Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
Players should be able to nominate a state not a club especially when moving for family reasons. But it wont happen the AFL is too scared of the AFLPA to change anything.
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.
Feel the same way about Danger?Players should be able to nominate a state not a club especially when moving for family reasons. But it wont happen the AFL is too scared of the AFLPA to change anything.
Players should be able to nominate a state not a club especially when moving for family reasons. But it wont happen the AFL is too scared of the AFLPA to change anything.
I think the real problem is you have 2 clubs in WA to chose from - one is a well run organisation and the other (at present) a bit of a basket case with players wanting out. In the real world which one would you chose?I can see it now. Kelly wants to get to West Coast, Geelong don’t like the picks offered. The AFL then offers Geelong a top 5 pick as a concession.
As an aside, maybe players whether returning to Victoria or another state could stop lying? Don’t play a bulls**t ‘homesick’ card but then say ‘I only want to play for that club.’ Why not just say ‘I want to leave Geelong and play for the Eagles at the completion of my contract.’ Why does there have to be some bulls**t, soap opera, sob story attached?
It makes the general population think of AFL players as a bunch of soft, ungrateful sooks that don’t appreciate the fortunate position they are in.
It should apply to the whole of Australia unfortunately most of the youth comes out of Victoria so the Melbourne clubs will be fine
But if the AFL are concerned about player welfare 18 year olds should be allowed to make the choice to live with their family which is far mire important than a 25 year old the right of choice
On SM-G965F using BigFooty.com mobile app
I want the next bargaining agreement changed to ensure players can be traded without their agreement until they hit the number of seasons required for FA eligibility. That'll stop this nominating a specific club nonsense. These entitled whingers want to get paid well and choose their destination without having put in the work to earn it. Kelly is probably the best case I've seen from a human perspective, and even he should shut up and go to Freo if his dream is really going back to Perth.
It should apply to the whole of Australia - could not disagree more, the academys are about game development & dont apply in the heartland States, it does in Q & NSW.
Agree player welfare for the young kids drafted is important but I've seen homesickness strike people I've worked with & its not about age IMHO.
Reality for AFL footy is player agents have a big part in 'homesickness'/go home players & its a tool for them.
Players should be able to nominate a state not a club especially when moving for family reasons. But it wont happen the AFL is too scared of the AFLPA to change anything.
Player X plays for Club A but wants to play for Club B.
Club C, D and E are all nearby.
Club A shops around and find that Club D have the best offer.
Player X has 3 choices -
1) Go to Club D
2) Stay at Club A
3) Retire and get a new job (special condition that can't be on an AFL list for the next 2 seasons).
You know, just like the rest of us players can have wants and needs but ultimately need to weigh up the pros and cons and if they decide not playing is better than playing at another club no worries, go play second div).
I want the next bargaining agreement changed to ensure players can be traded without their agreement until they hit the number of seasons required for FA eligibility. That'll stop this nominating a specific club nonsense. These entitled whingers want to get paid well and choose their destination without having put in the work to earn it. Kelly is probably the best case I've seen from a human perspective, and even he should shut up and go to Freo if his dream is really going back to Perth.
Don’t get me wrong. I think any player who is out of contract has the right to nominate their preferred destination. However, they shouldn’t bullshit and talk about homesickness beforehand. Because if it was solely about homesickness or family wouldn’t you do anything to get back (I.e. play for any club)?I think the real problem is you have 2 clubs in WA to chose from - one is a well run organisation and the other (at present) a bit of a basket case with players wanting out. In the real world which one would you chose?
Playing for a football Club should be the same as any other employment - can you imagine what would happen if an employee (under contract) decided to leave at the end of his contract to go to another place of employment and chooses employer A, and his previous employee said you can only go to employer B and not employer A! It would end up in the Courts. Players are not chattels - at end of contract they should be able to nominate a Club of their choice and the best deal be done by the two Clubs in good faith. Can you imagine if Adelaide had taken this line when Dangerfield wanted to leave but only wanted to go to Geelong, the same with Ablett when he left Gold Coast. A bit of double standards here by the sounds of it!
So stuff basic human rights and restraint of trade laws. As long as a footy club is better off lets forget about the laws of the land that apply to everyone else.
