Who is Concerned about Pratt?

[Kramer1]

Worry about Pratt all you like. No one seemed to give a toss about Carlton in recent years...we make a few good moves, get some capable people into the place and all of a sudden people are lining up to piss on us...all is back to normal as far as I am concerned.

 

[Monkey King]

he is a self confessed cheat, liar, fraud, etc (whatever you want to call it). as for articles... you don't get out much do you? it's been all over the papers for the past week

that's not to say that i agree with the thread starter, see my earlier post on this matter. just get your facts straight though so you don't sound like an idiot

To begin with, why does getting out have anything to do with newspapers. Do you have to go out to read them these days

Secondly, I'll gladly accept your insult of being an idiot if you can produce one single quote from these articles you speak of where Dick Pratt confesses to being a cheat, liar or fraud. Until you can, you clearly have the title of idiot between us champ!

Now I don't want to accept your paraphrasing as being an accurate representation of the truth, as it appears as though your bias is attempting to distort what Pratt has actually said. So rather than just calling me an idiot and repeating yourself again, how about giving something with a little more substance; such as this..........................

"I've had to wrestle with the choice of going to court to explain myself and try to clear my name or seeking a negotiated settlement which will necessarily involve admissions of breaking the law," Mr Pratt told The Weekend Australian in anexclusive interview.


"On balance, the appropriate and pragmatic thing to do is settle."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22539478-601,00.html?from=mostpop

 

[MarkT]

They need to incorporate all income derived from football and football related activities and expand the Salary Cap to take it into consideration or else the Salary Cap will be dead in a matter of years because more and more clubs are getting powerful executives to run clubs and are offering them significant remuneration outside of football payments as mechanisms for attracting players.

They need to do this, they should do that. HOW CAN THEY?
What is football related and why should Essendon have t pay their list less because James Hird can write and a newspaper will pay him to do it? Why should Hawthorn pay their list less because media outlets want a piece of Shane Crawford? Where would you draw the line? Buckley’s TFS gig is not on but Crawford’s is? How about anyone from North? Melbourne?

When that happens the Salary Cap comes to a point of self-destruction. You can't have a top quality Collingwood player being paid 100k a year plus earning 250k working for Channel 9 because they are a football player. You can't have someone like Judd getting part of his package paid through via Vissy or an associated company when he is doing no real third party job for them other than being a footballer.

If there are real commercial arrangements for fair value then they are currently of. If not they already contravene the rules. What sort of unrealistic unenforceable illegal rules do you want on to of what we have?

We need to eliminate the back doors and grey areas where clubs are going to be able to squeeze out a few more players via creative remuneration packages.

Ignoring the how for a moment, what is the purpose of the salary cap? I think it is two fold.

It is partly to prevent rampant player wage explosion. If so then it does that in terms of preventing a massive blowout with or without further restrictions such as you propose. On the other hand it is also inflationary because clubs pay up to the cap regardless or merit.

It is also partly competition rigging. In that regard it works but it is imperfect. Perfect would be the Wrestling model.

 

[jonoman89]

as a carlton supporter i am a bit concerned about pratt. he has done great thing for the club in a very very short time but the memories of the salary cap punishments make me apprehensive about any big deals the club gets involved in.

i trust him and like him, and very hopeful that he can guide us to a better patch in a legal and respectable way.

 

[Adpar]

When Richmond signed Nathan Brown Miller stated publically that they would he would be mentoring and assisting to start property development.

Every club has wealthy supporters that help to ensure greater income for their stars.

Do you mean Miller was the mentor to Brown on getting deals done?

 

[hustla]

All the rich clubs, Collingwood, Essendon, West Coast, Adelaide and Carlton, without a doubt in my mind, pay players out of the cap. It could possibly be happening at every club and the AFL can't and won't do anything about it. Rich people back clubs and most of them are unknown to supporters. There is alot of networking and a job could be given to anyone at any company or a business could be setup for example.

Property deals, portfolios, etc. are already occuring and the AFL believe they are fine. This is the AFL, not the CIA. It would almost be impossible to trace everything. Even if they begin to crack down on it, there's always the option of Swiss Bank accounts and what-not. The system is flawed.

Using Judd as an example, he is currently doing his MBA (Master of Business Administration). What's to stop him from getting a job at Visy? He is highly qualified and seems pretty switched on.

 

[SydneyBomber]

I don't know about that.... Essendon won flag in 93' in the midst of a salary cap cheating spree didn't they.

so how about we just deal in the facts here.

Until you can, you clearly have the title of idiot between us champ!

hmm, would love to see this proof regarding 93...

