Merged Tarrant Trade Threads

[morebeer]

Freo is the only loser out of this deal, they should just take what they can get and be done with it. Better than ending up with nothing.

Pies wouldn't give a crap if we don't get him or not. If we do, bonus, but our backline is looking quite fine at the moment and its not worth wasting an earlier pick on a player that probably only has 1 or 2 years left in him.

I have a lot of respect for Taz (hence my handle). The guy just wants to come back to a club where he begun his career, nothing wrong with being passionate about playing for a club you support. Think about it, there should be more of it.

Open your blinkers guys, i'd rather see players go to a club they want to go rather then be forced to a club they wont commit 100 percent too.

If Freo don't deal, he goes to the draft, if Pies don't get to pick him up, he retires and will probably come back to the club in another role anyway.

Only loser out of this deal is Freo, its all up to them if they want to get nothing or at least get something.

This talk about screwing Collingwood over, what a joke, wake up people, we just won the premiership!.

Freo have already lost. Their full back has walked out on them and they only look like getting a 4th rounder in return.

Freo may not even be planning on picking into the 50's as they already have a stack of kids. So from a strategist pov, they may be better off by making it harder for him to go to a competitor. They may think it is better to not have to face Tarrant next September than to get the pick on offer. If that was pick 30 or something then it would be a stupid decision but the pick on offer is probably useless to them.

 

[speedy]

No, he's just retiring.

No he's threatening to retire. If he wants to retire then f off and retire.

 

[silverscope]

No he's threatening to retire. If he wants to retire then f off and retire.

Exactly. I highly doubt his girlfriend would want him to give up the paycheck just because he isn't playing for collingwood.

 

[Subprime]

I don't know why he'd retire. If someone offered me a gym membership and several hundred thou a year I'd take it.

 

[freocuz]

Exactly. I highly doubt his girlfriend would want him to give up the paycheck just because he isn't playing for collingwood.

Nor would his wife.

 

[CAS79]

First of all, if you select him, you need to pay him and include the $$$$ in your salary cap over the length of his contract, even if he retires.

There is no such thing about "pay him nothing". You are legally bound to pay him, whether he plays or not.

See Michael Voss when he retired at Brisbane with 1yr left on his cntract.

I'm not sure your right about not have to pay him. Can you line that bit in the players EBA for me. We drafted Kyle Coney a couple of seasons ago but he never fronted and we didn't pay him.

You have to make room under your cap but if he doesnt front for work you dont have to hand the cash over...

 

[Bay Pie]

Listen to the possibilities here.

Shit, we could say to Tarrant, go into the ND, if you get picked up by someone else, just retire and we'll give you a $100,000 p.a. admin/footy dept job. We've got the $$ to do it.

Is this talk of the moral high ground is ridiculous?

Freos picks are close to 21ish, 38, 72 & 19.

If Freo only plan on taking 2 players in the draft then they are no worse off then trading with us for pick 55 or pick 43 for that matter. Given that they've asked for pick 43 means they'll use that pick. In that case pick 55 is still better then having to use pick 72.

Drafting a better kid > moral high ground.

 

[The Panther]

You don't have to pay him, correct. Regardless of whether he's paid or not, that total is included in the salary cap.

For example, Tarrant could stipulate $500 K in his 2nd year. At Collingwood, this is relatively easy to do, given 50% of it will be knocked off in the vets list. At Freo, that total will sit there in it's full.

Freo are just trying to save face.

 

[Furn]

Listen to the possibilities here.

Shit, we could say to Tarrant, go into the ND, if you get picked up by someone else, just retire and we'll give you a $100,000 p.a. admin/footy dept job. We've got the $$ to do it.

Is this talk of the moral high ground is ridiculous?

Freos picks are close to 21ish, 38, 72 & 19.

If Freo only plan on taking 2 players in the draft then they are no worse off then trading with us for pick 55 or pick 43 for that matter. Given that they've asked for pick 43 means they'll use that pick. In that case pick 55 is still better then having to use pick 72.

Drafting a better kid > moral high ground.

That is draft tampering at its best. Besides who would do an admin job for 100k when you can play footy for 300-400k ?

55 for 43 ? and send then message that they are bent over and have lube ? seriously ?

 

[WakeUpPies]

???

 

[MaggieNo20]

No he's threatening to retire. If he wants to retire then f off and retire.

No... he just retiring

 

[soreplums]

Slight correction, Pick 55 removed because we started with it.

Not sure we should be happy to take a crap trade from Collingwood simply because we got a good one with Faulks.

As it stands, Collingwood has pick 55, Freo do not. Freo chose to trade it to get the deal done for Faulks. You can get it back. So how do you want to look at it?

You get Faulks and pick 61 for free off GC along with Blight for Tarrant from Collingwood.

Or

You get Faulks, Blight, Pick 55 and Pick 61 for Tarrant.

It's not so much about accepting 'crap' on an individual deal, you need to look at the overall picture of what you gain out from it. Do you want to take pick 55 and let your recruiters do their job to pick a kid who could potentially be a 200 game player for you, or are you willing not to give that kid a go at your club, instead letting him go to Collingwood?
FWIW IMO Blight has a heap of upside and has played very well at VFL level. Was named as an emergency quite a few times this year. All he needs to do is put on a couple of kilos and he will be a very good half back flanker/wingman. We only delisted him because he was homesick.

