Was Gil out of line? Does he know what he's doing?

[iBeng]

Helps to see the context:
Wilson asked the league boss on 3AW if he’d be disappointed if Coniglio left the expansion club. “Yeah, I would,” McLachlan said. “Certainly my advice is that it’s not a given (that he’ll leave).

“I think he’s a star player and I know he’s a leader of the club. I know him a bit personally, I think he’s a fabulous person. I’ll be explicit — I’d love him to stay up there.”

On the News website.

That actually makes it worse you know.

Wait how does it make it worse? That he knows him "a bit" personally? Hes saying he would love for him to stay up there, and your interpreting that as a threat to GWS that they'll get sanctions for not doing their best to retain him.

Hell, you can interpret anything you want out of just about anything said. Youre here claiming he over stepped the line for ANSWERING A QUESTION.

 

[iBeng]

If anything this all stinks of Victorian fans getting their knickers in a knot because they think the AFL Boss is going to stop them raiding elite talent from North of the border by making oddly unspecific threats to said Northern clubs.

Lots of stretching the dots in this thread.

 

[La Vache]

What do you expect matey? The AFL all but frog-marched Franklin through the front doors at Blacktown until Sydney blew their doors off. They then proceeded to chuck a big old wobbly and issue a that hilarious no-trade edict.

 

[Bostonian]

So his options were:

Refuse to answer the question

Answer the question how he did

Or answer with "Thats a decision for Cog and nothing for me to be involved in".

I guarantee any 3 of those answers would result in a thread calling for his head and outrage of his opinion.

Bingo. How easy was that.

The only answer that isn't the way to go is the one he chose.

Nobody would have cared less if he's not answered the question or said it's not his business, because we all know it's not.

 

[10571z]

Horrible look. He should say “I’d love our expansion clubs to do well but I have no opinion on player movements”

 

[iBeng]

Bingo. How easy was that.

The only answer that isn't the way to go is the one he chose.

Nobody would have cared less if he's not answered the question or said it's not his business, because we all know it's not.

People would have elaborated that out as him "keeping quiet" about the AFLs intent to punish whatever club gets Cog, and punish GWS for not doing more to keep him. We know how this works, people will find a way to complain regardless of the statement.

 

[Bostonian]

People would have elaborated that out as him "keeping quiet" about the AFLs intent to punish whatever club gets Cog, and punish GWS for not doing more to keep him. We know how this works, people will find a way to complain regardless of the statement.

Since when have fans wanted the CEO to be commenting on player movement?

Never from my experience.

We want them no where near any kind of decision or influence to get any single player to a club.

 

[Jakksynn]

If you’re outraged by this you’re being silly. Gil is allowed an opinion. It’s not going to change Coniglios decision either way.

 

[legend166]

I mean, the AFL has history on this. They've been getting revenge on us for half a decade now after we stopped Franklin going to GWS. Fitzpatrick called up our CEO and let loose a massive tirade because we had the audacity to obtain a player completely within the rules given to us by the AFL.

It's interesting seeing the media reactions both ways. No one cared at that time because Franklin going to Sydney and we were the most hated club for a few years. Now it's possibly to the detriment of a Melbourne club, well there you go.

Anyway, Gilligan is a dummy. Let me write what he should have said for him - "Look, it's not for me as the AFL CEO to be commenting on individual player movements. Sure, there's something we all like about players staying as one club people, but they also have a right to move clubs using the rules in place, and as long as both player and club are following those rules it shouldn't matter. We have equalisation measures in place which will ensure no club gets all the talent."

If he wants to actually change things, he has the power to put in actual beneficially rules like allowing clubs to go over the cap (to a degree) to resign players they drafted, or a proper retention allowance for players from our of state. Instead he just acts like a goose in the media.

 

[Buzz Hawk]

No question, he's a campaigner.

 

[The Warlord]

Are you for real?
What version of worse concerns you now you know the context of his comments.

Well, I knew the context of his comments when I made my original posts on this thread but you clearly didn't. So I was replying to you in that sense.

The key thing is that he talks about how how has personal relationship to Coniglio and how he'd "love for him to stay up there".

As I said, if we just accept that the AFL is a business that's about generating revenue, it is fine.

If there was a star performer in a company that was in Marketing and Business Strategy were making a play to get them to transfer over, and the CEO knew that Marketing was struggling and would feel the loss of the star performer, then the CEO is perfectly within their rights to say "Hey, Coniglio, stick with Marketing, its what we at McLachlan Enterprises think is best"

But the AFL is NOT a private company concerned only with generating revenue.

It is the governing body of a sporting competition and in this case Marketing (GWS) and Business Strategy (Carlton) are competing in a football competition that the AFL is meant to ensure is fair to all those competing.

So the CEO of the organisation that decides what is fair has openly gone out and said he wants to see one team have the advantage of Coniglio's services and not the other.

That's straight up unprofessional bias.

