Swans told to end COLA - OR be banned from trading in players for 2 years

[MarkT2]

Because he was so outspoken about our Buddy contract earlier this year & said that the AFL shouldn't allow such outlandish contracts.

Ok I see your angle now but there is a large age difference FWIW.

 

[Leg End]

Sheesh, the plot officially left the building with that tosh.

That guy nearly won the prelim in 2012 off his own boot. He had long been capable of kicking bags, it's just that you hadn't noticed because he didn't play for Sydney.

Good grief, what a turd thought process you have ticking over there.

I've heard people saying that 2014 was Buddy's best year too, so I shouldn't be surprised I guess. It's funny how 'good' players suddenly get when they're wearing your jumper.

Now you all start lying that you always thought Tippett was a gun.
You have no pride - just childish anti-Sydney crap.

We get the best out of players, regardless of previous standards. Buddy has never played better - and will only get better. But not in the eyes of churlish Hawthorn w***ers who thrive on negative rubbish day in, day out, like life's true losers.

 

[Scotland]

Buddy has never played better?

I think you might have missed 2008.

 

[mightynineteen]

Wouldn't it be more sensible for both parties if the afl had said trade as many players as you like as long as your combined outgoing Salarys is greater than your incoming.

The swans would be limited to who they could recruit whilst still being able to address any list issues , and their tpp would also have been reduced

I would have thought that this is exactly how it should have been handled. It certainly would have been more fair, instead of just an outright ban

 

[Scotland]

I don't think even the 'you can trade as long as your outgoing exceed your incomings' is necessary.

Salary cap (round numbers, $10m base with 10% CoLA):

2015 - $11m
2016 - $10.8m
2017 - $10.6m
2018 - $10.4m
2019 - $10.2m
2020 - $10m

That really is all that is required to stage the CoLA out of existence. s**t, you could even say that those 6 years add up to $63m so spend whatever you want each year so long as it isn't more than $11m and the total over 6 years is $63m.

 

[Number37]

But still, Malceski would have been an above average salary earner at the Swans, he wouldn't have been eligible for the new COLA but still had the 10%ish old COLA on his salary, him leaving frees normal TPP cap space and reduces the amount of COLA being paid to players. If Swans took a free agent at similar money, he wouldn't get anything under the new COLA regime so it would make no impact if you applied the new COLA rules to newly acquired players during the phase in period.

There is just no logical reason why the Swans wouldn't be allowed to trade or get free agents. Either there is something fishy going on or the AFL is so clueless that a captain obvious solution could have easily resolved the problem.

If the Swans were doing anything illegal, the AFL has at its disposal a whole range of actions they need not make up some BS rule.

I have heard that we have no recourse because the AFL can in fact make up whatever rule they want. The trade ban was not framed as a punishment, it was framed as a new rule, which supposedly makes it all ok.

 

[MightyHawks]

Now you all start lying that you always thought Tippett was a gun.
You have no pride - just childish anti-Sydney crap.

We get the best out of players, regardless of previous standards. Buddy has never played better - and will only get better. But not in the eyes of churlish Hawthorn ******s who thrive on negative rubbish day in, day out, like life's true losers.

Buddy was terrific in 2008 and 2011 - definitely better years than 2014

Certainly had a better Grand Final in 2012 than he did in 2014 as well

I look forward to his continual improvement over the next 8 years!

He'd better be good because his contract is the one that is preventing you from trading for the next two years

Even if all the other Swans players agree to give up the 9.8% - doing the best thing for the team, Buddys contract can't be reduced under restricted free agency

 

[Tas]

If the Swans were doing anything illegal, the AFL has at its disposal a whole range of actions they need not make up some BS rule.

Yes, they do, if they want to punish the Swans. You wouldn't think they would want to openly punish the club given the AFL is keen to expand the market share in NSW. I'd prefer to believe the commission was devious rather than incompetent but they do not have a great track record for competency.

I have heard that we have no recourse because the AFL can in fact make up whatever rule they want. The trade ban was not framed as a punishment, it was framed as a new rule, which supposedly makes it all ok.

