NO Third Party for Melbourne

[MYLOTIS]

..i highly doubt the AFL has a special favouritism for Carlton..

They wanted Judd in Melbourne and they want Carlton to be successful.

It made sense that the deal would be signed off at AFL house.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

For the entire duration of the deal, I have seen one piece of Visy branded advertising with Judd's image on it.

I may well be missing something here, but the work does not seem commensurate with the pay.

Hard to know what is commensurate with the pay, if nobody knows what the pay actually is though. The media again speculated on $200k today however.

Judd does business nights and participates in school tour seminars, mostly out of the new facilities at Visy Park itself. There was also some environmental jigsaw puzzle with his name on it.

Judd is involved in the Enviromaniacs Program, his image is used, his name is used for competitions and he makes appearances accordingly.
http://www.visyenviromaniacs.com.au/

This was the original role.

Under the contract, Chris will be involved in media, community, customer, staff and stakeholder programs which are likely to include:
• representing Visy’s existing national school education programs
•romoting recycling messages during Planet Ark’s National Recycling Week
• representing Visy at education forums for stakeholders
• media engagement for Visy’s environmental campaigns.

I'd love the job for $200k per year for sure, but I'm not Chris Judd so nobody is going to get involved just because I am on board.

 

[asanque]

The AFL is a dictatorship that changes the rules to suit itself.

Read between the lines:
1. AFL is promising extra compensation to Melbourne if Scully goes
2. AFL is saying that no third party deals are allowed anymore

The AFL are pushing as hard as they can for Scully to leave.

It strikes me that GWS is having a hard time attracting top tier talent.

Edit:
The Judd deal stunk too.
However, the AFL were willing to change the rules again to make sure Judd came back to Victoria.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Both. The comments were about the impact of a carbon tax on Visy's recycling program, and Chris Judd's comments would carry more weight with the public than Tony Gray's.[/IMG]

They were trying to get a promise of tax credits from the Government, not promote their recycling program or get the public to jump to their defence because Juddy said so. Judd has absolutely no place in Visy politics and nor should he. He is mostly there for the education component and working with schools, and to be wheeled out as a face for functions. Taking on the Government over something that had yet to be decided is not his role. You know that though.

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

AFL is turning into soccer more and more which is really sad.

I'm so over it! Melbourne losing Scully is far worse then the Cats losing Ablett. They have two premierships and we have done nothing!

 

[XXX KINGS]

It's funny how everyone cries about how Judd's third party payments are illegitamate when in doing so fail to realise they are talking about VISY and giving them more and more exposure. That is the whole point of employing someone of high stature to be an ambassador for your company. Nobody else would attract anywhere near as much attention, which considering the fact he is an ambassador for their company, would suggest that maybe he is giving them some value afterall. I know for a fact he does attend and speak at corporate events involving VISY and have attended one myself. If people don't think VISY benefit from their partnership they are living in the clouds.

Megan Gale gets paid 1 million dollars a year to be an ambassador for David Jones yet I don't think I've seen her lift much of a finger either. Why should the fact that Chris Judd is a footballer limit his potential earnings outside football. The deal never would have been ticked off had VISY signing him not represented any value for them. It makes sense for VISY to employ a Carlton footballer considering their association with the club, why would they want to employ someone from another club? Should Judd provide his name and attend coroporate events for free?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

However, the AFL were willing to change the rules again to make sure Judd came back to Victoria.

They didn't change any rules. He was required to run the deal past them as per the conditions on the existing collective bargaining agreement and they sought clarification on the role and exactly what was involved and signed off on it.

It took Visy the best part of Judd's first season at Carlton, to develop the role so that it met the AFL's guidelines. Fair enough too, the idea was in its embryolic stage when Visy management approached Judd. Once he agreed, they then had to actually come up with some substance to the role. It's the same as Collingwood trying to flesh out the detail of Malthouse's role next year to his satisfaction.

 

[Hornberger]

Edit:
The Judd deal stunk too.
However, the AFL were willing to change the rules again to make sure Judd came back to Victoria.

The AFL didn't change the rules for Judd. They changed the rules because of Judd.

 

[jsd09]

I see it like this,

If a player is to have another job ie Judd& Visy, the company cannot at the time of the agreement have any association with the football
club in question which if it did would be a conflict of interest and seemingly denied by the AFL

So it seems Judd got away with this because when Judd signed up with Carlton they were not sponsored by Visy but were sponsored by Mars(pretty sure) Allowing him to get the all clear from the AFL.