 

[Jimthegreat]

1. I have no problem with a team getting priority picks. This is up to the AFL to eliminate if it brings the game into disrepute. So I give Carlton a tick regarding playing by the rules. People can rant all they like. They would do exactly the same thing.

2. The real concern I'd like clarified is whether Pratt is entitled to "set a footballer up for life" under the current rules. Can he create positions in his company (eg Directorships) in order to pay "elite" players significant amounts of money outside the salary cap.

Carlton fans can cry all they like about this but I for one, do NOT trust Pratt. His flagrant disregard for competition laws shows he is willing to squash competitors legally or illegally. AFL is all about fair competition.

Why did Judd say he wanted to secure his future outside of football? Did he negotiate anything with Carlton whilst under contract? Can Pratt do this legally within the rules. If so, I will shut up and cop it sweet. If not, he needs to be investigated. Pure and simple. Too much money and power. If he can set up a few "elite" players lives after football, you can't blame players trying to secure their families future. However, this almost becomes a case of buying a premiership. Great for the rich and famous, but that's not what fair competition is about (something Pratt clearly has no idea about).

Is this legal? That's my question for smart posters out there. Emotional blues supporters who are only going to come out with abuse, please put me on your "ignore" list.

Of course it's legal. He's allowed to be employed by a company outside of football even if it's the President's company. Technically as long as he's actually "employed" simply simply not just being paid by a 3rd party. We're all allowed to be employed. Kicking a bag of wind around doesn't make them different. Last time read it the AFL are not the law of the land.

 

[Paddywhackers]

Gee........Another hawks supporter having a go at carlton.
WERE CARLTON AND **** THE REST!!!

We're Carlton you forgot the apostrophe. pffft yes you are Carlton LOL!

 

[Jimthegreat]

hmm, would love to see this proof regarding 93...

Big Jack said so, so it must be right .

 

[Pedro59]

you are well named ...16 premierships defines the great clubs from the others ...We all know why Judd didn't pick your club don't we ?

Its this simple...Carlton HAVE NOT won 16 AFL flags...It doesn't matter that the old VFL bought in all these extra sides and became the AFL.
Sheedy has been quoted as saying it was a walk in the park to get a flag pre AFL with no travel and no Lions Eagles Crows Swans or Port breathing down your neck......look at how high tech and well multi coached teams like Collingwood are these days....
to the cats supporters..... which mighty old blues team of yesteryear would the Cats side of 2007 fear? Or the Lions side of 2001-2003 or the bombers all conquering 2000 team .....thats right no comparison.I'm happy for a club to say VFL/AFL flags but.....the AFL counting starts at 1990...

 

[Monkey King]

hmm, would love to see this proof regarding 93...

It's common knowledge, why waste my time looking it up for you.

In 1999 Essendon was fined around $280,000 for salary cap breaches between 1992 and 1996. The Bombers were also excluded from the first two rounds of the 1999 national draft.

So by your inference, I take it you will be replying with a full admission of your idiocy

Here is the link for further reading into Essendon's additional penalties for breaching the cap again in 2002. Enjoy!

http://abc.net.au/victoria/news/200310/s959539.htm

 

[Baroclinic instability]

It's common knowledge, why waste my time looking it up for you.



So by your inference, I take it you will be replying with a full admission of your idiocy

Here is the link for further reading into Essendon's additional penalties for breaching the cap again in 2002. Enjoy!

http://abc.net.au/victoria/news/200310/s959539.htm

Oops, I guess it's now clear that the scum cheated in their premiership year

 

[rand corp]

Its just more of the same from these serial crims, hopefully the AFL will learn their lesson and let them rot/fold/die next time instead of bailing them out. I mean there isn't a solitary loop hole or orifice left at the AFL that the Scum haven't shafted. Andy needs to go and have a long shower and a good scrub he must be feeling all dirty inside after the going over the cheating scum have given him. Never has one administration been ro&@ered for so long by so few.

 

[Monkey King]

Its this simple...Carlton HAVE NOT won 16 AFL flags...It doesn't matter that the old VFL bought in all these extra sides and became the AFL.
Sheedy has been quoted as saying it was a walk in the park to get a flag pre AFL with no travel and no Lions Eagles Crows Swans or Port breathing down your neck......look at how high tech and well multi coached teams like Collingwood are these days....
to the cats supporters..... which mighty old blues team of yesteryear would the Cats side of 2007 fear? Or the Lions side of 2001-2003 or the bombers all conquering 2000 team .....thats right no comparison.I'm happy for a club to say VFL/AFL flags but.....the AFL counting starts at 1990...

