News Dimma questions if clubs should be able to trade players mid-season

[Mr Magic]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-31/hardwicks-nfl-solution

Dimma also proposing NFL rules to FA agency which I personally think is flawed.

But anyway, more my point, why can't clubs trade players to other players mid-contract?? If they can't take it to the department of fair trade as a compliant against any regulators hurdle!!

I would have thought, if not set already, do a new contract signed by both player and club to override the previous contract with inclusion of head of agreement to allow the possibility of the player in question to be traded to another club for the period at end of season provided the player and club(s) agree to the trade and new contract terms with the new club. If the player will not sign it will not matter because they will not sign to be traded anyway

Am I missing something?? Why can players not be traded mid-contract now??? I thought they could!!


Regarding the NFL link I think it is flawed because a clubs position on a ladder is not a reflection of where they are at given injuries, biased draws, and other anomolies. The only true reflection of a clubs prospects can be determined by the player in a demand and supply scenario where the player considers other clubs to go to via FA.

For example a youngster wouldn't go to Hawthorn on top of the ladder now because they have an aging list and are about to fall of a cliff like Geelong. Collingwood on the otherhand used their brains offloading Shaw and Thomas to renew their premiership prospects to enable an increased ability to attract more talent.

So IMO, top 4 and top 5-8 are meaningless statistics for FA in terms of demand and supply of players because the value, like shares is not based on the present but the future over the team of the next players contract!!!

 

[TigerImposter]

Didn't we do that with Daffy and Stafford? It was a long time ago but I think it was those two players and we had to pay the excess on Daffy's deal
Good point though as I thought it was possible

 

[nut]

even he wants to get rid of Hamson now.....

 

[nut]

Why didnt we just pick Ball in the National draft before the Pies????? was there draft tampering between the Pies and Luke Ball?

and that was before free agency???? what is Dimma on about?

 

[Mr Magic]

Why didnt we just pick Ball in the National draft before the Pies????? was there draft tampering between the Pies and Luke Ball?

Don't know, if you could pay him what he was offering, you could have played him in the reserves for a year and trade him again.

I suppose if he goes into the pre-season you pick him and do you have to agree for a minimum contract term for a year? Not sure what the situation was but it was general club stupidity on all the other clubs that they let Ball slip to the Pies IMO!

Lets face it, if Ball had of stayed at the Saints they probably would have won it so its their own fault to a degree IMO.

 

[Mr Magic]

Why didnt we just pick Ball in the National draft before the Pies????? was there draft tampering between the Pies and Luke Ball?

and that was before free agency???? what is Dimma on about?

Think he is creating smoke and mirrors but not sure what his agenda is and who he is serving atm by this announcement!

I am not buying it at face value anyway!

 

[Spluff]

It's a journo error, he's talking about being able to trade players mid-season, not mid-contract.

 

[johnno77]

Soon I'm going to need a bloody Physics and Mathematics degree just to understand what the bloody hell is going on in footy.

I agree with what he said though about Free Agency being here to stay. I'm not sure how good it will be for the game especially if it keeps evolving towards the NRL style of player movement.

 

[TigerImposter]

even he wants to get rid of Hamson now.....

Was thinking the same when I first saw the post ,but I had to bite my tongue

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Soon I'm going to need a bloody Physics and Mathematics degree just to understand what the bloody hell is going on in footy.

I agree with what he said though about Free Agency being here to stay. I'm not sure how good it will be for the game especially if it keeps evolving towards the NRL style of player movement.

Players are pushing it that way, piece by piece they are widening the scope of FA, and reducing its restrictions.

IMO medium to long term players will get what they want, my only question is will they stop at the draft.

 

[NZ_Tiger]

He is talking about trading players without their consent. eg. nearly every US sport. So we want x player we call their club up and ask what they want in trade, players are told to move and that's the end of story. None of this nominating clubs, or refusing to be traded.

 

[The Rusty Trombone]

Why is he trying to prevent the top 4 teams from getting stronger ? Isn't it our goal to become a top 4 team?

