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

Remove this Banner Ad

BruceFromBalnarring said:
I'm not justifying COLA. That has been done to death in many other threads. It is an undeniable fact that there is a cost of living issue applicable to Sydney. That created an imbalance in the value of contracts for Sydney players. The COLA addressed, in part, this imbalance. However, as the TPP has increased and players are being paid more, the cost of living difference, whilst still there, is less relevant and so COLA goes. We're all ok with that.

What we're not ok with is that players are contracted with COLA in their contracts. It's immediate removal is unlawful. The AFL are now penalising Sydney for not doing something that is unlawful.

Hawthorn supporters are saying that Sydney have built their list around a rule that has been found to have created a talent imbalance in favour of Sydney and so by stripping Sydney's list (which is the effect of the AFL's actions) they are simply correcting the imbalance. I say "fine". It is also acknowledged that the priority picks around which Hawthorn have built their list have created an imbalance, hence why priority picks have been removed. Therefore, in order to restore Hawthorn back to where they were prior to the imbalance, they should be required to restructure their list in much the same way as Sydney.
Click to expand...
If cola was stripped away and not fazed out your concerns and counter argument is valid. But it isn't and its not.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

BruceFromBalnarring said:
Well it is, or else we suffer a trade ban. So we are suffering a trade ban as a result of not complying with a request that was unlawful.
Click to expand...
It seems to sound like if cola was removed you wouldn't be able to recruit any players and In fact might lose someone, but in fairness to keep Sydneys list together they have given them a fazeing out period.

they keep there inflated salary cap untill they can afford to pay there entire list under the tpp.

Whats not fair on the rest of the competition is them useing money they only have because of the afls compromise to recruit a player instead of absorbing some of the afls cola alouance.
 
Barlow#14 said:
It seems to sound like if cola was removed you wouldn't be able to recruit any players and In fact might lose someone, but in fairness to keep Sydneys list together they have given them a fazeing out period.

they keep there inflated salary cap untill they can afford to pay there entire list under the tpp.

Whats not fair on the rest of the competition is them useing money they only have because of the afls compromise to recruit a player instead of absorbing some of the afls cola alouance.
Click to expand...

But that's not how it works. You need to think of the Swans TPP as like everyone else's. Except COLA is an added allowance. We can't use COLA to recruit new players as their contracts would not have COLA on them. The phase out is simply due to contracts on which it exists already. In fact, by placing this ban on us they've actually made it more difficult for us to phase out COLA within the agreed timeframe because we can't trade out a Hannebery (who has COLA) in favour of a Bruest (for instance). Our trading options have been limited.
 
BruceFromBalnarring said:
But that's not how it works. You need to think of the Swans TPP as like everyone else's. Except COLA is an added allowance. We can't use COLA to recruit new players as their contracts would not have COLA on them. The phase out is simply due to contracts on which it exists already. In fact, by placing this ban on us they've actually made it more difficult for us to phase out COLA within the agreed timeframe because we can't trade out a Hannebery (who has COLA) in favour of a Bruest (for instance). Our trading options have been limited.
Click to expand...
But you would have to fit it under you tpp once its removed on all contracts its written in to, the players are entitled to the money they signed up for.

You can trade any player but the cola component will have to be absorbed by the club receivng.

are you saying once its removed the money those plays would of received just disappears?
If so who has been feeding you such misinformed information?
 
The afl has came out and said Sydney are free to trade for players if that can afford to pay all players contracts under the tpp, players are intiteled to the cola component even if the afl isnt paying it.

Any cash Sydney had to recruit a player this off season was only there because Sydney is yet to absorb the cola components of there players contracts.
 
Barlow#14 said:
But you would have to fit it under you tpp once its removed on all contracts its written in to, the players are entitled to the money they signed up for.

You can trade any player but the cola component will have to be absorbed by the club receivng.

are you saying once its removed the money those plays would of received just disappears?
If so who has been feeding you such misinformed information?
Click to expand...

I'm actually not sure whether the COLA component stays if a player is traded to, say, Carlton mid contract. But even if he is, Carlton can go in eyes wide open and know on the individual player and make a judgement call on that.

All new contracts are written without COLA. It's as simple as that.
 
Barlow#14 said:
The afl has came out and said Sydney are free to trade for players if that can afford to pay all players contracts under the tpp, players are intiteled to the cola component even if the afl isnt paying it.

Any cash Sydney had to recruit a player this off season was only there because Sydney is yet to absorb the cola components of there players contracts.
Click to expand...

Mate can I make a suggestion? Don't pull the legal speak if you can't do it. There's nothing particularly impressive about it even if you could. But you can't, and in trying, you're making your posts nonsensical.
 
Last edited:
BruceFromBalnarring said:
Mate can I make a suggestion? Don't pull the legal speak if you can't do it. There's nothing particularly impressive about it even if you could. But you can't, and in trying, you're making your posts nonsensical.
Click to expand...
haha wtf?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BruceFromBalnarring said:
That's just nonsense. It's not even worth talking to you. You're just making s**t up.
Click to expand...
Its true. But if you don't believe me do some research you will encounter the truth. Unless you dont want to hear it, then I would advise not to research any further in to this matter.
 
Barlow#14 said:
Its true. But if you don't believe me do some research you will encounter the truth. Unless you dont want to hear it, then I would advise not to research any further in to this matter.
Click to expand...

Mate. Hawthorn offered more money to Franklin than Sydney did. Franklin gets * all COLA. He's mostly paid on additional services. Put up evidence or shut up.
 
