AFL corruption yet again

[sprockets]

Oh wow, another thread to bag the Suns.

Lemme guess... it's about to come out that Juddy's still being paid as an ambassador for Visy right?

 

[PrideOf]

The AFL want to allow Gold Coast to pay Tom Lynch as an ambassador to keep him from leaving.

Why can't other teams get that perk?

I think it is a disgrace.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...8/news-story/0ee762b5031aeaaa682fb5b6da5fac8f

Mark Evans in three weeks: "It's disappointing to lose Gary back to Geelong, but we really think we can do something with the pick #127 they've generously given."

Worse than FIFA these ****ers.

 

[sprockets]

Your club plays home finals no matter where you finish and your complaining about rorts... Keep it coming AT.

I am objective, we have advantages in having an academy (lots of em) and a great home ground advantage. But then we travel (like all interstate clubs) a lot, don't have derbies to boost our crowds every 2nd game and the biggest juniors and reserves comps aren't based in our state (let alone the sponsorship and 3rd party arrangements available to clubs in footy states, or the home of footy like Melbourne). We also don't get a home Grand Final or a home final just because we have a bigger ground.

I'm all for objective discussion, but it goes both ways, you say unfair advantages hurt the competition but then in the same breath say the unfair advantages received by the Tiges are fair because money and ground capacity... Strange

It may have already been stated but the Tigers worked for 100+ years for any perceived advantages. As for the final being home ground advantage, what's a legitimate alternative that's fair to the people that pay for the whole thing to take place at all, ie, supporters?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

So has every living thing in the history of the universe.

I mean literally. I deal with the critically ill on a daily basis in my role as a hospital doctor. I've been doing that for 30 years. I'm not sure that every living thing does that......

 

[master bate]

Surely there's some middle ground here.

Set Lynch up with one of the League or clubs sponsors to get 3rd party payments. Organise a media deal for him (or other GC players). Find ways to allow GC and other small market clubs players to get the same exposure as big market players do.

Straight up cash for an ambassador job doesn't seem right. Player payments are set up for the good and popular players to earn more how it is, there shouldn't be a system of giving out special payments to those who bring in more attention.

 

[Aramis]

Does anyone on the Gold Coast know who Tom Lynch is?

Herein lies the heart of the issue.... It's going to take a more creative approach than blindly throwing money at a star player to try and build their brand awareness. This is how the AFL do things though.. knee-jerk, not well thought through and always with a hidden agenda. Really starts from the top down.

Got no problem with Gold Coast being supported financially, they are still in their infancy. It's good for the AFL if they succeed and in turn good for all other 17 clubs.

 

[Aramis]

This isn't any different to what almost every other club does. The only difference is the AFL were talking about it. Ambassador payments and other things of that ilk aren't a secret they're public knowledge as others have said.

All the AFL really said was that Tom Lynch would be a good ambassador for football on the Gold Coast, but they won't pay him for that unless he stays. What exactly is controversial about that? Why pay for an ambassador who'll leave 12 months later?

It can be seen as influencing an outcome before Lynch has made any decision. Its bit dirty, if they just came out and said "Hey we want Lynch to stay at Gold Coast because they are struggling and we need top end talent to be retained up on the Coast" no one would have an issue, because you know, thats the truth of it... its the fact they use these grey methods to influence results instead of just being honest.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Herein lies the heart of the issue.... It's going to take a more creative approach than blindly throwing money at a star player to try and build their brand awareness. This is how the AFL do things though.. knee-jerk, not well thought through and always with a hidden agenda. Really starts from the top down.

Got no problem with Gold Coast being supported financially, they are still in their infancy. It's good for the AFL if they succeed and in turn good for all other 17 clubs.

Agreed.

Also GC are already supported financially by the other clubs.

 

[Aramis]

Agreed.

Also GC are already supported financially by the other clubs.

But they need to be supported, they have pushed a club into one of the hardest places in Australia to run a sporting club. Personally I think the numbers lie and it isn't as good a spot to set one up as the exec's obviously thought but nonetheless here we are and we got to at least try our best to get the club on its own 2 feet.

The idea is this investment will obviously have some form of dividend later down the track.

 

[Kwality]

It may have already been stated but the Tigers worked for 100+ years for any perceived advantages. As for the final being home ground advantage, what's a legitimate alternative that's fair to the people that pay for the whole thing to take place at all, ie, supporters?

Home finals benefit those clubs that play regularly at those grounds. Earning the benefit is why we play home & away.
Being gifted the benefit is good enough on Grand Final day and the major hurdle to any genuine attempt at integrity.
At least with the Grand Final those benefitting are transparent, whereas the FIXture is even more problematic & the 6/6/6 arrangement is not fair by any measure, its handicapping as surely as the Melbourne Cup field is handicapped, travel is also transparent ... bit rich to describe it as corrupt, but lacking integrity it surely is.

Hope you don't think you deserve any leg up because of your 100 year aside.

 

[mick500]

So they had 1.5 week breaks rather than 2 week breaks?

With a trip to Perth thrown in for free. Bonus . Lucky us.

 

[HairyO]

With a trip to Perth thrown in for free. Bonus . Lucky us.

In a game that meant absolutely nothing. And with plenty of time to recover.

Of all the things to bitch about, scheduling is not one of them.

