Oppo Camp Dangerfield's Gone (Zero tolerance to trolling) - READ THREAD LINKED IN OP BEFORE POSTING

[footy4ever]

Yes, he is. He's a Free Agent, albeit restricted. It's like saying that someone from Holland shouldn't be referred to as someone from Netherlands because they are actually from Holland. The difference is that everyone from Holland is from Netherlands, but not everyone from Netherlands is from Holland. Every Restricted Free Agent is still a Free Agent, just not every Free Agent is a Restriected Free Agent.

Orr pls.

 

[headache1]

Yes, he is. He's a Free Agent, albeit restricted. It's like saying that someone from Holland shouldn't be referred to as someone from Netherlands because they are actually from Holland. The difference is that everyone from Holland is from Netherlands, but not everyone from Netherlands is from Holland. Every Restricted Free Agent is still a Free Agent, just not every Free Agent is a Restriected Free Agent.

What a useless analogy. He's a Free Agent for as long as he has an offer in front of him that isn't matched by his current club. He's then no bloody different from every other normal uncontracted player in the league. Stop going on with this bullshit.

RFA is a chance for a team to blow everybody else out of the water with an offer that nobody else can hope to take on. Geelong don't appear to be prepared to do that.

 

[Wood_Duck]

It's also not that hard - see Bernie Vince; if you want to trade a player, you will.

Bernard was on the outer. We are suggesting here, finding a player that is perfectly secure at Geelong and tapping him on the shoulder. Completely different.

 

[Strangled Cat]

No mate.

The second we match he is no longer an FA.

If you match, the process becomes the same. But the concept doesn't change, just because someone decided that it was easier to appease clubs whinging about losing players for nothing than to fight it. Hence, the restricted component. Your club is well within its rights to match, don't get me wrong. And the process doesn't change from a normal trade situation once you match, but the whole idea of Free Agency is for players to get where they want after serving an arbitrary period of time at one club, be it for a cash incentive or otherwise.

You guys will match for only one reason, you think that the compo that the AFL is offering can be bettered by Geelong. Again, you're well within your rights to do so, and if you get a better deal from us - more power to you! I won't begrudge your club as it has lost its fair share over time. But, I am sure that your club won't demand overs to the point that it would be happier to lose out on EVERYTHING and see Patrick in the ND over getting BETTER compensation than what the AFL is offering. If thag happens, then I'm confident that the fairest of outcomes will have come to fruition.

 

[1970crow]

Yes, he is. He's a Free Agent, albeit restricted. It's like saying that someone from Holland shouldn't be referred to as someone from Netherlands because they are actually from Holland. The difference is that everyone from Holland is from Netherlands, but not everyone from Netherlands is from Holland. Every Restricted Free Agent is still a Free Agent, just not every Free Agent is a Restriected Free Agent.

His free agent status is not permanent. It's a one off opportunity and once the offer is tabled and matched, the status reverts to being an uncontracted player. There are is no other status.

 

[StonesThrow]

GHS is probably worse than the worst player on our list. I'd rather have a vacant list spot than that spud clogging up our SANFL side.

This is not true. He's a decent player around the same standard as Lyons, Grigg and crouch. He's just too much the same and we really don't need him

 

[Strangled Cat]

What a useless analogy. He's a Free Agent for as long as he has an offer in front of him that isn't matched by his current club. He's then no bloody different from every other normal uncontracted player in the league. Stop going on with this bullshit.

RFA is a chance for a team to blow everybody else out of the water with an offer that nobody else can hope to take on. Geelong don't appear to be prepared to do that.

Only if the point has been othwrwise lost. My analogy highlights the erroneous trivialities of what is an otherwise irrelevant - therefore triffling conclusion. Just because I state fact X, doesn't mean fact Y isn't clearly obvious to me, I just didn't feel like I had to quantify fact X by stating fact Y. The rest of your post I have covered by quoting Wood_Duck.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Yes, he is. He's a Free Agent, albeit restricted. It's like saying that someone from Holland shouldn't be referred to as someone from Netherlands because they are actually from Holland. The difference is that everyone from Holland is from Netherlands, but not everyone from Netherlands is from Holland. Every Restricted Free Agent is still a Free Agent, just not every Free Agent is a Restriected Free Agent.

Yeah nah. They are 2 seperate categories not one category with a caveat on some players. Very clearly once we match dangerfield is no longer a free agent. He is an out of contract crows player with a decision to make

 

[feenix67]

Yeah nah. They are 2 seperate categories not one category with a caveat on some players. Very clearly once we match dangerfield is no longer a free agent. He is an out of contract crows player with a decision to make

Yep, highlighted by the fact that we are not bound to our matching offer, in the unlikely event he decided to stay. We would be free to negotiate with him as we would with any other listed, uncontracted player.

 

[Strangled Cat]

This is not true. He's a decent player around the same standard as Lyons, Grigg and crouch. He's just too much the same and we really don't need him

I agree. He's not a spud just like an average car with no observable, redeemable qualities isn't lemon. It's just that there's nothing at all special about him that nakes him stand out.

 

[6BTS]

RFA doesn't exist to facilitate unfettered player movement, that comes 2 years later

RFA exists for price discovery. In a compromised market it allows a player to discover, to know his truth worth and be paid that.

RFA is the pay day before the free choice. Now it might be that once your current club discovers the true market price you've earned access to that it chooses to stands aside.

RFA is actually about getting paid. It is not about moving below market value, that is an unrestricted choice 2 years later

Well, that's the way it should be and is the way it is in the US. The thing about the RFA in the US is the player in question must first sign the contract, then the original team is within their right to match and then that contract becomes a valid contract. None of this stuff about the player running off to the draft, yet the AFL allow this loophole because they never do their due diligence when they attempt something new.

