Bluelegs
Celebrating what we're good at
In an article that appeared on Sydney's website today Gillon Mclaughlan revealed that the AFL is reconsidering their trade ban. Within the article an interesting quote arises about the communication (or lack there of) from both the AFL and Sydney towards the AFL public.
http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2014-11-27/trade-ban-may-soften
So it seems that Sydney understood the restrictions they would be dealing with prior to the trade period taking place. How long prior is not revealed but it could certainly have been as far back as when the COLA was revised months ago.
Neither side chose to reveal that the ban was happening until halfway through the trade period, which made it seem like the ban had been implemented at that point in time.
From where I'm sitting it feels like the Swans wanted to take the AFL community for a ride and get people on their side making the situation seem more ridiculous and contrived than it actually was. While I personally still feel the trade ban was a poor decision from the AFL the lack of communication from the Swans is pretty slimy.
http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2014-11-27/trade-ban-may-soften
The League has also acknowledged it made a mistake in the way it communicated the trade restrictions to the Swans, with AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan saying it should have been far more transparent.
"I'll take responsibility. I think it was poorly communicated," McLachlan told AFL.com.au's NAB Draft Countdown show on Thursday.
"And that was a bit in response to the Swans not wanting to communicate it (the ban) because they wanted to use maximum leverage going into that trade period.
"I think in retrospect we should've communicated that properly."
The League met with Swans officials on Thursday morning to discuss a potential softening of the trade ban.
So it seems that Sydney understood the restrictions they would be dealing with prior to the trade period taking place. How long prior is not revealed but it could certainly have been as far back as when the COLA was revised months ago.
Neither side chose to reveal that the ban was happening until halfway through the trade period, which made it seem like the ban had been implemented at that point in time.
From where I'm sitting it feels like the Swans wanted to take the AFL community for a ride and get people on their side making the situation seem more ridiculous and contrived than it actually was. While I personally still feel the trade ban was a poor decision from the AFL the lack of communication from the Swans is pretty slimy.