Haha! Does the same count for Port Adelaides 34 SANFL Premierships, considering 9 were won before the SANFL even existed.

As for Mightly Blue teams of yesteryear, I think the Cats of 2007 would have shit themselves against Carlton's 1972 Premiership team; certainly considerably more than they did against Port, and especially with no trial by video.

The legendary Jezza, one of the best players of all time, kicked more by himself than Port's whole side could manage for the day. Nicholls and Walls matched their efforts. With Doull and Southby down back, I figure if you knew much footy in those days you'd be agreeing with me, but you probably consider all things new mean all thing better.

 

[hustla]

Our 95 would of owned Geelong 07. I've thought long and hard about it and no doubt the Blues of 95 were unbelievable.

 

[sharpie]

2. The real concern I'd like clarified is whether Pratt is entitled to "set a footballer up for life" under the current rules. Can he create positions in his company (eg Directorships) in order to pay "elite" players significant amounts of money outside the salary cap.

of course he can - the company that is looking to employ judd has shareholders and board members other than pratt!

let me assure you - if judd isn't delivering value to the company he'll be out on his lemon and sars.

FWIW - Adam Gilchrist is on the board of Travelex - so it isn't new territorty for a sports star to be involved in business

 

[Tas]

They need to do this, they should do that. HOW CAN THEY?

Easily, ammend the rules. They already audit players and have access to all their financial agreements.

What is football related and why should Essendon have t pay their list less because James Hird can write and a newspaper will pay him to do it?

This would fall under the salary cap, Hird is not a professional journalist so is deriving income associated to being a footballer. Nobody would care for his comments and he isn't a skilled writer to get the job outside of being a footballer.

They can create an allowance of up to a certain amount if need be, but it is basically there to ensure ALL clubs have a level playing field. It doesn't bother me whatsoever because it is not like my club is paying the full cap, I am more interested in fair mechanics involved.

Why should Hawthorn pay their list less because media outlets want a piece of Shane Crawford?

Because any top class player is going to derive income outside of football, much of it not related. If players are earning arms-length legitimate income then that income wont be counted. This has been a diry area all clubs have been exploiting and it will get to the point where our Salary Cap will collapse if this loop-hole isn't shut.

Where would you draw the line? Buckley’s TFS gig is not on but Crawford’s is?

Income derived from being a footballer, ie payments for going on to television programs would be counted, for all players. North has probably more players that appear on TFS than Hawthorn or even Collingwood, I think it is a fairer system. Salary Cap would be expanded to factor in reasonable income levels but it will stop someone like Carlton paying Judd $1 million a year from Vissy, a subsidiary or another company with vested interest in the CFC as a means of attracting players and paying them outside the Salary Cap.

How about anyone from North? Melbourne? If there are real commercial arrangements for fair value then they are currently of.

Thompson, Grant, Harvey and Archer made frequent visits to TFS. Archer writes a column in the paper, these would all have been counted as income derived as a footballer. Nobody would give a shit about watching, listening or reading to any of their ideas were they not footballers, none of them are professional journalists or entertainers. Had they been, had they the qualifications, had they the experience and had they put the hours in somewhere which has no direct or indirect tie to a football club then that income would be exempt.

Something similar to when Campbell from Richmond worked at C9 doing the cameras or lights or whatever, it was his real job and didn't get it via a club executive.

If not they already contravene the rules. What sort of unrealistic unenforceable illegal rules do you want on to of what we have?

There are no rules which say a Vissy can't hire Judd for $1m a year for endorsement work. They can just say that is how much he is worth, who can try and prove otherwise?

So if Pratt was thinking of donating say $1 million to Carlton, he can decide to hire Judd as his donation to the club, they can then pay Judd peanuts via the club and use their Salary Cap on poaching or retaining a number of other players.

The rules are enforceable under a collective bargaining arrangement. The players wouldn't earn any less, their total package as footballers however is counted towards each club's Salary Cap. The only party it would disadvantage are those wanting to abuse the system. Currently it can be abused. I just want to see that fixed so it can't be abused. Why must we run into a disaster before we fix it?

Ignoring the how for a moment, what is the purpose of the salary cap? I think it is two fold.

To create a fair and even environment to allow the Draft system to be the balancing mechanism to promote an even and level playing field.

It is partly to prevent rampant player wage explosion. If so then it does that in terms of preventing a massive blowout with or without further restrictions such as you propose. On the other hand it is also inflationary because clubs pay up to the cap regardless or merit.