They can pretty much make it up on the fly, clubs have at their disposal the means to veto any AFL decision by getting 75% of club votes against the AFL, it is however all but impossible to get a veto decision done these days and the few contentious issues which could have generated a veto the AFL have chosen to alter their course of action rather than get the clubs used to vetoing their decisions.

Sadly, most clubs would take the unethical approach of denying the Swans natural justice because they are deemed a strong club and a premiership threat, the same reason clubs blocked the North-Fitzroy merger, had we been a wooden spooner rather than a premiership team in 96 the merger wouldn't have been blocked.

We have small-minded individuals making decisions based on short-term circumstances and outcomes, we have a very selfish and dysfunctional leadership in general.

 

[Tas]

I said 12 months ago that Sydney were taking the piss with the Buddy contract and that the AFL wouldn't let it slide. Not because they prevented GWS getting him either. I don't agree with it but that's the AFL all over. Process and motivation are one thing though and COLA and trading are two other matters entirely. COLA shuold go. Trading should stay. I don't know why they get a choice.

I don't have an issue with COLA, however, it should be transparent. One team rules are generally a bad idea. The system should say the base TPP is based on the city which has the lowest COL and every other city gets some kind of allowance based on the variance in the COL. It was just absurd to only apply it to one city and really have no clear metrics based on how it is calculated.

 

[Crankyhawk]

It's

I remember that! i swear there was a article on it as well predicting all sorts of doom and gloom, hardly surprising the mass hysterical outcry of what we do when compared to other clubs who do the exact same thing has been hilarious.

From a long contract to being able to recruit after winning a flag(lol)

its a bit like how lots were criticising the Eagles for ducking. We complained and when we saw that was falling on deaf ears we started doing it too. Eg puopolo. So Gordon sees this Buddy contract and goes initially wtf then next thought is ok can we do something similar.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

But in typical Sydney style - sook sook sook. If it's that important give up COLA! Choice is yours.

Our point is that being told to renege on legally-binding contracts is not really what most fair-minded people would describe as "choice".

And all the more bizarre when you consider we were already complying with the AFL's directive on phasing out CoLA.

Tinpot dictatorship stuff.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Exactly !!!

Swans want it all and they've finally been told you've got to live by the same rules as the other clubs.

Um, we were told some months ago, and we had complied with the phasing out of CoLA. That's not what we're talking about here.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

get over it

Why?

 

[Stratton_Gun]

Sydney do seem to have had good mgt and what not but you can't say that all their handouts haven't contributed to their success at least a little bit. When the COLA is gone and the playing field is more level, I look forward to seeing if they will do a Brisbane (become more or less irrelevant for the most part) or continue on to be moderately successful like they have in the last 10 years or so

 

[Ashman23]

The Vic anti COLA stance didn't increase when we recruited Tippett fresh off a Grand Final win?
I imagined all those screaming "COLA wasn't meant to help the reigning Premiers poach a quality FF??"

I imagined the extension of the vitriol when having failed to add the obligatory COLA guaranteed flag in 2013 we snapped up Buddy on a lengthy and lucrative contract?

I did not say anything about the logic, just that the volume well and truly increased with both of those recruitments.

And this kinda hits the nail on the head in relation to the AFL stepping in so suddenly. You're victims of your own cleverness and good practice.

 

[Tedeski]

Ok I see your angle now but there is a large age difference FWIW.

If the boy hurts himself like our AlexJohnson has it will be no different.

 

[yodellinhank]

Sydney do seem to have had good mgt and what not but you can't say that all their handouts haven't contributed to their success at least a little bit. When the COLA is gone and the playing field is more level, I look forward to seeing if they will do a Brisbane (become more or less irrelevant for the most part) or continue on to be moderately successful like they have in the last 10 years or so

Boo hoo. AFL rules and handouts help out most premiership teams. Look at the Hawks/Pies with the old priority pick rule. Cats with the veterans list changes and old F/S.

 

[Stratton_Gun]

Boo hoo. AFL rules and handouts help out most premiership teams. Look at the Hawks/Pies with the old priority pick rule. Cats with the veterans list changes and old F/S.

