Mega Thread Port Forum General AFL Thread Part 21

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
If they offer a 5 year deal straight up and structure it that way it’s fine, but not when they offer a 3 year free agency deal with 90% of the salary that he gets over 5 years and the two year extension comes after he signs.

The problem here is they’ve, maybe, offered a mammoth deal over 3 years to (potentially) manipulate the free agency compo and get ESS a better pick so they don’t match, then extend the contract at very very low cost to spread his salary out over 5 years.

They may not have done this, but that the question that’s being asked.
I don't think they can actually spread out the salary from the three years initially offered. They just get the last two much cheaper.

They'd probably get away with it without question if they extended him in the third year, instead of now.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Lol Willie Rioli got off. Fully expecting Robinson to be overturned now - in fact Duursma will probably get a game lol
 
Last edited:
Robinson rep: The game is built on courage. Here, Robinson had the maturity and insight to read an impact at the very last moment and took steps to protect Duursma.
Well i never thought id see Robinson and maturity without the word lack in the sentence but here we are
 
How is that possible?

'The jury did find he had made high contact with Rowell, but that proved irrelevant after the rough conduct charge was dismissed.'

So they throw out the charge but can't get him on one that he actually is guilty of ??
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Another Tribunal shock as Mitch Robinson remains banned - even after making a similar case to Willie Rioli.
 
MRO and Tribunal main questions:

— Is it a Vic club?
— Was against a Vic club?
— Is it a star player?
— How hurt is the victim?

The rest is secondary.
 
Robinson rep: The game is built on courage. Here, Robinson had the maturity and insight to read an impact at the very last moment and took steps to protect Duursma.

That level of gaslighting is right up there with Morrison accusing Albanese of going missing when things get tough.
 
West Coast have had two players forced into retirement in the past 12 months due to brain injuries and yet still go and defend Rioli for recklessly clattering into an opponent's head with zero regard for his safety. What a ridiculous precedent for the tribunal to set.
 
West Coast have had two players forced into retirement in the past 12 months due to brain injuries and yet still go and defend Rioli for recklessly clattering into an opponent's head with zero regard for his safety. What a ridiculous precedent for the tribunal to set.

As if the Tribunal actually followed precendents. It doesn't. It's maddening.
 
West Coast have had two players forced into retirement in the past 12 months due to brain injuries and yet still go and defend Rioli for recklessly clattering into an opponent's head with zero regard for his safety. What a ridiculous precedent for the tribunal to set.
Had that been Jonas - "Wahh. Ten weeks. Absolute filth. Run him out of the game immediately".

#doublestandards
 
MRO and Tribunal main questions:

— Is it a Vic club?
— Was against a Vic club?
— Is it a star player?
— How hurt is the victim?

The rest is secondary.
The only thing consistent about the AFL MRO and tribunal is their inconsistency.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top