successful than Collingwood and have a much greater earning capacity than Collingwood ever will. Deal with it. You're not as spectacular as you like to think you are. If the AFL was less regulated Adelaide & WC would each go halves and buy out Collingwood just so they could use the Lexus centre as our training and preparation facilities for our away games

Unfortunately Adelaide and Perth are tadpole small outback towns that only have football teams so games can be pumped back into Melbourne for ratings purposes.

Football in these cities has only just started in "OUR" league for you supporters. Melbourne is the games home.


The AFL has given the teams in Perth and Adelaide huge advantages with over half their games at home which leads to home finals and therefore Grand Final appearances.

Meanwhile Collingwood is trying to bail out Western Bulldogs and North and now Carlton (before Pratt stepped in) and even Richmond by using the pulling power of our supporters.

We carry footy and it is time we got a better deal out of it all.

 

[garlic munchers]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

The proposition that the salary cap is sufficent protection to guarantee equality in the competion if free agency is introduced, is a furphy.

Good players get significant off field financial support i.e. Judd's leg up into the business world of property investment.

It is logical to assume that a two team WA would be able to offer far more non-salary cap rated incentives to lure players than could the Victorian teams as whole when it is taken into account that "Perth has a population of 1,507,900(December 2006 estimate) with a growth rate of 2.1% (2006) and is currently the fastest growing major city in Australia. It is expected that Perth's population will grow at 2.5% per annum in 2007, due primarily to the booming Western Australian economy. State Final Demand, for instance, is growing at 10.2%, 12 months to March 2007" (ABS).

With the mining boom predicted to run at least another decade, WC should for the benefit of its members, be demanding free agency now!

Why doesn't it, because we acknowledge that no free agency allowed WC to start from scratch and survive the first few years and that it is the AFL competition and competition is not served by having Chelsea &/or a Man U.

 

[MickyCrow]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

I understand the point of this thread and the motivation behind it, I even agree with it, but ya cant halp but think if it was the other way round they would be squealing like stuck pigs

 

[Messenger]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

If Collingwood left the AFL and set up their own league by bringing in Glenelg and Norwood, West Perth, South Fremantle, Glenorchy, Launceston, a team out of the Albury/Wagga Wagga area, Southport and Balmain and then went and signed every player coming into this years' draft at twice the rookie contract rate, and then signed a contract with Channel 9 to televise the league, pretty soon the AFL would be the second level competition in Aussie Rules.

Utter nonsense. Yet you say it with such conviction.

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

The proposition that the salary cap is sufficent protection to guarantee equality in the competion if free agency is introduced, is a furphy.

Good players get significant off field financial support i.e. Judd's leg up into the business world of property investment.

If that is the case, why is Judd coming home? Money isn't everything, it is not even the second most important thing. You defeat your own arguement with your comments. And the AFL are stepping up finding out about any under hand payments et al so the salary cap will be administered to the letter.

PS. They do have an extensive property investment world here in Melbourne and also in Sydney I hear and via a thing called the internet, you can even buy property overseas.

 

[EscapeHere]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Unfortunately Adelaide and Perth are tadpole small outback towns that only have football teams so games can be pumped back into Melbourne for ratings purposes.

Football in these cities has only just started in "OUR" league for you supporters. Melbourne is the games home.


The AFL has given the teams in Perth and Adelaide huge advantages with over half their games at home which leads to home finals and therefore Grand Final appearances.

Meanwhile Collingwood is trying to bail out Western Bulldogs and North and now Carlton (before Pratt stepped in) and even Richmond by using the pulling power of our supporters.

We carry footy and it is time we got a better deal out of it all.

Yeah yeah, I've heard it all before.

Only Collingwood would actually consider taking the AFL to court because they couldn't recruit a star player.

Deal with the situation and stop wingeing. If you get Judd then good, if you don't, well shit happens. Collingwood is not above the game. You cannot take the AFL to court every time something doesn't go your way. Nobody cares nor believes all this crap about breaking away and forming a new league if Collingwood doesn't get its way. You don't have the capacity to do it and you won't.

