When Is A Contract A Contract ??

Remove this Banner Ad

Sep 7, 2011
12,234
13,633
Perth
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Manchester United
Lol coming from the club trying to poach Bontempelli. Geez.

Clubs don't own players, they can't force someone to see out a contract. This isn't Nazi Germany. I do however think that a player shouldn't be allowed to play at all if voiding a contract early, unless it's a mutual thing.
 

didaksrightfoot

Premiership Player
Sep 12, 2013
4,902
5,555
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
SA Spurs, Juventus
With free agency now available for players, it should move more towards the NBA where a player doesn't get to choose where he goes while in contract.

Clubs have no power atm, changing this rule would pull the power back a bit more towards the clubs.

For example why shouldn't Adelaide be able to trade Dangerfield to the highest bidder, while in contract if he doesn't sign an extension?

I support Collingwood and want what's best for my club not the players.

I agree with this a thousands times over.

Players, while under contract, should not be allowed to dictate where they get traded to. (And I have long held this opinion, and it has little to do with the recent trade period... though that just signifies how big a problem this is for a lot of clubs).

If a player signs a 4-year contract... they must be held to that contract, or for their club to have the ability to trade them during that term. If Collingwood wanted to poach Dangerfield this year- then would have to come up with an offer that trumps all other teams. Either Adelaide can trade him for the best offer they can get, or they can take the risk of him becoming a free agent- but they are allowed to look at all 17 clubs to find that best offer. (And obviously- if another club isn't confident that Danger will stay with them long term, then that will impact how much they offer... so the player does keep some control, but its still up to the receiving club to put in the best offer).
 
Clubs don't own players, they can't force someone to see out a contract.

Well they can certainly stop a player moving by denying them a trade. If they chose to sit out, that's their problem.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

simmo97

Club Legend
Aug 15, 2013
1,992
2,108
AFL Club
Adelaide
The AFL need to set Mandatory fees for clubs Poaching contracted Assistant coaches for Senior coaching Jobs and players asking for a trade when contracted.
 

Stax on the mill

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 13, 2008
6,489
9,978
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
So if you agree, what was the point of having your Collingwood dig? You sound like an idiot.

Collingwood, Hawthorn and Geelong have had a massive amount of assistants leave while in contract, I actually can't remember the last contracted player Collingwood picked up, I am sure you will do some research and let us all know.
He doesn't just sound like an idiot. He is an *****.
 

Schraderbrau

Cancelled
Oct 7, 2014
5,371
6,647
AFL Club
Collingwood
The AFL need to set Mandatory fees for clubs Poaching contracted Assistant coaches for Senior coaching Jobs and players asking for a trade when contracted.





that happens only in amateur leagues.
oh don't be such a conspiracy theorist. amateur leagues load up their players with cushy jobs, not $
 

SugarCoat

Club Legend
Suspended
Sep 27, 2014
1,471
1,086
AFL Club
Collingwood
If we decide we want to ditch Simpson and go after a contracted Clarkson or Hinkley or whoever then we can't trade picks and players to do so. We'd just offer a contract of $x over y years and hope the coach's existing club lets them walk.

You would have to pay overs to get Hinkley or Clarkson to move.
That would have an impact now more than ever because of the new tax.
It's a cycle now.
If Clarkson left Hawthorn they would have to pay overs to get a contracted coach to move from their club to replace Clarkson.
Again, it would impact more because they would be taxed more as a result of WC's decision.
 
Jun 16, 2012
25,015
25,576
AFL Club
Sydney
I think most clubs are pretty mature about coaches leaving. Of coarse assistants cannot walk out and take a similar role elsewhere, but clubs understand if they are offered senior gigs and usually do not stand in their way of taking what may be their only shot at the big time
 

Man of Steele

Debutant
Oct 3, 2014
120
32
AFL Club
Collingwood
Really not too fussed about assistant coaches or Rocket Eade scenarios leaving a club mid contract as they are effectively getting a promotion to a senior coaching role.
The biggest issue is contracted players requesting trades to a club of choice. Granted I might sound of sour grapes (losing Beams) but I do fear this is going to spiral out of control over the coming seasons.AFL needs to close this loop
hole. A contract is exactly that! a contract, end of story.
 
I wonder what other organisations can just turf someone because they are old (30), I wonder what other organisations can turf a worker (coach) because a better one came along......etc

I feel the recent test of both player and coaching contracts has brought about a better balance. Clubs and the afl will have to treat people better to keep them!
 
Sep 21, 2002
52,639
46,330
Adelaide
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Norwood
AFL is very unprofessional compared to other codes in the 'weight' a contract holds.

I recall a discussion on this several years ago and it was stated that the average AFL contract simply doesn't have the strength to stand up in court. Proper and legally binding contracts are a lot more weighty than your average AFL contract which is, in essence, nothing more than a written agreement between two parties.