 

[vide0n]

Wasn't really comfortable with that statement

But if he chooses to stay I don't think the extra money would make a world of difference, what other players are going to suck up the cap? Not too many banging down the door at the moment

 

[Ron The Bear]

Honest question, but wasn't there 3rd party deals involved with Dusty as part of the signing, and is part of the $1.1 mil or included in Richmond's cap? Same with the Footy Show appearances.

Could have sworn I heard it on SEN the following morning but they never really expanded on it.

No idea, but since the club preferred him not to make the announcement on The Footy Show, I assume it was arranged outside his contract and it doesn't come under the cap. I can't see McGuire going out of his way to benefit Richmond.

 

[PowerForGood]

Home finals benefit those clubs that play regularly at those grounds. Earning the benefit is why we play home & away.
Being gifted the benefit is good enough on Grand Final day and the major hurdle to any genuine attempt at integrity.
At least with the Grand Final those benefitting are transparent, whereas the FIXture is even more problematic & the 6/6/6 arrangement is not fair by any measure, its handicapping as surely as the Melbourne Cup field is handicapped, travel is also transparent ... bit rich to describe it as corrupt, but lacking integrity it surely is.

Hope you don't think you deserve any leg up because of your 100 year aside.

Richmomd could potentially win a flag this year having played 2 finals against Geelong and Adelaide at home when they would have been playing away in a "fair" competition.

Yet Richmond would still complain that they are being hard done by!

 

[Rotayjay]

I see this thread has turned into a Richmond-Geelong MCG-Kardinia shitfight

 

[Ancient Tiger]

I see this thread has turned into a Richmond-Geelong MCG-Kardinia shitfight

It was never meant to be. However, some on here want to go off topic and think that it is on topic. It's hard to stop the nonsense.

 

[Danger!Selwood]

I made the thread you idiot. I should know what the thread is about. I can handle anything. I deal with life and death on a daily basis. This is nothing to me. You, however, simply refuse to answer questions and you are a flog of the highest order.

Yeah you're complaining about how unfair it is that some clubs get a financial helper, and glossing over every other inequality in the AFL like home teams playing finals at the away teams ground. We can all see it. It's hypocritical that you only have an issue with something that doesn't directly help your club.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

But they need to be supported, they have pushed a club into one of the hardest places in Australia to run a sporting club. Personally I think the numbers lie and it isn't as good a spot to set one up as the exec's obviously thought but nonetheless here we are and we got to at least try our best to get the club on its own 2 feet.

The idea is this investment will obviously have some form of dividend later down the track.

Of course they need to be supported, as does any club that is struggling financially. There is a difference to be given extra funds from the AFL fund allocation and have no issue withe the AFL paying guys like Jonathan Brown and Leigh Matthews good money to go and sell the game on the Gold Coast. However, on the field, they have been given the cream talent in the AFL and the best player in the last 20 years in GAJ. They can not nor should not be given salary cap advantages to other clubs to retain players. They have their own academies to get players from. GC doesn't need to be a success story overnight. They can be a slow burn. Other sides have stuggled for many years before success has come to them. Point in case the bulldogs who had only one one flag in their history until they achieved success in 2016.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Yeah you're complaining about how unfair it is that some clubs get a financial helper, and glossing over every other inequality in the AFL like home teams playing finals at the away teams ground. We can all see it. It's hypocritical that you only have an issue with something that doesn't directly help your club.

It's not the financial helper that is the problem. See the above post.

 

[Aramis]

Of course they need to be supported, as does any club that is struggling financially. There is a difference to be given extra funds from the AFL fund allocation and have no issue withe the AFL paying guys like Jonathan Brown and Leigh Matthews good money to go and sell the game on the Gold Coast. However, on the field, they have been given the cream talent in the AFL and the best player in the last 20 years in GAJ. They can not nor should not be given salary cap advantages to other clubs to retain players. They have their own academies to get players from. GC doesn't need to be a success story overnight. They can be a slow burn. Other sides have stuggled for many years before success has come to them. Point in case the bulldogs who had only one one flag in their history until they achieved success in 2016.

I see your point and agree. Unfortunately player retention (especially top end talent) has to go hand in hand with a solid team or it leads nowhere.
This is a poor attempt at a patch job but the issues will still remain.

 

[Danger!Selwood]

It's not the financial helper that is the problem. See the above post.

What's the issue then? The fact they dangle it before he signs?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

What's the issue then? The fact they dangle it before he signs?

I don't mind financially helping the club. They obviously can't survive themselves without money being handed out to the them. That money is from the TV rights deal AND from the equalisation funds from profitable clubs. That money is to run the club and provide the funds to pay the players. What I don't agree with is using false "jobs" like ambassador payments outside the cap to give them a COLA type advantage. This is even worse than COLA as it only to keep one player. We all know that won't save the club. It is a myopic view that the AFL gets as a knee jerk reaction when they sense that a good player wants to possibly consider leaving their new expansion clubs. How have people like the GC recruiting team kept their jobs all these years when continually given the top talent in the land? How have the board kept their jobs by stuffing up coaching choices? To an outsider, there are more issues there to tackle and correct rather than artificially keeping a single player by paying him more money outside the cap in the guise of an ambassadorial role.

 

[Seeds]

Ehhh?

afl has stated that gws will get home finals at blacktown despite the scg being available.

 

[Bokonon_]

afl has stated that gws will get home finals at blacktown despite the scg being available.

And Spotless is available too. What's your point?