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Yeah yeah, I've heard it all before.

[Only Collingwood would actually consider taking the AFL to court because they couldn't recruit a star player.

You guys were sqealing like stuffed pigs when Chick wanted to come home and Hawthorn wouldn't deal at the time. That is why a form of free agency needs to come in so that there is more oil to the wheels of the trade system. If the Judd deal takes to the last minute then watch out. Ricky Nixson is circling.

Nixon, meanwhile, said if the Judd deal dragged on into trade week there could be serious repercussions.

"When you have someone like Chris Judd, or for that matter last year, Peter Everitt, these deals have got to be done by 12 o'clock Tuesday on trade week so that the other 10, 20, 30 deals can happen," Nixon told SEN.

"If the Chris Judd one comes down to one minute to two then I reckon we're going to be for the first time looking at some major legal action from a restraint of trade point of view.

"If I have players who miss out on being traded because this trade happens at one minute to two then I'll be going down that track this year."

From a Carlton perspective if Judd choses them as his preferred option.

Richard Pratt will make many nervous people in league circles that his threat to bank role a Free Agency bid is very real. If West Coast don't deal with Carlton then this possibility is very much on the table. If West Coast are lowballed on the deal and do the trade then it will be because the AFL convince them to. Carlton want to keep the #1 pick and they want Judd - something will need to give.

Pratt and his mates would love nothing more than to tear up the AFL's equalisation measures and he's one of the few that would be prepared to bank-roll it. He'll play ball if he gets his way but if he doesn't, god help the AFL. A case against the AFL's trading rule would succeed, it's not that huge resources would be needed to defend it. Pratt doesn't like rules that restrict his desires and remember he was one of the main players behind the inital proposed breakaway league.

If both Collingwood and Carlton got behind a proposed breakaway Aussie Rules league then I would certainly back it to succeed against the AFL especially in the football heartland where the corporate and advertising dollar and therefore the tv rights would be the richest. The AFL would have a huge black hole in its corporate identity.

 

[EscapeHere]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

You guys were sqealing like stuffed pigs when Chick wanted to come home and Hawthorn wouldn't deal at the time.

I'm not arguing against free agency, I support it (in a limited form). I just think it's hilarious you think you can take it to court if things don't go your way.

That is why a form of free agency needs to come in so that there is more oil to the wheels of the trade system. If the Judd deal takes to the last minute then watch out. Ricky Nixson is circling.

Nixon, meanwhile, said if the Judd deal dragged on into trade week there could be serious repercussions.

Good luck to Ricky Nixon. Since when is he a lawyer? Can you cite me exactly what statue and or precedent that will support Ricky's case for "not getting things done in time". Can you tell me what court this will be addressed in?

From a Carlton perspective if Judd choses them as his preferred option.

Richard Pratt will make many nervous people in league circles that his threat to bank role a Free Agency bid is very real. If West Coast don't deal with Carlton then this possibility is very much on the table. If West Coast are lowballed on the deal and do the trade then it will be because the AFL convince them to. Carlton want to keep the #1 pick and they want Judd - something will need to give.

Why would West Coast care about what Pratt wants? Won't effect their decision in any way.

Pratt and his mates would love nothing more than to tear up the AFL's equalisation measures and he's one of the few that would be prepared to bank-roll it. He'll play ball if he gets his way but if he doesn't, god help the AFL. A case against the AFL's trading rule would succeed, it's not that huge resources would be needed to defend it. Pratt doesn't like rules that restrict his desires and remember he was one of the main players behind the inital proposed breakaway league.

So what Pratt wants he gets? He's under a big enough legal cloud as it is, he won't go there.

Either way, none of it would be sorted in court by the start of the 2008 season.

 

[Eddie Gold]

Re: If Judd chooses the Pies and West Coast won't deal, should we take the AFL to court for Free Age

Good luck to Ricky Nixon. Since when is he a lawyer? Can you cite me exactly what statue and or precedent that will support Ricky's case for "not getting things done in time".

