Shane Heard
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 11, 2018
- 10,269
- 17,268
- AFL Club
- Essendon
He might need that long to play in a winning final.
Nah...12 months minimum
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He might need that long to play in a winning final.
Of course Carlton never cheated the salary cap.No surprises here, they have been cheating and rorting the system for over 100 years.
Linda I'd spend more time looking at my own club if I were you. And id be asking a question like "why are our players repeatedly failing drug tests?"Quick version : The AFL allowed Essendon to deliver big payments outside the salary cap in the form of legal settlements probably giving them a massive advantage over other clubs still to this day.
Long version: Essendon have done absolutely nothing wrong as they simply followed the AFL's directives. This is not the 'supplements saga', this is more like COLA. It was AFL, whether intentionally or incompetently, compromising the competition again.
The reason it's interesting to bring it up now is that generally people didn't understand the possible implications at the time and still don't. They didn't seem to get that it could allow Essendon to retain (almost) all of its gun players and young talent while raiding genuine talent elsewhere for a number of years. And that is what we are starting to really see now - seemingly no pressure to retain wanted (from outside) players and the ability to go after multiple big signings in consecutive years.
Essentially Essendon was allowed to make discretionary payments to players outside the cap who they were simultaneously trying to keep contracted at the club and negotiating salaries with, with the only oversight being that Essendon had to pay 'market value'. This means they couldn't take the absolute piss with the cap, but it did mean that they could easily free up extra cash for each player and allow further room to maneuver with front-loaded and back-loaded contracts. It reduced the likelihood of paying overs for required players, helping list management. This means the effects were always going to last for many years after the payments.
Collingwood would love to pay Tom Lynch a 3 million dollar settlement if he stubbed his toe while meeting Bucks, pay him a bit less on his contract than otherwise and use the spare cash to help fend off any future plays for Stephenson. A settlement is just a payment from a club to a player outside the cap. It's ridiculous that essentially only Jake Niall in the media realised this was a problem at the time (but even he couldn't see how inadequate the 'fix' was) and other clubs have screwed up badly by not pushing back on the AFL.
Lastly, someone will post that these were just insurance payments - this is a lie. Insurance covered SOME of the payment amounts, but Essendon was paying discretionary amounts to different players from its own pocket.
Just a heads up. OP is not a Collingwood supporter.Linda I'd spend more time looking at my own club if I were you. And id be asking a question like "why are our players repeatedly failing drug tests?"
Linda I'd spend more time looking at my own club if I were you. And id be asking a question like "why are our players repeatedly failing drug tests?"
Daniher as well. At the time I remember how small his contract seemed (in the context of boyd $1 million)
Just a heads up. OP is not a Collingwood supporter.
Without AFL intervention the club would have folded. The were allowed to make payments which should have come under salary cap.
It's not really to do with the top-up players.
There was no easy answer as to what they could have done about the situation, short of requiring that no current Essendon player could negotiate a settlement. That would've caused a likely exodus - but that shows you why the whole thing was inherently compromised and also that the idea that compensation/contract negotiations were completely separate just doesn't make any sense. They were intrinsically linked.
Richmond,the only fair club left.
Without AFL intervention the club would have folded. The were allowed to make payments which should have come under salary cap.
Literally they're in the finals and present a real hurdle. Every club still in it cares a fair bit about the Tigers.Literally no one cares apart from other tigers supporters.
Literally they're in the finals and present a real hurdle. Every club still in it cares a fair bit about the Tigers.
No, they could have folded.
You just pointlessly trolling another thread? I get it you've had an awful year. It's a test of character. Some pass and some dont.In a tin foil thread about salary cap cheating? Yeah ok mate. Why are you here anyway? Have you been banned from the trades board?
You just pointlessly trolling another thread? I get it you've had an awful year. It's a test of character. Some pass and some dont.
No surprises here, they have been cheating and rorting the system for over 100 years.
No surprises here, they have been cheating and rorting the system for over 100 years.
How about the rort that James Hird's 1 year banned was completely paid by the AFL? Absolute bull if you ask me.