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

It's funny how everyone cries about how Judd's third party payments are illegitamate when in doing so fail to realise they are talking about VISY and giving them more and more exposure. That is the whole point of employing someone of high stature to be an ambassador for your company. Nobody else would attract anywhere near as much attention, which considering the fact he is an ambassador for their company, would suggest that maybe he is giving them some value afterall. I know for a fact he does attend and speak at corporate events involving VISY and have attended one myself. If people don't think VISY benefit from their partnership they are living in the clouds.

Megan Gale gets paid 1 million dollars a year to be an ambassador for David Jones yet I don't think I've seen her lift much of a finger either. Why should the fact that Chris Judd is a footballer limit his potential earnings outside football. The deal never would have been ticked off had VISY signing him not represented any value for them. It makes sense for VISY to employ a Carlton footballer considering their association with the club, why would they want to employ someone from another club? Should Judd provide his name and attend coroporate events for free?

What a silly post, its just a cop out. You're only saying its okay coz you're a Carlton supporter. The fact is its just WRONG to allow it to happen only 4 years ago then disallow it now just because the AFL wants GWS to be successful straight away. GWS will fold in 10 years!

 

[asanque]

They didn't change any rules. He was required to run the deal past them as per the conditions on the existing collective bargaining agreement and they sought clarification on the role and exactly what was involved and signed off on it.

It took Visy the best part of Judd's first season at Carlton, to develop the role so that it met the AFL's guidelines. Fair enough too, the idea was in its embryolic stage when Visy management approached Judd. Once he agreed, they then had to actually come up with some substance to the role. It's the same as Collingwood trying to flesh out the detail of Malthouse's role next year to his satisfaction.

Perhaps they didn't change any rules per se.

But they did change their criteria for what would normally constitute a 3rd party payment.

Then Visy spent one year trying to meet this AFL criteria after already having it allowed. Arguably, this criteria should have been met prior to AFL approval.

 

[Messenger]

It's funny how everyone cries about how Judd's third party payments are illegitamate when in doing so fail to realise they are talking about VISY and giving them more and more exposure.

Not really the exposure Visy would be looking for, surely. By your logic the cartel case Visy and Amcor settled with the ACCC a while back is good publicity.

 

[Big Kahuna Boot]

The AFL didn't change the rules for Judd. They changed the rules because of Judd.

..bollocks.. ..Judd had been on a 3rd party deal back over in the west [not the only player either].. ..the 'rules' were not changed before, or after the Judd trade.. ..the rules have not been changed because of him, either in the past or the present.. ..the tightening of 3rd party deals was done to restrict Geelong from getting even more cash to Gazza outside the cap [since he already had a 3rd party deal in place].. ..the tightening of the rules is purely to restrict clubs from getting anywhere near matching the war-chest offers by the expansion teams..

 

[Big Kahuna Boot]

They wanted Judd in Melbourne and they want Carlton to be successful.

It made sense that the deal would be signed off at AFL house.

..so why sign off the deal when Judd was an eagle..?.. ..granted they're happier with Judd playing more games in melbourne, but i'm not so sure they'd be going out of their way to help carlton get a leg up.. ..if they wanted to give the blues an advantage they wouldn't have hit them so hard earlier that decade for cap breaches.. ..any 'big' club doing well is great for the AFL, but i'm doubt the AFL has gone out of their way to help out carlton in this regard.. ..quite simply, this 'method' of 3rd party deals was already being used.. ..it wasn't something 'clever' done by the blues with the afl's complicit 'wink'.. ..it wasn't anything dubious either, provided it was put before the afl first so they could approve it.. ..it's only being talked down now by the afl when it's been attempted to keep a star away from an expansion team..

 

[DermiesLuvChild]

The whole competition is now manipulated by the AFL, not Collingwoods fault, but having them play 17 games at the 'G' gives them a huge advantage, the fact that clubs this year have played some teams twice already while not having played others once, has to have an effect on ladder positions, some clubs play the top teams twice this year and the GCS only once, that could be the difference between making the finals and missing out, I'm more concerned about this imbalance (all teams need to play each other twice a year) than some under the counter payments, but for the AFL to do this to the Dees is pretty harsh, both dimwittio and his sidekick anderson are schemers of the highest degree.