I mean, we KNOW the AFL wants GWS/GC (and other TV market franchises) to do well, but he is an absolute goose for coming out and saying it in such a specific instance like this.

 

[The Warlord]

So his options were:

Refuse to answer the question

Answer the question how he did

Or answer with "Thats a decision for Cog and nothing for me to be involved in".

I guarantee any 3 of those answers would result in a thread calling for his head and outrage of his opinion.

You'd be wildy wrong, if he said that third one I would have been like "Oh my God, he actually said the sensible and responsible thing"

 

[The Warlord]

If you’re outraged by this you’re being silly. Gil is allowed an opinion. It’s not going to change Coniglios decision either way.

Actually, when you take up certain roles, you're not allowed an opinion on specific issues.

This is one of them.

 

[The Warlord]

I mean, the AFL has history on this. They've been getting revenge on us for half a decade now after we stopped Franklin going to GWS. Fitzpatrick called up our CEO and let loose a massive tirade because we had the audacity to obtain a player completely within the rules given to us by the AFL.

It's interesting seeing the media reactions both ways. No one cared at that time because Franklin going to Sydney and we were the most hated club for a few years. Now it's possibly to the detriment of a Melbourne club, well there you go.

Anyway, Gilligan is a dummy. Let me write what he should have said for him - "Look, it's not for me as the AFL CEO to be commenting on individual player movements. Sure, there's something we all like about players staying as one club people, but they also have a right to move clubs using the rules in place, and as long as both player and club are following those rules it shouldn't matter. We have equalisation measures in place which will ensure no club gets all the talent."

If he wants to actually change things, he has the power to put in actual beneficially rules like allowing clubs to go over the cap (to a degree) to resign players they drafted, or a proper retention allowance for players from our of state. Instead he just acts like a goose in the media.

Great post.

One thing that hasn't been commented on much that came out of North parting ways with Scott is that Brad went to the AFL and got them to introduce the "bank the salary cap deficit" rule with his big Josh Kelly/Gaff/Dusty raid in mind.

Obviously it failed at the crucial stage, but it worked in that he got the AFL to change the rules to advantage his plan. The Saints and Dogs have used it too now as well.

Its just mind boggling stuff.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Was that taken before or after he took Chitty Chitty Bang Bang for a spin? To answer the topic, Gil shouldn't have an opinion externally on these matters. The game is already visibly compromised as it is.

He's like the sissy version of your avatar. Weaky grinders.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Imagine the outrage if Gil said he really hoped Tin Kelly re-signed with Geelong ?

This Interstate Alliance stuff supporting Gil is nonsense

 

[juss]

He's driven by numbers and revenue. He doesn't care for anything else, that's the answer.

 

[IKnowtheDog]

Optics

Imagine the outrage if Gil said he really hoped Tin Kelly re-signed with Geelong ?

This Interstate Alliance stuff supporting Gil is nonsense

exactly, in certain football matters Gil forgets about the optics.

 

[The Warlord]

Imagine the outrage if Gil said he really hoped Tin Kelly re-signed with Geelong ?

This Interstate Alliance stuff supporting Gil is nonsense

Imagine if he'd said he hoped Josh Kelly went to North because that would show there was still some romance in the game, going to his dads club.

 

[iBeng]

He's driven by numbers and revenue. He doesn't care for anything else, that's the answer.

I mean, its his job, right?

 

[juss]

I mean, its his job, right?

One part of it yes, but there's a lot more to a CEO, especially in the unique business of the AFL.

 

[The Warlord]

I mean, its his job, right?

https://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/Files/Laws-of-the-game-charter.pdf

Keen for you to refer to the bit where it says:

"And the Chief Executive Officer shall make public comment on where players should ply their trade in order to maximise revenues"

 

[captain blood 17]

He's like the sissy version of your avatar. Weaky grinders.

I should give you a smile based on that remark!!!! By order of Gill Shelby!!!

 

[iBeng]

https://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/Files/Laws-of-the-game-charter.pdf

Keen for you to refer to the bit where it says:

"And the Chief Executive Officer shall make public comment on where players should ply their trade in order to maximise revenues"

So when are you starting the petition to get him hung and quartered again for HAVING AN OPINION?

One part of it yes, but there's a lot more to a CEO, especially in the unique business of the AFL.

I still do get the issue, he was ASKED A QUESTION, he ANSWERED IT HONESTLY and we are all meant to be calling for his head? For the good of the damn game, a player like Coniglio SHOULD be a one club one career player, but everyone here is now completely opposite to that.

It used to be people getting ANGRY when players left for more coin, and now we are meant to be ANGRY that the CEO OF THE BLOODY LEAGUE thinks being a one club player is better than chasing money?

What the hell do you people want, a strawman to burn or just something to yell at besides the sky?

 

[hilly]

He is allowed an opinion. It isn't proper for him to express that opinion in this instance.