Andrew Ireland - "Carlton haven't won too many flags without cheating the cap"

Remove this Banner Ad

Can you give me a source for this?

Haha. That's a good one. I'll just ring up the club and I'm sure they'll put it on BF for you.

But this is how it's been explained on multiple occasions.

If it helps Buddy's contract was investigated by the AFL to see if it was exposed to a cancellation of COLa or included 3rd party arrangements. It completely wasn't. Much to the AFL'S annoyance. And they had to let it go through.

Nice bit of panto there from the AFL btw as they bloody well have every contact the Swans sign in their records already.
 
Haha. That's a good one. I'll just ring up the club and I'm sure they'll put it on BF for you.

But this is how it's been explained on multiple occasions.

If it helps Buddy's contract was investigated by the AFL to see if it was exposed to a cancellation of COLa or included 3rd party arrangements. It completely wasn't. Much to the AFL'S annoyance. And they had to let it go through.

Nice bit of panto there from the AFL btw as they bloody well have every contact the Swans sign in their records already.
So you're telling me that Buddy doesn't have any of his 1 mil as part of the COLA? :eek:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So you're telling me that Buddy doesn't have any of his 1 mil as part of the COLA? :eek:

He cannot possibly. COLa is not included in the TPP calculations.

It's not $1m this year btw. It's $700k in his first two years. And not all of that would be eligble for COLa either.

COLa is dead. Long live the myth of COLa.
 
No their managers do, and then they tell the players. That's their job.

Wrong,they talk total payment including what they can get of the media cap as well. That is directly from player agent friend of mine. The club keeps it separate and it is a separate line but you look at the whole package.
So stop the bs mate
 
This will be my first and last post in this thread because I'm sick of reading the same crap over and over again.

The facts, as confirmed by Ireland here: http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2014-05-31/hes-saying-were-cheating-syd

* Every player on the Sydney Swans list receives a 9.8% COLA to help with the cost of housing in Sydney. It CAN'T be "pooled" or "hoarded" to recruit players because every player has the SAME clause in their contract which was approved by Ken Wood himself. The Swans have previously approached the AFL to ask them to confirm this publicly and are still waiting.

* Ireland acknowledged that Perth is more expensive than Melbourne, but Sydney is still more expensive than both cities due to the high cost of housing (in reality the cost of living is probably closer to 15-17% higher in Sydney). Eddie McGuire is on record as saying the cost of living allowance was justified when he was living in Sydney.

* The Swans have always argued in favour of equalisation proposals to help out the weaker Melbourne clubs and we were the ones pushing for clubs like the Bulldogs to be given financial assistance to ensure they get a fair go.
 
Last edited:
This will be my first and last post in this thread because I'm sick of reading the same crap over and over again.

The facts, as confirmed by Ireland here: http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2014-05-31/hes-saying-were-cheating-syd

* Every player on the Sydney Swans list receives a 9.8% COLA

Thats all well and good. But in the same article he also says that Buddy & Franklin receive about $40k combined from the COLA, and that they are costing the Swans a bit over $1m....so, i guess the facts confirmed by Ireland are a bit suspect...
 
Or maybe, just maybe, throwing it out there, it was Waite and Yarran getting sucked in and showing no discipline?
Didn't help, but weren't THE reason we lost. Yarran was right at the death of the game already behind. Waite's cost us a goal, but that was just one of at least four other goals that were gifted to the Lions by the umpires in that last quarter. Take that Waite one away and we still lose, was just one in a string of decisions that collectively cost us.

Anyway, it's the thing that awakes the sleeping giant. Will smash the Cats next week and people will realize finally the Cats dynasty is over, they're well and truly on the slide down now. That game next week will underline it.

Bookmark it and come see me next week.
 
Didn't help, but weren't THE reason we lost. Yarran was right at the death of the game already behind. Waite's cost us a goal, but that was just one of at least four other goals that were gifted to the Lions by the umpires in that last quarter. Take that Waite one away and we still lose, was just one in a string of decisions that collectively cost us.

Anyway, it's the thing that awakes the sleeping giant. Will smash the Cats next week and people will realize finally the Cats dynasty is over, they're well and truly on the slide down now. That game next week will underline it.

Bookmark it and come see me next week.

Am happy to do so.
 
Thats all well and good. But in the same article he also says that Buddy & Franklin receive about $40k combined from the COLA, and that they are costing the Swans a bit over $1m....so, i guess the facts confirmed by Ireland are a bit suspect...

Not all payments to players are eligible to receive COLa on top. Fact.

Both Tippett and Buddy likely have large parts of their contract ineligble for COLa.

Its just the media and BF that tries to boil these complex contractual arrangements down to easy round numbers.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Shouldnt you be correcting 'RW'?

Why should he, you had the facts wrong. Tuco is quite right, Buddy's contract includes marketing money which is NOT part of Total Player Payments but but is included in a different part of the cap, the same as every other club, which does NOT get the COLA. I should have clarified that, my apologies.
 
I know this COLA issue is getting very dreary. But I have one simple question that I have asked repeatedly and never received a satisfactory response to.

if COLA is simply 9.8% on everyone's contract to compensate for cost of living expenses in Sydney (i.e. suggesting that $100,000 in Melbourne is worth $109,800 in Sydney) then why with FA did Hawthorn have to match Sydney's entire offer to keep Buddy Franklin, and not Sydney's offer minus 9.8%?

I'd LOVE to hear an explanation for that.
 