 

[headache1]

trivialities irrelevant triffling

Sums up what we're discussing beautifully.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

I still think the timing of this is all wrong from a geelong perspective. They are not going to win a flag in the next 2 years so they would have been better off waiting until he was unrestricted and fit him for nothing. I can't help but think danger must have approached them which is why they went now.

I think there is pressure to 'start a family' and he wants to be in Victoria for that

 

[Strangled Cat]

Yeah nah. They are 2 seperate categories not one category with a caveat on some players. Very clearly once we match dangerfield is no longer a free agent. He is an out of contract crows player with a decision to make

So, when does the 'out of contract crows player with a decision to make' trading period commence, as opposed to the Free Agency trading period? Because surely, if Patrick isn't a Free Agent, then he wouldn't form any part of the equation of the Free Agency trading period, right?

 

[Strangled Cat]

Sums up what we're discussing beautifully.

It takes two to tango, brother!

 

[6BTS]

If you match, the process becomes the same. But the concept doesn't change, just because someone decided that it was easier to appease clubs whinging about losing players for nothing than to fight it. Hence, the restricted component. Your club is well within its rights to match, don't get me wrong. And the process doesn't change from a normal trade situation once you match, but the whole idea of Free Agency is for players to get where they want after serving an arbitrary period of time at one club, be it for a cash incentive or otherwise.

You guys will match for only one reason, you think that the compo that the AFL is offering can be bettered by Geelong. Again, you're well within your rights to do so, and if you get a better deal from us - more power to you! I won't begrudge your club as it has lost its fair share over time. But, I am sure that your club won't demand overs to the point that it would be happier to lose out on EVERYTHING and see Patrick in the ND over getting BETTER compensation than what the AFL is offering. If thag happens, then I'm confident that the fairest of outcomes will have come to fruition.

Are you calling Restricted Free Agency an appeasement to whinging clubs? Are you on the AFLPA's side? That just sounds a little bizarre to me, that's all.

 

[Scorpus]

This is not true. He's a decent player around the same standard as Lyons, Grigg and crouch. He's just too much the same and we really don't need him

The problem is that GHS has to replace a player on our list currently. We already have a ton of slow inside mids with average skills, so replacing these players with him is a nill-all-draw. On top of this he wouldn't be as familiar with our other players and their traits as our existing slow mids, so it'd actually be a downgrade overall.

 

[Strangled Cat]

I think there is pressure to 'start a family' and he wants to be in Victoria for that

aBloody Mardi and Bruce! Why couldn't threy wait two more years for kids and grandkids respectively, just to make life easier for Geelong's recruitment department! Relax... it was a joke!

 

[6BTS]

So, when does the 'out of contract crows player with a decision to make' trading period commence, as opposed to the Free Agency trading period? Because surely, if Patrick isn't a Free Agent, then he wouldn't form any part of the equation of the Free Agency trading period, right?

I thought the trading period is the trading period. It sounds like your saying there is separate time put aside to trade just free agents. Did I misinterpret that? If we match, then Danger becomes and out of contract player who wants to be traded. I'm not sure if I'm getting this conversation quite right.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

aBloody Mardi and Bruce! Why couldn't threy wait two more years for kids and grandkids respectively, just to make life easier for Geelong's recruitment department! Relax... it was a joke!

Ive been in a similar situation. Thinking about moving back to Adelaide but my and my wifes parents are in Melb. Not having access to grandparents was what stopped us

 

[Strangled Cat]

Are you calling Restricted Free Agency an appeasement to whinging clubs? Are you on the AFLPA's side? That just sounds a little bizarre to me, that's all.

I'm not on anyone's side. I just call it as I see it. I think that the i initial idea of Free Agency wss just that... Free Agency, and nothing more! I think that clubs whined and said that they have no protection to get compensation for losing a player. The AFL were then more willing to add a clause to the Free Agency after eight-years' service, by way of a mechanism for 'matching' than they were to further compromise the draft by providing compensation for departing players like Buddy, Danger et al commensurate with their value.

 

[Strangled Cat]

Ive been in a similar situation. Thinking about moving back to Adelaide but my and my wifes parents are in Melb. Not having access to grandparents was what stopped us

Haha. Without trying to go O/T, I'm from Vic originally, been in SA for 11 years and been thinking of moving back to Vic. But wifie's folks are here and help A LOT with the little ones. My parents are now scattered all over the place, except Vic.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

So, when does the 'out of contract crows player with a decision to make' trading period commence, as opposed to the Free Agency trading period? Because surely, if Patrick isn't a Free Agent, then he wouldn't form any part of the equation of the Free Agency trading period, right?

As above, hes no longer a free agent at that point, so hes still a crows player until we trade him during the trade period or his contract expires. The only way for danger to become a true free agent now is for the crows to not offer to renew his contract anx delist him, which obviously we wont do.

 

[TexFactor]

But, I am sure that your club won't demand overs to the point that it would be happier to lose out on EVERYTHING and see Patrick in the ND over getting BETTER compensation than what the AFL is offering.

And I am sure that your club won't demand unders to the point that it would be happier to lose out on EVERYTHING and see Patrick in the ND.

Its still the same poker game no matter which way you slice it.

 

[Wood_Duck]

So, when does the 'out of contract crows player with a decision to make' trading period commence, as opposed to the Free Agency trading period? Because surely, if Patrick isn't a Free Agent, then he wouldn't form any part of the equation of the Free Agency trading period, right?

Yeah probably enough arguing about terminology, deal?