Does he not think we could be a top 4 team one day , has he not seen our contested ball stats over the last 6 weeks ?

 

[Mr Magic]

It's a journo error, he's talking about being able to trade players mid-season, not mid-contract.

Will not happen IMO because 1. punters will not get involved in AFL future markets with unknown significant variables such as mid-season trades and AFL HQ will lose to much bookmaker sponsorship.

Furthermore 2., it compromises teams strategies during the year if they get blindsided by opposition trades out of the blue. Eg. Hawthorns set-up for Buddy in a GF scenario as part of the planning for finals, and Swans trade-off Buddy and get Dangerfield and Dusty! They then would need to adjust their defensive stocks to accommodate the changes which is a bit unreasonable IMO!

 

[NZ_Tiger]

Will not happen IMO because 1. punters will not get involved in AFL future markets with unknown significant variables such as mid-season trades and AFL HQ will lose to much bookmaker sponsorship.

Furthermore 2., it compromises teams strategies during the year if they get blindsided by opposition trades out of the blue. Eg. Hawthorns set-up for Buddy in a GF scenario as part of the planning for finals, and Swans trade-off Buddy and get Dangerfield and Dusty! They then would need to adjust their defensive stocks to accommodate the changes which is a bit unreasonable IMO!

Bollocks. No teams are tweaking their lists in the november for specific match ups in september.

 

[Mr Magic]

Bollocks. No teams are tweaking their lists in the november for specific match ups in september.

No clubs can trade mid-season so of course it will not happen atm!!

If mid season trades occurred the total season would be compromised IMO

Just say Essendon got Goddard mid-season! Half the teams trying to make the 8 play Essendon with Goddard and half don't.

Or just say Saints are mid season at the bottom of the ladder with Brisbane. Saints trade out Reiwoldt to get the spoon and top pick.

Or just say Gold Coast trade Gary Ablett to Geelong mid-season. Some teams play Gold Coast and Geelong without Ablett and other teams play Geelong and Gold Coast with Ablett.

The season's integrity would be compromised again and become a bigger joke!!

 

[TigerImposter]

No clubs can trade mid-season so of course it will not happen atm!!

If mid season trades occurred the total season would be compromised IMO

Just say Essendon got Goddard mid-season! Half the teams trying to make the 8 play Essendon with Goddard and half don't.

Or just say Saints are mid season at the bottom of the ladder with Brisbane. Saints trade out Reiwoldt to get the spoon and top pick.

Or just say Gold Coast trade Gary Ablett to Geelong mid-season. Some teams play Gold Coast and Geelong without Ablett and other teams play Geelong and Gold Coast with Ablett.

The season's integrity would be compromised again and become a bigger joke!!

If it came down to this I would lose interest completely
Loyalty would be lost between club and players with these subcontract deals
What would Parents tell their young kids? Cotchin's going to Geelong bc were rubbish this year , but were getting pick 16 and Hamish McIntosh
I don't think I could take it anymore and would take up golf on footy days at Northcote or PAscoeVale

 

[Mr Magic]

If it came down to this I would lose interest completely
Loyalty would be lost between club and players with these subcontract deals
What would Parents tell their young kids? Cotchin's going to Geelong bc were rubbish this year , but were getting pick 16 and Hamish McIntosh
I don't think I could take it anymore and would take up golf on footy days at Northcote or PAscoeVale

What would be a bigger Joke is Cotch goes to Geelong mid-season and Geelong have a change of heart end of year and trades him back to RFC at a different price!!

 

[Tiger71]

I believe Dimma meant to trade players who are in contract without maybe having to pay them out ?

 

[nut]

I believe Dimma meant to trade players who are in contract without maybe having to pay them out ?

yer its hard to work out what the article is about..... I was always under the impression that most contracts would have a clause which allowed clubs to trade players if they could get them a better deal or something along those lines??? I mean we traded for a contracted Hampson....

 

[theflea]

I believe Dimma meant to trade players who are in contract without maybe having to pay them out ?

It was simply to trade players without their consent. If players are in contract they have to agree with the trade for it to go ahead.