I think it is the Restraint of Trade laws that allow people to break existing contracts if they are transferring to a position that enhances the financial situation. In this case a football director moving to the position of senior coach would (I imagine) offer greater financial reward, whereas if a person moved to a role with a similar financial package, the contract may prevent them from doing that.

Can't be 100% certain, but that is my understanding.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

AM

The standard you walk past is the one you accept
Aug 18, 2006
24,579
23,475
Here there and everywhere
AFL Club
Geelong
I do think that this issue has gone on long enough, when is a contract a contract ??

Far too often we see coaches walk out to another club even though they may have another year or two left to go on their contract.

If a club sacks a coach, they have to pay out the remainder of the contract yet if the coach walks, it doesn't matter.

Either the contracts are binding or clubs don't have to get one signed, it's as simple as that.
It's not as black and white as that. The reasons for releasing a person or body from a contract are many and varied.

It actually doesn't happen that often at AFL level when seen in totality.
 

rustyg70

Premiership Player
Jul 24, 2011
3,338
3,388
Fremantle
AFL Club
Collingwood
I recall a discussion on this several years ago and it was stated that the average AFL contract simply doesn't have the strength to stand up in court. Proper and legally binding contracts are a lot more weighty than your average AFL contract which is, in essence, nothing more than a written agreement between two parties.


Wouldn't a written agreement be exactly the same as a contract?
Player X signing on the dotted line to be at club Y for a certain amount of time sounds a lot like a contract to me.
 
Sep 21, 2002
52,639
46,330
Adelaide
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Norwood
Wouldn't a written agreement be exactly the same as a contract?
Player X signing on the dotted line to be at club Y for a certain amount of time sounds a lot like a contract to me.

As I tried to explain, there are contracts and there are contracts. Not all contracts carry the same weight as others. I'm no lawyer, I'm just repeating what I've been told, and that is your average AFL contract is not particularly legally binding.
 
Dec 2, 2003
9,763
4,175
AFL Club
Sydney
Of course Collingwood didn't have a problem with this when they were poaching stars, or trying to poach contracter stars from other clubs a few years ago.

Now that the tables have turned, they want a review. Typical. :rolleyes:

Do agree in essence regarding the strength of a contract now, players like Tom Body can just dictate where they want to go, and at the risk of compensation, the home club is in the backseat.

it's been known for years that according to McGuire, an issue only becomes a league-wide problem once Collingwood have been adversely affected in some way.
 
Aug 14, 2011
44,794
16,853
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
Are you saying players don't have front loaded contracts currently?

Come on telsor you know that is not what I said.

Only a commercially naïve person would front end a contract whilst not protecting their club in the event of an action in the control of the player - yes that's not legalspeak, that's common sense.
 

Leeda

Talents B Sharp
Suspended
Sep 26, 2012
9,443
1,622
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Isn't sport a bit different to the average job?

Hang on, maybe it isn't..

Nowadays, people have maybe at most a five year limit and then they are like most attitudes where things can get pretty boring pretty quickly.

It is just a faster merry go round and those who play the 'game' will charge their credit cards more effectively to survive. So to speak...
 
Aug 14, 2011
44,794
16,853
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
You would have to pay overs to get Hinkley or Clarkson to move.
That would have an impact now more than ever because of the new tax.
It's a cycle now.
If Clarkson left Hawthorn they would have to pay overs to get a contracted coach to move from their club to replace Clarkson.
Again, it would impact more because they would be taxed more as a result of WC's decision.

the new tax does not apply to all clubs, its rate is in the mind of the AFL administration, & some clubs are already at the max so it doesn't effect the wealthy clubs at all.
 
Jul 1, 2014
6,697
17,614
Adelaide, Australia
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Lakers, Ducks, Yankees
The clause in any assistant's contract is that their current team must release them from their contract if said coach is offered a promotion to a senior coaching position. It's black and white (pardon the pun). There is no ambiguity about it. More or less, this is a universal rule regarding coaching in every major sport around the world.

The issue I have is that teams are sacking their coach too late after the season. I mean, if you have to conduct any kind of "review," it immediately suggests that the higher ups aren't convinced about the structure in place anyway, and hence, the coach probably should be gone, as opposed to taking a few weeks (months in some cases) to decide "should we or shouldn't we?" Furthermore, bringing in a new head coach and a few new members to the coaching staff so late can at times make their first season a wash before it's already begun. Last year Richo went to St. Kilda only 1 week before the draft. You really think he would've had any input into that draft? Missed trade week, next to no impact on the draft, and he's left with a team that he's had no way of getting his structure in place and they're telling him "go to work, son." Was no surprise that the Saints came last this year. Will probably be close to the spoon again next year, but I think that their rebuild would be further along had Richo been there the entire off-season to get the structure he wants in place.

It also inconveniences multiple teams when you bring in a head coach so late. Other teams have put in their structures and then they have to change them very late into the off-season, which screws things up. This imo is the biggest problem of them all; and is one that Eddie will likely be pushing hard if there is any kind of review.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back