 

[Freo2012]

Odds are Tarrant will not be playing AFL anymore.

Excerpts from the thread on clubs being to kind to players wanting to leave:


Players contract with AFL as well as individual clubs. Clubs are not totally separate bodies in their own right (though they are marketed that way for all the obvious supporters interests point of view). There is no restrictive trade - players are free to go and play in other competitions. The AFL owns and runs the AFL, businesses don't own and run their industry sector - completely different. Existing clubs lost much of their "independence" with the forming of the AFL and this will only continue. Even when it comes to the survival of some clubs, the AFL is only being lenient on timing of their demise due to image concerns and managing to diminish the fallout - writing is on the wall.

All need to remember that AFL creates the competition and rules that the players are bound to and which are legally binding under law, the AFL owns the AFL comp, not the people, players or anyone else - no matter how much you might want to believe otherwise.

Another thing that really should be considered here is that all investments by clubs, sponsors in both $ and development of players is based on those specific contracts they have with the AFL, and which are all based/reliant on the rules as published by the AFL and determined by the AFL rule setting criteria.

So when clear breaches to the AFL rules occur, clubs have right to challenge legally. Of course the AFL will enforce the rules where they feel this might occur or where it is in the AFL's best interest for protecting the image, growing the game, and maximising profits/future returns.

This Tarrant thing has got way out of hand and I have heard from some contacts that it will get very ugly. The most likely outcome is that Tarrant will not be playing AFL again.

 

[Bay Pie]

That is draft tampering at its best. Besides who would do an admin job for 100k when you can play footy for 300-400k ?
55 for 43 ? and send then message that they are bent over and have lube ? seriously ?

Someone that is had a few injuries and might want to start a family. Footballers retire all the time on $300k and they could go on (Paul Medhurst) and get another year which we offered. He said he'd had enough.

Draft tampering is tough to prove. Hawthorn draft Tarrant. Tarrant says, sorry guys I've lost my desire to play and retires. 6 weeks later we offer him a footy department job.

Sending a message is the most overused, overrated term in trading.

Who and how has that ever helped any team? Port Adelaide and Nick Stevens supposedly sent a message. How have they directly benefited in a trade scenario from 'sending a message'?? St.Kilda sent a message to Luke Ball. How did that work out?

As I said, having any earlier pick then the one you will use (17 places) > sending some mythical message.

Hawthorn badly want and need him hence the angst here.

 

[TradeDraft]

Be interesting if nothing Happens up to 1:30 if the Dockers take what the Pies are Offering so they get something for Taz instead of Nothing

 

[The Panther]

So when clear breaches to the AFL rules occur, clubs have right to challenge legally. Of course the AFL will enforce the rules where they feel this might occur or where it is in the AFL's best interest for protecting the image, growing the game, and maximising profits/future returns.

That will never happen.

The poorer clubs know if they challenge the movement/lack of it b/w players & clubs that the AFLPA would up the ante with their push for total free agency. That is why the AFL never acted with Fraser Gehrig & Luke Ball.

The AFL don't like what Tazz is doing but they won't act. They know if they act, they will have to contemplate what the NFL is going to go through next season.

 

[Furn]

Someone that is had a few injuries and might want to start a family. Footballers retire all the time on $300k and they could go on (Paul Medhurst) and get another year which we offered. He said he'd had enough.

Draft tampering is tough to prove. Hawthorn draft Tarrant. Tarrant says, sorry guys I've lost my desire to play and retires. 6 weeks later we offer him a footy department job.

Sending a message is the most overused, overrated term in trading.

Who and how has that ever helped any team? Port Adelaide and Nick Stevens supposedly sent a message. How have they directly benefited in a trade scenario from 'sending a message'?? St.Kilda sent a message to Luke Ball. How did that work out?

As I said, having any earlier pick then the one you will use (17 places) > sending some mythical message.

Hawthorn badly want and need him hence the angst here.

pick 9 and 16 for burgoyne?

 

[MaggieNo20]

Spoken like a true Pies supporter just after a Premiership - to enlighten you what the Western side of Australia (Freo in this case) may be thinking this is it - WE DONT CARE ABOUT COLLINGWOOD AND SCREWING THEM OVER (bonus if we do)

I'm sure you and your club doesn't.... but read back through the thread mate, I was referring it to them, the ones posting crap on here saying we should just screw the Pies over, Thats just stupid!.

I dont give two hoots about this deal. Dont care if we get him, dont care if we do. Let him go to the draft, its your club's loss. If their trying to make a point to your other players......... your club still loses.

Don't get me wrong, I am West Australian and I have a lot of respect for the Dockers, this is no personal attack against your club. Just pointing out the fact that the Pies have put an offer on the table, if your club doesn't take it, in return they get nothing. I would be suprised if the Pies let pick 44 go for him, can't see it happening.

