List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade Talk 2016

[Baltimore Jack]

Agreed Heppell is gone. No way you stay with an employer that you are in legalities with.

People sue their employer (or more correctly their employers insurance company) fairly regularly and remain with their employer
It may not be ideal but it doesn't necessarily mean Heppell is finished at Essendon, although I concede until he says "I am definitely staying" then IMV he is getable

 

[Apex36]

People sue their employer (or more correctly their employers insurance company) fairly regularly and remain with their employer
It may not be ideal but it doesn't necessarily mean Heppell is finished at Essendon, although I concede until he says "I am definitely staying" then IMV he is getable

Can you actually provide an example of someone suing then staying with their employer? Because I think you might be talking out your arse.

 

[Soups]

Would Essendon want him there if he sued them?

 

[left at home]

the company l used to work for once you sued, they started to make life very uncomfortable for them to the point they
left or found some thing to sack them with

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Lindsay Tanner just said on SEN, in a previous life he instigated proceedings regularly against Employers for injured Employees.
He said Employers are able to treat these types of things as being two distinct things 1. Injury and 2 Employment
He said if Heppell decides to sue it will not affect his ongoing contract with Essendon as Essendon has the capacity to treat both things as separate matters

 

[JB1975]

Lindsay Tanner just said on SEN, in a previous life he instigated proceedings regularly against Employers for injured Employees.
He said Employers are able to treat these types of things as being two distinct things 1. Injury and 2 Employment
He said if Heppell decides to sue it will not affect his ongoing contract with Essendon as Essendon has the capacity to treat both things as separate matters

I'm curious about the relationship between any proposed settlement and the salary cap. Surely Essendon can't be allowed to reach a generous settlement with their players which might then allow them to minimise their liabilities under the salary cap? It doesn't seem beyond the realms of possibility that the club and player managers could come to a contractual agreement which, while it may not specifically refer to any legal settlement, nevertheless takes it into account.

If these issues have been dealt with before, can someone point me to it?

 

[Baltimore Jack]

I'm curious about the relationship between any proposed settlement and the salary cap. Surely Essendon can't be allowed to reach a generous settlement with their players which might then allow them to minimise their liabilities under the salary cap? It doesn't seem beyond the realms of possibility that the club and player managers could come to a contractual agreement which, while it may not specifically refer to any legal settlement, nevertheless takes it into account.

If these issues have been dealt with before, can someone point me to it?

That is a pretty interesting point, perhaps any settlement will not be considered a component of a players contract and therefore outside TPP
Not sure how it will ultimately work

 

[JB1975]

That is a pretty interesting point, perhaps any settlement will not be considered a component of a players contract and therefore outside TPP
Not sure how it will ultimately work

Well it almost seems impossible that these legal processes would be included in the TPP, especially if other players initiate legal proceedings. It would blow the TPP to bits. But the upshot would be that these legal proceedings just become a vehicle for the Essendon FC to subvert the salary cap.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Well it almost seems impossible that these legal processes would be included in the TPP, especially if other players initiate legal proceedings. It would blow the TPP to bits. But the upshot would be that these legal proceedings just become a vehicle for the Essendon FC to subvert the salary cap.

Yeah, you could quite easily see what might be a $1 mill settlement turning into a $2 mill settlement and the next day Heppell announcing a new long term contract

 

[spartan-magpie]

Yeah, you could quite easily see what might be a $1 mill settlement turning into a $2 mill settlement and the next day Heppell announcing a new long term contract

Good way to keep disgruntled players. Pay them well and truly above and beyond.

 

[TheSierBear]

Yeah, you could quite easily see what might be a $1 mill settlement turning into a $2 mill settlement and the next day Heppell announcing a new long term contract

I'd be livered and so would afl house if easendon pulled off a dodgy like that and used this disgrace of a situation to their advantage.

 

[TradeDraft]

IF Heppell Goes. I say all who get Offerd from other Clubs will leave

 

[mike123]

Would Essendon want him there if he sued them?

I think Essendon would

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-14/dyson-heppells-milliondollar-legal-claim

The Bombers believe they are equipped to deal with players suing them and playing for them at the same time, though they are extremely nervous about the actions involving Heppell and key defender Michael Hurley.

 

[Soups]

I think Essendon would

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-14/dyson-heppells-milliondollar-legal-claim

I guess they might not have a choice.

 

[MLG23]

Can we please recruit a bloke that can hit a target by foot. Thank you

 

[AmellyPies]

Witts will be used to get a first rounder.

 

[Baird]

Witts will be used to get a first rounder.

lol I wish Witts could net a first. Maybe a mid 2nd. I'd be happy with that

 

[The Plowking]

Witts will be used to get a first rounder*

*except his actual value is probably more an early second rounder.

i don't mind witts but will likely fulfill his potential elsewhere given said potential is possibly still 5 years away.

 

[AmellyPies]

lol I wish Witts could net a first. Maybe a mid 2nd. I'd be happy with that

Teams will offer a first round for him Late but they will.

GWS wanted the first and witts for Treloar but he didn't want to go.

 

[Giant Pete]

Witts will be used to get a first rounder.

You won't get a first rounder for Witts.

 

[AmellyPies]

*except his actual value is probably more an early second rounder.

i don't mind witts but will likely fulfill his potential elsewhere given said potential is possibly still 5 years away.

Again. No, Theres still a few teams the rate very highly.

 

[The Plowking]

You won't get a first rounder for Witts.

I tend to agree.

 

[AmellyPies]

Bulldogs, Richmond and Adelaide will go for him.

 

[TradeDraft]

Witts will be used to get a first rounder.

No Complaints here

 

[Knightmare]

I'd be looking towards undervalued veterans such as Jack Grimes and Nathan Van Berlo with the view to add them for some veteran leadership to help with the development of our youth.

Outside of Pendlebury I'm still not seeing any veteran leadership and that needs to change in a hurry because our once strength being young player development has stalled and as we say in 2007 and 2010 when we had the strongest combinations of veterans, they only help with young player development which with a good young core group is what we need most right now.

From a more pure needs standpoint a Trent McKenzie if he goes out of favour at seasons end is someone I'd be very interested in. A 75m kick on a back flank or wing is a missing ingredient and I tend to think Gold Coast using him deeper in defence where in the 1v1s he gets exposed is misusing his talents. I could make the same case for Aaron Mullett with North Melbourne.