We are talking about football mate. Not life or death. Not intellectual property rights with millions of dollars involved.
A game played for entertainment. ENTERTAINMENT........FUN!
Youre mixing up grass roots footy with professional sport
Football is a past time its also a full time occupation
Players welfare comes before anything
To suggest it doesn't affect 18 years olds having to move out of home and leave family and friends at that age is ridiculous
These 18 years need to be given the option whether they take it or not is up to them, some will some wont
Yes not ideal for the comp, bad luck, players welfare comes first especially teenagers
No I'm comparing the AFL the entertainment business to actual serious company's with employment contracts that restrict senior executives or technical staff moving to a direct competitor with valuable IP gained from their current employer.
Some on here are suggesting the league restrict a football players rights to move to an employer of choice because of a few spots in a draft.
A few spots in a draft that may or may not mean anything at all. In a game played for entertainment.
This is a sport we are talking about here. A sport played for fun and entertainment. People seem to be forgetting this!
I'm not underestimating that some kids will be leaving Mums clutches for the first time. Anthony Rocca missed his Mums cooking way back (the mid 90s) .. drafting kids that have been to boarding school might be more fool proof.
I've long held clubs should be forced to select local kids first, great theory, bit harder to implement.
No I'm comparing the AFL the entertainment business to actual serious company's with employment contracts that restrict senior executives or technical staff moving to a direct competitor with valuable IP gained from their current employer.
Some on here are suggesting the league restrict a football players rights to move to an employer of choice because of a few spots in a draft.
A few spots in a draft that may or may not mean anything at all. In a game played for entertainment.
This is a sport we are talking about here. A sport played for fun and entertainment. People seem to be forgetting this!
Don’t get me wrong. I think any player who is out of contract has the right to nominate their preferred destination. However, they shouldn’t bulls**t and talk about homesickness beforehand. Because if it was solely about homesickness or family wouldn’t you do anything to get back (I.e. play for any club)?
You have ludicrous situations where Dayne Beams and Bradley Hill have played the homesickness card twice. Going to Brisbane and Fremantle respectively for themselves and then back to Victoria for their wives/partners. Maybe they do it because lying is culturally endemic to the AFL but I don’t like players talking about homesickness or that they need to get back to/for family reasons but then picking and choosing their clubs. It also throws their family members under the bus - just own your decision.
Basic human rights? Don't be so melodramatic. A workplace is allowed to send people to a specific location for work. It isn't a restraint of trade as players are perfectly able to play in the VFL, SANFL or WAFL if they feel so strongly about playing in a specific location. In any case I'm suggesting they shouldn't be allowed to choose a particular team, rather than location. No laws are broken, otherwise every North American sports league would have been sued for allowing players to be traded without their agreement.So stuff basic human rights and restraint of trade laws. As long as a footy club is better off lets forget about the laws of the land that apply to everyone else.
We are talking about football mate. Not life or death. Not intellectual property rights with millions of dollars involved.
This is a completely invalid comparison. Different clubs aren't analogous to different companies, they're all franchises of the same organisation. It's no different to a company with offices in multiple locations telling an employee which one to work at until they've served a certain number of years. In the real world if you refuse to move when your job moves, you get sacked and have to look for another company (or in this case, another football league).Playing for a football Club should be the same as any other employment - can you imagine what would happen if an employee (under contract) decided to leave at the end of his contract to go to another place of employment and chooses employer A, and his previous employee said you can only go to employer B and not employer A! It would end up in the Courts. Players are not chattels - at end of contract they should be able to nominate a Club of their choice and the best deal be done by the two Clubs in good faith. Can you imagine if Adelaide had taken this line when Dangerfield wanted to leave but only wanted to go to Geelong, the same with Ablett when he left Gold Coast. A bit of double standards here by the sounds of it!
Who said it doesn't affect them? Of course it affects them. But that's the price of earning great money to play a game. If they really haven't been weaned from mummy's breast yet, they can get a real job and play in the state league. Being an AFL player is a well-paid privilege, not a right.To suggest it doesn't affect 18 years olds having to move out of home and leave family and friends at that age is ridiculous