 

[TigerImposter]

What would be a bigger Joke is Cotch goes to Geelong mid-season and Geelong have a change of heart end of year and trades him back to RFC at a different price!!

Now you're thinking outside the box.Ouch

 

[leekok]

I hate how everything about our great game needs to be Americanised. It's bad enough that some of their terminology is creeping in via the commentators but the rules seem to be heading that way as well. Hopefully it will never come close to resembling gridiron or basketball. Very boring viewing for mine.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

Players were being shipped off to other clubs mid season all the time in the past.
It's not new.
I remember going to Richmond v Hawthorn in 1979 and Barry Rowlings was number 22 for Hawthorn in the footy record and ran out 22 for us !
Russell Greene around the same time trained for St.Kilda Thursday night and played for Hawthorn Saturday!
He was walking through the car park at waverly and a hawks player recognized him and said "you're at the wrong ground ?"
He said " I play with you blokes now".
I don't see a problem with it.


I think the main thing Hardwick is pointing at though is stopping blokes from picking and choosing where they go.

 

[Mr Magic]

Players were being shipped off to other clubs mid season all the time in the past.
It's not new.
I remember going to Richmond v Hawthorn in 1979 and Barry Rowlings was number 22 for Hawthorn in the footy record and ran out 22 for us !
Russell Greene around the same time trained for St.Kilda Thursday night and played for Hawthorn Saturday!
He was walking through the car park at waverly and a hawks player recognized him and said "you're at the wrong ground ?"
He said " I play with you blokes now".
I don't see a problem with it.


I think the main thing Hardwick is pointing at though is stopping blokes from picking and choosing where they go.

I don't have a problem with players after 8 or 10 years having a say where they go.

If they have too much of an issue their madman if they are asked to they are interested in going to certain clubs. For example GWS are virtually guaranteed to get a premiership at some stage in the next 8 years and if a RFC player who can make their 22 turns that down they are lunatics because any flight trip is not that far away anyway. Its not like they are being asked to play in England!!


What this does mean is clubs are forced to get real and that means getting real with supporters and not playing the dumb game assuming they do not know were the team is at and bank on supporters rocking up to matches to watch marketed wins which suits dumb short term coaches and dumb short term executives worried about their immediate salary remuneration!!

It means clubs have to get real about building premiership teams which attract smart players via FA and other means and not sell BS false stories to fans about fools gold wins. It is about clubs embracing the reality that winning premierships is greatly to do with the cattle you have and that every club including Geelong now, Freo and even Hawks are going to have to dip at some stage in the future to win their next premiership in years ahead. It is about facing the fact that clubs at some stage have to build for the long term to beat 18 clubs to a premiership whether this suits a coaches or executive's short term 2 year goal or not. It really means clubs should be setting goals on a minimum rolling 5 year period if not longer whether the coach or executive has a 5 year contract or not. It also means that club long term goals regarding list management and premiership building take priority over any short coach or executive goal. So it is no wonder some coaches like Geelong's Scott are whinging about FA now because they threw most of their eggs in the recent premiership victory past and they have a long road ahead to rebuild through the draft and eventually attract FA talent to give them their tilt in years ahead. That might not suit Scott's short term agenda but that is what the club needs to do!!

What it also means is clubs need to re-shape their business models so they get a better slice of TV revenue they earn and be more profit centric. The fact is putting short term bums on seats at the ground may not be in the clubs long term business and growth interest including improving their fan base!! To try and make sense of that, increasing a clubs TV audience may well be far more beneficial long term as well as adopting policies which reduce costs while increasing revenue in an cost avoidable, sustainable way leading to greater long term support is likely to be paramount. It may mean some executives need to be replaced by far more astute sustainable individuals with a focus on building clubs for the long term. Bit like replacing short term Wall street traders with investors that actually create value for the club, players and supporters. Because some can think what they like, but as far as I am concerned, players and supporters largely want the same thing, to win as many premierships as they can. So if players have more power in many occasions the supporters have more power because it forces clubs to perform for the long term to attract players and supporters alike!!

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

I reckon you have to be careful about giving players too much power.