Collingwood play a total of 14 games at the G this home & away season.
9 of those games are home & 5 are away games (Richmond, Essendon, Geelong, Melbourne, Carlton). They play 4 games at Etihad (2 home & 2 away) & 4 games interstate.
I agree the AFL max financial returns with the draw. But teams also request to play their home games v Collingwood at the G.

nb this is off topic, however just wanted to clarify draw situation for CFC

 

[morgoth]

The game is so compromised that it is bordering on corruption. Draw, third party payments, MRP, umpires etc etc.

Now wonder crowds are down. Once again Carlton is allowed to cheat but not anyone else.

Dees should do whatever they want and then threaten the AFL with court action but as they provide funding they can do nothing but bend over and ask for some lube to ease the pain.

Its disgraceful because its so bloody obvious what their agenda is.

 

[Burzum]

The game is so compromised that it is bordering on corruption. Draw, third party payments, MRP, umpires etc etc.

Now wonder crowds are down. Once again Carlton is allowed to cheat but not anyone else.

Dees should do whatever they want and then threaten the AFL with court action but as they provide funding they can do nothing but bend over and ask for some lube to ease the pain.

Its disgraceful because its so bloody obvious what their agenda is.

Agree.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Perhaps they didn't change any rules per se.

But they did change their criteria for what would normally constitute a 3rd party payment.

Then Visy spent one year trying to meet this AFL criteria after already having it allowed. Arguably, this criteria should have been met prior to AFL approval.

No, it took them the best part of a year to develop the role, and THEN the AFL approved it. Judd did not start the role until then,

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Look at the hysterics. Nobody knows anything about the Visy role, or what was presented to the AFL but they still run around screaming that Carlton are cheating. Drama queens.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Nobody knows anything about the Visy role, or what was presented to the AFL but they still run around screaming that Carlton are cheating.

I don't blame Carlton. The problem is the cheating has been sanctioned.

 

[Simple Jack]

Can't recall how many times I have said it on this board but "the new francises are GUARANTEED premierships. If they don't get 'em on their own, the AFL will do what it takes to make it happen. It is simply too important for the support in these areas."

This appears to be instance 1 of changing the rules to help GWS/GC. I seriously doubt it'll be the last. Just bad luck for Melbourne that they happend to be on the end of it this time.

Sucks

 

[Jordie_tackles]

Can't recall how many times I have said it on this board but "the new francises are GUARANTEED premierships. If they don't get 'em on their own, the AFL will do what it takes to make it happen. It is simply too important for the support in these areas."

This appears to be instance 1 of changing the rules to help GWS/GC. I seriously doubt it'll be the last. Just bad luck for Melbourne that they happend to be on the end of it this time.

Sucks

Anybody else listen to SEN around 6? apparently MFC had a 200K deal regected or something, for Scully to do work for REACH, Judd style

 

[Darkdayz]

Can't recall how many times I have said it on this board but "the new francises are GUARANTEED premierships. If they don't get 'em on their own, the AFL will do what it takes to make it happen. It is simply too important for the support in these areas."

This appears to be instance 1 of changing the rules to help GWS/GC. I seriously doubt it'll be the last. Just bad luck for Melbourne that they happend to be on the end of it this time.

Sucks

Lol cant agree more. I half expect to see the following headline post 2014/15 prelim week. " half of what ever side going up against GC/GWS suspeneded for bring the game into disrepute" Offence being would be too good for the Suns/giants to beat...


On a side note. News just in, Leigh brown has totally gone insane and thrown Vads car into the Yarra river...

News has filtered in that his third party deal with Maccas consisting of a life time supply of big macs has been revoted under the new third party payments laws

 

[melbournemartin]

The game is so compromised that it is bordering on corruption. Draw, third party payments, MRP, umpires etc etc.

Now wonder crowds are down. Once again Carlton is allowed to cheat but not anyone else.

Dees should do whatever they want and then threaten the AFL with court action but as they provide funding they can do nothing but bend over and ask for some lube to ease the pain.

Its disgraceful because its so bloody obvious what their agenda is.

Luke Ball

 

[DermiesLuvChild]

Luke Ball

Is Luke Ball also working for Visy on a $200,000 p.a contract?
That's nice for him.