Those rules were in place for every club

 

[yodellinhank]

Those rules were in place for every club

Brought in at times that advantaged some and taken out when it would advantage others. The short lifespan of some of the rules is akin to the targeted COLA allowance rulings. The league is manipulated and has been for far longer than people care to think about.

 

[ScoobySnacks]

Brought in at times that advantaged some and taken out when it would advantage others. The short lifespan of some of the rules is akin to the targeted COLA allowance rulings. The league is manipulated and has been for far longer than people care to think about.

Utter bullshit to insinuate that those rules were chopped and changed at a whim to suit particular teams. You're just trolling saying that.

COLA was designed and legitimised as an advantage given only to the Swans and the other franchises

 

[Maddo11]

I think this thread has jumped the shark. Somewhere around page 70.

 

[ScoobySnacks]

I think this thread has jumped the shark. Somewhere around page 70.

Just like the Swans. Somewhere around September 27

 

[Maddo11]

Just like the Swans. Somewhere around September 27

 

[yodellinhank]

Utter bullshit to insinuate that those rules were chopped and changed at a whim to suit particular teams. You're just trolling saying that.

COLA was designed and legitimised as an advantage given only to the Swans and the other franchises

You are just being a bad sport because the Swans rival your team. Rules are chopped and changed all the time at the discretion of the AFL. They don't do things randomly, they do things for effect.

 

[The Brabazone]

You may choose to deny it like the flat earth society, but your club were the laughing stock of the competition and had the most pathetic culture. It got to the stage where the AFL had to step in and installed Barassi to save your arse. Then you guys bought Plugger from the Saints for some success. Roos, your favourite 'son' were also bought from the Lions when the AFL killed off Fitzroy. At no stage did the Swans achieve success ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT A MASSIVE HANDOUT FROM THE AFL. Perhaps you should learn some facts of and live with your own clubs history before going off on your 'culture'.

Here is a history lesson for you: The Hawks played in eight grand finals in nine seasons from 1983-1991, yet only 5 years later in 1996 they nearly merged with Melbourne... And yet they survived, and today they are a strong club. The fans voted against the proposal and because of that the Hawthorn Hawks still exist today (instead of the Melbourne Hawks, red and brown? yuck). You probably aren't aware but South fans voted against moving to Sydney as well, there was a groundswell of support for the "Keep South at South" movement but the club was penniless and heavily in debt, it couldn't afford to stay. The AFL (then VFL) placed the club in Sydney but due to the supporters and players past and present the club retained it's colours and history (a history older than that of Hawthorn). From day one in Sydney players left to return home to Melbourne-based clubs (Foschini, Morwood brothers) and the club was almost sold to Carlton! This was supported by the AFL and only blocked by Collingwood because Carlton wanted to play 11 home games at Princes Park and 11 away games at the SCG! It's true we lost 26 straight games in the 90s but guys like Richard Colless, Ron Barassi, Craig Kimberley, Paul Kelly and Rocket Eade helped turn around the culture. This work was carried on by Paul Roos, Stuey Maxfield, Brett Kirk, Jude Bolton, Adam Goodes, Barry Hall etc. and today we have an authentic club culture built from within the club that fans are extremely proud of. That culture wasn't built by the AFL as your peanut response suggests, but came from the leaders of our football club both on and off the field. Hawthorn were similarly unsuccessful (a laughing stock one might even say) before their own culture revolution inspired by John Kennedy snr (whose grandson is half-decent but "the family club" didn't want him...) which Hawks fans are rightly proud of. Both of our clubs built separate but strong cultures and both of our fan bases are proud of them, they're both fantastically rich histories and the game is all the better that Melbourne and Hawthorn didn't merge, and that Carlton didn't buy Sydney's license. It's just that I would never dream of dismissing your clubs culture or downplay it's role in the success of your club, but you're willing to disregard the impact of my clubs culture instead saying the AFL hands us our success. Both Alistair Clarkson and Luke Hodge, fantastic leaders of your club and admired by all, acknowledged the respect they have for the Swans leaders and culture both in 2012 when you lost the Grand Final and in 2014 when you won. Maybe as a fan you should do likewise.