I know this COLA issue is getting very dreary. But I have one simple question that I have asked repeatedly and never received a satisfactory response to.

if COLA is simply 9.8% on everyone's contract to compensate for cost of living expenses in Sydney (i.e. suggesting that $100,000 in Melbourne is worth $109,800 in Sydney) then why with FA did Hawthorn have to match Sydney's entire offer to keep Buddy Franklin, and not Sydney's offer minus 9.8%?

I'd LOVE to hear an explanation for that.

Perhaps you never listened to the answer. But here it is: They didn't.

The Hawks only had to match the terms of the offer under the cap. COLa is not included in the cap. COLa was therefore NOT included.

Of course terms also include the number of years and the Hawks offered more money but a shorter contract. But I digress.
 
Perhaps you never listened to the answer. But here it is:

The Hawks only had to match the terms of the offer under the cap. COLa is not included in the cap. COLa was therefore NOT included.

Of course terms also include the number of years and the Hawks offered more money but a shorter contract. But I digress.

No-one's ever said that to me before! If that is in fact the case that Hawthorn only had to match Sydney's offer minus 9.8% then that's all fair enough, I reckon.

It certainly wasn't reported that way at the time. But it wouldn't be the first time the footy media ballsed it up.

Thanks for the clarification, Tuco.

EDIT: Also thanks to Inspector Malceski. It's moments like this when you can by-pass the footy media that BF is gold.
 
Last edited:
then why with FA did Hawthorn have to match Sydney's entire offer to keep Buddy Franklin, and not Sydney's offer minus 9.8%?

I'd LOVE to hear an explanation for that.
I believe Hawthorn matched Sydney's offer: less 9.8%, but they didn't want to do it for 9 years.

E.g.

Sydney offered 1m + 9.8% from AFL
Hawthorn offered 1m

Both are the same but Sydney offered 9 years & Hawthorn didn't.

If Sydney offered it for 5 years & Hawthorn matched this, Hawthorn keeps Buddy.
 
No-one's ever said that to me before! If that is in fact the case that Hawthorn only had to match Sydney's offer minus 9.8% then that's all fair enough, I reckon.

It certainly wasn't reported that way at the time. But it wouldn't be the first time the footy media ballsed it up.

Actually that's fair enough, mate. None of us has been particularly well served by our media during all this.

But I bet some advertising exec was happy if that was pissing you off and probably encouraging you to buy newspapers to read about the outrage. That's the guy I have issues with. Not you for asking the simple question.
 
This kind of comparison only brings more attention onto Sydney's cheating. What's next, a crack at the Melbourne Storm?

2012 P'ship still is fantastic to watch.

So Ireland is as silly as you.

Not sure Buddy and Tippett have signed $500k annual ongoing contracts

There's no question the COLA is a rort and so is the NSW cash given to Goodes & Jack

I wonder if Buddy were to suffer a career ending injury this year whether the AFL really will force the Swans to either keep him on the list for the next 8 years or ensure $9.5 million of your 2015 salary cap is allocated to Buddy. Thems the rules after all

Your blokes are dropping like flies & your club still has to pay them out for all the games they are missing.
Rioli can't go to the midfield because his hamstrings will pop so you have an overpaid forward that can't go full pace & can only play limitedgame time.
How long is he signed up for?

All players on every team's lists can face the same as Buddy.
Ireland said when we got Buddy that he was well worth the risk.
I'll take his word over anyone's on here.
 
Actually that's fair enough, mate. None of us has been particularly well served by our media during all this.

But I bet some advertising exec was happy if that was pissing you off and probably encouraging you to buy newspapers to read about the outrage. That's the guy I have issues with. Not you for asking the simple question.

This is what it all comes down to atm with this issue. Again the AFL could come out and finally put a stop to all this confusion and allegations but they are not becasue in my cynical view of the AFL and the media..it sells. It keeps people engaged in the code. No one in victoria is going to walk away from the game, they are stuck in the AFL vortex so any news is good news.

The silence from the AFL on this plays right into the hands of those who dont want to accept fact. To them it proves that sydney are indeed guilty of doing something dodgy and they are nothing but a grubby dirty club. Also success always breeds contempt from those not involved in that success, its hardwired in our DNA.

If anything the fans should be rightly pissed of at the AFL for all this but potting a successfully run club is much easier.

Im telling you the AFL mandates the narrative and instructs the media to run with it.
 
2012 P'ship still is fantastic to watch.



Your blokes are dropping like flies & your club still has to pay them out for all the games they are missing.
Rioli can't go to the midfield because his hamstrings will pop so you have an overpaid forward that can't go full pace & can only play limitedgame time.
How long is he signed up for?

All players on every team's lists can face the same as Buddy.
Ireland said when we got Buddy that he was well worth the risk.
I'll take his word over anyone's on here.

Didnt the swans spend most of 2013 doing some sort of risk assessment on the buddy deal?
 
Didnt the swans spend most of 2013 doing some sort of risk assessment on the buddy deal?

I'm very comfortable that our management & recruiting department would have spent a lot of time weighing up the positives & the negatives with recruiting such a player.

They wouldn't go out & hand pick rejected players from other clubs to fill certain roles in our team (Laidler & Derickx) only to go in blindly in such a deal with Buddy. We have the best recruiters in the country.
 
Except for Bradshaw (was still being paid even though he technically retired), Seaby, Bolton, Mattner

Morton, Mumford, Lamb, White..

Johnston and Armstrong...

Edit: Forgot Moore and Everitt.

These guys retired. 1 from a degenerative knee injury and Bolton from age.

Mumford left because he felt like he was close to getting pushed out of the team, same with Lamb. Morton retired and White wanted more opportunities at Collingwood. Who is Johnston? and Armstrong is a very ordinary player. Everitt's doing great at Carlton but he wasn't in your best 22.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top