Contingencies In Case of Bans

Remove this Banner Ad

May 30, 2006
17,496
10,279
Canberra
AFL Club
North Melbourne
This has come up in one or two threads, but as far as I've seen there isn't one of its own and it could derail threads on other topics so I think it deserves a fresh one. (mods: if I've missed a similar thread please lock this and link to that thread.)

If there are player bans handed out, what are some of the contingencies the AFL could have in place to allow EFC to field a team? There is no doubt the AFL need nine games a round and Essendon will field a team each round.

Will they need to be different depending on the timing of bans being handed our (before and after trade priods, drafts; if they happen mid-season, etc); and the length of bans (1 year may require a different approach to shorter, Cronulla style slaps on the wrist)?

We don't know who the 34 players are, but if all get suspensions there would probably be around half still on the Essendon list by 2015. Most players who stay on a list after that sort of time are probably top 22. A conservative estimate would then be at least half of the first choice team on the sidelines. A little over half a first team is therefore probably the worst case scenario for EFC and the AFL as it requires all SCNs to be upheld.

(I coule be wrong here, but as I understand it) Players are not to be paid while suspended, but the contacts are still there - so does it count under the salary cap? Would special provision need to be made for contracts which are unpayable in the cricumstances?

The usual two year minimum contract for drafted players might need to be looked at as well, assuming any bans are not that long. Otherwise players could be returning while the replacements are also still under contract.

Whatever the AFL decide, they should make all the contingecies known so that they are in place for any future incidents of this type at any club. (Hopefully there are none, but to presume there won't be, and potntially haven't been, would be incredibly naive.)

There are numerous possibilities that contingecny should be made for; ranging from a couple opf players for a few weeks to long, mass suspensions.
Obviously nothing needs to be put in place for if there are no suspensions at the end of the process.

So, people, what can be done to ensure a club fields a team in cases like this? At what stage does it become an issue?
If one player is banned, probably nothing needs to be done; but at what stage does a line get drawn? Six bans, the list getting down to only 22 players?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

HoopsAhoy

Club Legend
Sep 3, 2012
1,651
2,699
AFL Club
Geelong
Simple solution. Just suspend Essendon from the competition in parallel with the players for the year or years of player suspension.

If they can't train or play there is no point including Essendon in the competition in the year or years involved.

Anything else ensures the AFL competition remains an ongoing circus for yet another year (or years).

Frankly the last three years have been more than stuffed around enough by EFC/Hird for the other 17 teams and their supporters.
 

This Is Anfield

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts Podcaster
Feb 25, 2014
32,084
70,155
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Liverpool, England, Furies
We could do it like they did with the Brisbane Bears, two players from each club, but those two players are voted for by each clubs BF board.
For example, from the Tiger board I would say Shaun Hampson is a certainty and possibly Shaun Grigg:D
 

Ophiomorpha

Senior List
Aug 4, 2013
226
727
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Thumb_Jarrad-Oakley-Nicholl.jpg
 

Buzz27

Draftee
Sep 21, 2014
1
1
AFL Club
Fremantle
I think this is where the club gets its comeupence. It would certainly be helpful if everyone knew where they stood before the trade period. I think there will be bans which will result in the effective loss of a season for the players, even if it is only half a season EFC cant hold on to them all.
There are still 20 players with show cause notices on their list, there may be 1 or 2 retirements, but you cant start a season with bans hanging over around 40% of your list, you simply wouldn't be able to field a team. EFC will need to trade away or lose via free agency (or up yours where's the duty of care agency) around 10-12 players. Of course with so many players moving and being compromised by the bans, Essendon wont be getting full market value for them.
 

Underdog

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 30, 2005
24,153
11,141
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Swan Districts
Simple solution. Just suspend Essendon from the competition in parallel with the players for the year or years of player suspension.

If they can't train or play there is no point including Essendon in the competition in the year or years involved.

Anything else ensures the AFL competition remains an ongoing circus for yet another year (or years).

Frankly the last three years have been more than stuffed around enough by EFC/Hird for the other 17 teams and their supporters.
It's not going to happen. It's not even worth discussing.
 
May 30, 2006
17,496
10,279
Canberra
AFL Club
North Melbourne
I think this is where the club gets its comeupence. It would certainly be helpful if everyone knew where they stood before the trade period. I think there will be bans which will result in the effective loss of a season for the players, even if it is only half a season EFC cant hold on to them all.
There are still 20 players with show cause notices on their list, there may be 1 or 2 retirements, but you cant start a season with bans hanging over around 40% of your list, you simply wouldn't be able to field a team. EFC will need to trade away or lose via free agency (or up yours where's the duty of care agency) around 10-12 players. Of course with so many players moving and being compromised by the bans, Essendon wont be getting full market value for them.
They started 2014 that way. All that has happened since is the SCNs being handed out and one avenue of trying to negate soime evidence appears closed. Nothing much has substantially changed in the last 12 months. There was, however, the prospect that bans could have come at any time during the season, whether through deals or the process being quicker than has actually proven to be the case.

But that is why I ask if different things need to put in place depending on the timing of bans - assuming they occur. If the tribunal convenes in May 2015, it probably needs to be a very different set of rules in place compared to a pre-draft verdict (which is relatively easily handled). ASADA have to follow the process, regardless of the timing desires of the AFL.
 
Jul 16, 2013
12,996
16,505
AFL Club
Essendon
Depending on how long the bans are you would think that Essendon would be able to sign up VFL players on short term contracts to fill the holes made by the banned players.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Word on the street is that Terry Wallace is on standby alert for exactly this scenario.
He will need one trading period, a fridge full of VB and a handful of beans to trade in 6 All-Australians and land the Bombers picks 1,2&3 in an 18-team deal.
He is, after all, THE LIST MANAGER. (I actually like Wallace, seems like a good bloke.)
 
Depending on how long the bans are you would think that Essendon would be able to sign up VFL players on short term contracts to fill the holes made by the banned players.
You'd think it would be some sort of scenario like that or access to state league players who had nominated for but not been taken in most recent drafts
 

Peacock

Club Legend
Apr 2, 2006
1,344
792
AFL Club
Carlton
Why should they get anything?

The AFL negotiate the TV game on a 'per game' basis so they would refund the networks for the Essendon games accordingly.

Ok that would be the right thing to do, but we all know the AFL will have a bunch of tricks up their sleave to protect the mighty dollar.
 

Underdog

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 30, 2005
24,153
11,141
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Swan Districts
Why should they get anything?

The AFL negotiate the TV game on a 'per game' basis so they would refund the networks for the Essendon games accordingly.

Ok that would be the right thing to do, but we all know the AFL will have a bunch of tricks up their sleave to protect the mighty dollar.
I don't agree that is the "right" thing to do.

Punish those involved. There are a lot of innocent bystanders at a football club. The biggest would be the fans.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back