Pies gain nothing and lose nothing. Freo loses Tarrant for nothing!.

 

[FD2646]

Someone that is had a few injuries and might want to start a family. Footballers retire all the time on $300k and they could go on (Paul Medhurst) and get another year which we offered. He said he'd had enough.

Draft tampering is tough to prove. Hawthorn draft Tarrant. Tarrant says, sorry guys I've lost my desire to play and retires. 6 weeks later we offer him a footy department job.

Sending a message is the most overused, overrated term in trading.

Who and how has that ever helped any team? Port Adelaide and Nick Stevens supposedly sent a message. How have they directly benefited in a trade scenario from 'sending a message'?? St.Kilda sent a message to Luke Ball. How did that work out?

As I said, having any earlier pick then the one you will use (17 places) > sending some mythical message.

Hawthorn badly want and need him hence the angst here.

In my club's existence the players have run the club (unfortunately) and the results have generally spoken for themselves. The precedent set by 'sending a message' may/may not have any effect, however I feel this is a path Freo must take if we feel we are not adequately compensated. I am also willing to bet it will pay dividend in the medium-long term.

 

[you idiot sheehan]

The Chris Tarrant merged thread is closing in on 1100 posts, outnumbering most other threads 10-1. This is completely disproportionate for a 30 yo bloke who wants to play out his career at his club of choice.

The thread has clearly turned into "Collingwood are trying to screw people. Let's not put up with it"

 

[freocuz]

As it stands, Collingwood has pick 55, Freo do not. Freo chose to trade it to get the deal done for Faulks. You can get it back. So how do you want to look at it?

You get Faulks and pick 61 for free off GC along with Blight for Tarrant from Collingwood.

Or

You get Faulks, Blight, Pick 55 and Pick 61 for Tarrant.

Wrong again.

We got Faulks + 61 for 55, not for free.

Net effect (if we take the Tarrant for 55 deal) is :

Lose: Tarrant
Gain: Faulks + 61.

We haven't gained 55, because we lost it to get Faulks in the first place.

EDIT: OK, I re-read your post and can see what you're trying to say.

 

[Bay Pie]

pick 9 and 16 for burgoyne?

Pick 9 & 16 for Burgoyne & pick 24 you mean?? Nice try.

So pick 9 and a 8 pick upgrade in a weak draft for Burgoyne.. meh huge win there and it only took them 6 years for the message to pay off.

 

[Freo2012]

That will never happen.

The poorer clubs know if they challenge the movement/lack of it b/w players & clubs that the AFLPA would up the ante with their push for total free agency. That is why the AFL never acted with Fraser Gehrig & Luke Ball.

The AFL don't like what Tazz is doing but they won't act. They know if they act, they will have to contemplate what the NFL is going to go through next season.

Clubs, the players, AFL and sponsors etc are all governed by the rules that are in place today. The AFL as we all know protects its image ABOVE ALL ELSE. They will have no option but to act in this case because Tarrant and his manager have stepped way over that line and not just Freo but also a couple of other clubs will make the necessary complaints/avenues - this has already begun. Wait and see.

As another issue the demise of the smaller Melb clubs is a foregone conclusion. When the limited free-agency comes in and the further inclusion of other northern (10-20 years???) and western teams (5-10 years) there is no way the Melb minnows will be able to survive in their over-satuated market. And that is the easiest avenue for AFL to get rid of them - AFL won't lose face, AFL will have all the evidence of how much those clubs have been supported by all others all these years during their demise and the backlash then will have far less effect on the AFL and game.

 

[MaggieNo20]

Clubs, the players, AFL and sponsors etc are all governed by the rules that are in place today. The AFL as we all know protects its image ABOVE ALL ELSE. They will have no option but to act in this case because Tarrant and his manager have stepped way over that line and not just Freo but also a couple of other clubs will make the necessary complaints/avenues - this has already begun. Wait and see.

As another issue the demise of the smaller Melb clubs is a foregone conclusion. When the limited free-agency comes in and the further inclusion of other northern (10-20 years???) and western teams (5-10 years) there is no way the Melb minnows will be able to survive in their over-satuated market. And that is the easiest avenue for AFL to get rid of them - AFL won't lose face, AFL will have all the evidence of how much those clubs have been supported by all others all these years during their demise and the backlash then will have far less effect on the AFL and game.

With the current rules can't see how the AFL will be able to do anything about it. Its been happening for years with players and clubs taking full advantage of it.

They are going to sue him for retiring?

 

[Freo2012]

With the current rules can't see how the AFL will be able to do anything about it. Its been happening for years with players and clubs taking full advantage of it.

They are going to sue him for retiring?

Tarrant's retiring is the best outcome for the AFL.

It is only if he gets picked up by Collingwood that it will get ugly. The process has, as I have been told, already begun. I would think the AFL has already commenced a few quiet discussions with Collingwood on what will happen if they draft him. Certainly the avenues have commenced from the other clubs involved point of view.

And whilst it has been happenning for years - it has never happened on this basis - with the player (and his agent, his player manager) stating on public record that he will retire if he doesn't get to a specific club - very clear breach of the rules that Tarrant is bound to.