What is a reasonable restraint of trade?

For a restraint to be valid, it must be reasonable on two fronts. Firstly, it must be reasonable in reference to the interests of the parties. That raises two competing sets of interests: the interests of the sporting club or League/body on the one hand, and the interests of the individual athlete on the other. These interests are not always easily reconciled.
Secondly, the restraint must be reasonable in relation to the interests of the public. The courts have applied varying tests as to what is reasonable, that is, reasonable in reference to the interests of the parties and the public interest. One test is that, if the restraint can be “reasonably related to the objects of the League or of its members, different forms of restraint that have been placed on players in sporting leagues including salary caps and zoning rules are imposed on the basis that these rules are necessary in the interests of
sporting equality (the argument here is that restrictive provisions are necessary to ensure equality of competition and hence safeguard continuing interest in the sport)”.14
Hill, J, sought to summarise the considerations to apply in restraint of trade cases in his decision in Adamson v NSW Rugby League (“Adamson”).15 Trade may be seen to be unreasonably restrained:

1. “Where the [person restrained] forfeits his choice of pursuing his calling”;16

2. “For a restraint to be reasonable in the interests of the parties it must afford no more than adequate protection to the party in whose favour it is imposed…Reasonableness will be charged having regard to the legitimate interests of the person in whose favour the restraint operates which interests they are entitled to protect”.

3. The restraint also must go “no further than is reasonably necessary to protect the interests of the [party imposing the restraint] and the onus is on [that party] to show that the restraint is reasonable and goes no further than is necessary to protect their interests”.

4. The effect of the restraint on the person restrained must also be taken into account.
5. The onus of showing that the restraint is injurious to the public interest is on the party attacking the restraint.
6. “The time at which the reasonableness of the restraint is to be assessed is the time at which, if the subject of a contract, the contract be entered into”.

Relevant facts arising after that date may also be relevant.17
In the Adamson case, His Honour was dealing with an internal draft introduced into the New South Wales Rugby League competition where players who had finished their contract could nominate for the draft and set certain terms upon which they sought to be employed. Under that draft system however, once the player had entered the draft, that constituted an offer of employment and the player had no choice as to which Club may accept his services. The players were essentially not given their choice to deal only with the Club to which they sought to be transferred. His Honour stated:

”The employment agreement is fundamentally a personal agreement so that it may be thought that, short of restraining the player from playing altogether, there could seldom be a greater restraint upon trade than restricting an employee’s freedom from choosing his employer”.18

On appeal in Adamson v NSWRL (“Adamson Appeal”)38, Wilcox J referred to the individual’s right to choose their employer as being closely linked to a general right to practise one’s trade or occupation unrestrained. His Honour saw an individual’s choice of employer as a fundamental element of a free society and, if any rule infringing this right – particularly where rejection of one employer could lead to not being able to practice one’s trade - was ever to be justifiable, then the case in justification must be “extraordinarily compelling”.39

One commentator suggested that the Full Court was “infatuated [with] the right of an employee to select the employer of his choice” and therefore gave inadequate weight to “the principle that a sporting organisation is entitled to impose restrictions that do no more than provide for the adequate protection of its legitimate interests”.40 It is suggested that the Court was correct on its findings on this point – the League went beyond what was necessary to protect its legitimate interests.

infatuated [with] the right of an employee to select the employer of his choice” sounds pretty compelling.

I'm not arguing against free agency, I support it (in a limited form).

Why would West Coast care about what Pratt wants? Won't effect their decision in any way.

So what Pratt wants he gets? He's under a big enough legal cloud as it is, he won't go there.

Either way, none of it would be sorted in court by the start of the 2008 season.

Because if Dick Pratt or any team the Chris Judd selects as his prefered option don't get the deal to go through, they will take it to the courts and West Coast will finish with nothing for the transfer Christopher Judd.

Dick Pratt, I think you will find owns the legal system. You don't become as rich and powerful as he is without having connections inside the legal system. He is the closest thing we have in this country to Silvio Berlusconi. A person who makes the rules the way he wants the rules.