SugarCoat said:
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/tr...rites-neil-cordy/story-fndv8ujy-1227106397655

Look how precious the Sydney journalists are getting now.
Click to expand...
If that article displays preciousness, you'd better go back to school. Cordy's opinion is correct, Sydney could go down because of this in a couple of years. He's not being 'precious', just stating potential facts. It's better than the smug silence from the Melbourne journo's:rolleyes: Huge controversy and.........nothing. No opinion pieces, just fact reporting in a very small article then silence. Pathetic.
 
stevoswan said:
If that article displays preciousness, you'd better go back to school. Cordy's opinion is correct, Sydney could go down because of this in a couple of years. He's not being 'precious', just stating potential facts. It's better than the smug silence from the Melbourne journo's:rolleyes: Huge controversy and.........nothing. No opinion pieces, just fact reporting in a very small article then silence. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

So sorry that your clubs unfair advantages were slightly reduced and now you're 'only' left with COLA-lite and an academy to bypass the draft with in order for you to stay unfairly ahead of the other clubs. Poor you.
 
stevoswan said:
If that article displays preciousness, you'd better go back to school. Cordy's opinion is correct, Sydney could go down because of this in a couple of years. He's not being 'precious', just stating potential facts.
Click to expand...

And avoiding others, like Sydney are able to trade, as long as they give up COLA now, which they could do easily. It's just part of the Swans media ploy to engender a "woe is us" attitude.
 
telsor said:
So sorry that your clubs unfair advantages were slightly reduced and now you're 'only' left with COLA-lite and an academy to bypass the draft with in order for you to stay unfairly ahead of the other clubs. Poor you.
Click to expand...
Jim Boy said:
And avoiding others, like Sydney are able to trade, as long as they give up COLA now, which they could do easily. It's just part of the Swans media ploy to engender a "woe is us" attitude.
Click to expand...
As I said, PATHETIC...........you just can't see that being punished for 'not breaking any rules' is unjust. If it happened to your club, you wouldn't be so cocky and frankly, pathetically bias.....sitting back smugly enjoying your Made in Melbourne mickey mouse league, and in turn becoming Eddies and Gillons 'minions'.....your prejudiced stupidity is laughable.:confused::drunk:
 
stevoswan said:
As I said, PATHETIC...........you just can't see that being punished for 'not breaking any rules' is unjust. If it happened to your club, you wouldn't be so cocky and frankly, pathetically bias.....sitting back smugly enjoying your Made in Melbourne mickey mouse league, and in turn becoming Eddies and Gillons 'minions'.....your prejudiced stupidity is laughable.:confused::drunk:
Click to expand...

So you don't get advantages like the revised COLA and academy picks that other clubs don't get?
Or are you complaining because you can't trade until you reduce yourself down to 'just' those advantages?
 
telsor said:
So you don't get advantages like the revised COLA and academy picks that other clubs don't get?
Or are you complaining because you can't trade until you reduce yourself down to 'just' those advantages?
Click to expand...
I get that the AFL set certain rules for us, and I get that we did everything within those rules, and that now we're being punished for working within those rules, that's what I get. I get that people like you know it too, but that your prejudice just won't let you admit it. I get that certain high profile club 'leaders' got jealous and had a sook to the league(one via his high media profile, influencing the parochial and jealous and easily blinded Victorian AFL fanbase), and Gillon rolled over and made policy on the run to appease these self interested 'leaders' and their blind followers, like yourself. I get that the academies were set up at the AFL's request to promote young talent and therefore the code in non AFL states, and that the Swans pay to run their academy, and deserve to receive the spoils/advantages of THEIR investment. Lastly I get why you don't get it, and frankly, that is pathetic and sad.........Enjoy your AFL/melbourne media led delusion, and also enjoy years of sustained Swans success as we show the rest of the league how great football clubs prevail and how bullies never win. In a few years you WILL get it, whether you like it or not. But I'm sure you will still be bleating like the sheep you are......:rolleyes:
 
stevoswan said:
I get that the AFL set certain rules for us, and I get that we did everything within those rules, and that now we're being punished for working within those rules, that's what I get. I get that people like you know it too, but that your prejudice just won't let you admit it. I get that certain high profile club 'leaders' got jealous and had a sook to the league(one via his high media profile, influencing the parochial and jealous and easily blinded Victorian AFL fanbase), and Gillon rolled over and made policy on the run to appease these self interested 'leaders' and their blind followers, like yourself. I get that the academies were set up at the AFL's request to promote young talent and therefore the code in non AFL states, and that the Swans pay to run their academy, and deserve to receive the spoils/advantages of THEIR investment. Lastly I get why you don't get it, and frankly, that is pathetic and sad.........Enjoy your AFL/melbourne media led delusion, and also enjoy years of sustained Swans success as we show the rest of the league how great football clubs prevail and how bullies never win. In a few years you WILL get it, whether you like it or not. But I'm sure you will still be bleating like the sheep you are......:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So all clubs should be able to run academies?

All clubs should have their salary cap adjusted for cost of living?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_Wookie
Pridham: it’s inevitable that the Sydney Swans will be the biggest sporting club in Australia
Replies
3
Views
704
The King!
The King!
Aristotle Pickett
Victorian AFL clubs raked in $40m from poker machines last financial year
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
3K
Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods
Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods
The_Wookie
Roy Morgan 2023: Swans still number one with 1.334m supporters, Port best at converting to members
Replies
21
Views
2K
Grand Uncle Horace
Grand Uncle Horace
Football Tragic
  • Poll
Does the AFL have anything to fear from the Matilda's recent success and the NRL's TV ratings?
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
6K
Tandy
Tandy
W
Brisbane's Gabba not to be rebuilt!
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
189
Views
9K
Walshawk
Walshawk
The_Wookie
Tasmania: From License reveal to set up - what we know
Replies
17
Views
1K
____
____
The_Wookie
Play Nice 2023 Non AFL (or lower league) Sports Industry Discussion
47 48 49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
64K
threenewpadlocks
threenewpadlocks

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top