Wages are larely tied to the how much revenue is generated by the clubs. Even if there wasn't a Salary Cap, most clubs wouldn't be able to afford paying much if any more than they currently do, in fact, some clubs are paying more than they would if there was no Salary Cap rules in place. Some clubs, however, have the means to pay significantly above the cap, as do clubs going through a dominant period and have significantly higher disposable income. They would look for ways to abuse the system. It has already happened, but there are still "legal" ways to abuse the system.

It is also partly competition rigging. In that regard it works but it is imperfect. Perfect would be the Wrestling model.

It is a mechanism to try and keep the game as even as possible. It prevents a rich club from poaching the best players in the competition via financial incentives to the point we have a system like Soccer in the UK where only a few powerful and rich clubs ever win the stupid cup. Yes, this mechanic is illegal in that it is restraint of trade, however, it is legal in that the players have collectively bargained away some of their rights for significantly higher benefits than they would have in any other work environment. We are not talking about placing more restrictions on players, just limiting how many stars of the competition some clubs can illegally hide in their club by abusing the system.

Nothing would effectively change if you weren't cheating. Say, for example, clubs have on average players earning say 3 million a year in total from sources that would be counted under the new Salary Cap rule. So the current salary cap is what, 7million? So the new Salary Cap limit will be 10 million to allow for all football related income.

It will just shut the door on people using the current rule to load up players as executives of subsidiary companies who are effectively doing nothing, have no relevant skills and contribute nothing other than exploit a system full of holes. The cap is constantly upgraded based on how much revenue is generated by football, this ammendment would also be adjusted as market demand changes. If more players are earning more football related income in the future then the cap will expand to reflect that. The cap is not so much a limitation as it is a mechanism to prevent abuse.

 

[SydneyBomber]

It's common knowledge, why waste my time looking it up for you.



So by your inference, I take it you will be replying with a full admission of your idiocy

Here is the link for further reading into Essendon's additional penalties for breaching the cap again in 2002. Enjoy!

http://abc.net.au/victoria/news/200310/s959539.htm

92 and 94 does not equal 93.
Please show me proof of us cheating in 1993.

 

[Deledio2Conca]

Gee........Another hawks supporter having a go at carlton.
WERE CARLTON AND **** THE REST!!!

Anyone else getting tired of this "**** the rest" catch phrase?

It's like they all went round to eachother sending PM's to spread it.

 

[Monkey King]

92 and 94 does not equal 93.
Please show me proof of us cheating in 1993.

This is what I originally wrote.

I don't know about that.... Essendon won flag in 93' in the midst of a salary cap cheating spree didn't they.

You disputed it. You were called, it was proven and now you've shown yourself up.

As I said, it's common knowledge. I've back-up what I said. If you want more info, stop being a lazy shit and go and get it yourself.

 

[Jeremias]

Because we actually have some talented youngsters and therefore could not afford to give 25% of our salary cap to one player?

Pretty obvious I would have thought.

Show us some proof that we are giving someone 25% of our salary cap.

Let's see if you can do it, or if you're just another very silly Colliwobble supporter.

I'm leaning towards the latter.

 

[Phil McCreviss]

Correct me if I am wrong but didnt Hird get paid online endorsements as a sweetener by the Bombers? This isn't classified under the salary cap but it certainly made Hird's contract signing a foregone conclusion.

Anyway my whole take on this is that there should be a blanket rule for all clubs. The AFL need to specifically state what is included in the salary cap. Is it just player salary? If yes then Carlton are doing nothing wrong. Does it include player endorsements, property, online kickbacks, career management, auction items etc?

What does not sit well with me is that if salary cap does not include all these other sweeteners, the AFL will become like Major League Baseball. Have you noticed the last time the Yankees were out of the playoffs? It was about 15 years ago. Why? Because their chequebook is the fattest in the land. Please dont let the AFL become a p***ing contest on which clubs are affiliated with the high rollers of our community.

 

[enosis7]

Do you guys think the AFL hasn't thought of these issues in the salary cap policy?

There's a cap on third party player payments in the salary cap which is currently around $450K or thereabouts per club. There used to be a limit on how many players could receive additional benefits outside their normal player payments, but if I'm not mistaken now all players can receive benefits so long as the total received is under the cap.

In some clubs, only a few players will share in the 450K. Judd would be likely to take up a great proportion of Carlton's merchandising cap next year, simply because there aren't many other marketable players at this stage of their careers (Murphy will no doubt be once his career takes off). This would ease the impact his player payments would have on the TPP cap. Fevola would be getting the majority of the marketing cap now with his media appearances.

 

[OneEyedPie7]

Our 95 would of owned Geelong 07. I've thought long and hard about it and no doubt the Blues of 95 were unbelievable.

pfft.