Traded Jack Bowes [Traded to Geelong with #7 for F3]

Remove this Banner Ad

FMD. It’s not that tough.

GC got into this mess in the first place by renegotiating Bowes initial deal. Moving around salary.

But now the Cats can’t do it because they won the flag? It’s pure jealousy, nothing else!

this happening at any club is off putting, regardless if its north melbourne or the premier.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The AFL needs to remove the option of front loading and back ending contracts, whilst removing this 95% minimum salary requirement. A trade like this should never happen again.

nah the other clubs needed to be compensated and the administrators sacked and supporters get free foxtel and season tickets for a year
 
i have not said geelong have done anything wrong. get it through your head.

no one is saying the trade is illegal. it is 100% legal

people are just saying it needs to be changed going forward.
Ok I disagree.
 
the contracted player shouldn't just get to demand his team of choice in this situation.

AFL needs to change the rules so if this occurs again the player goes where the suns can get the best deal.
We're not in America. The only way the AFLPA agree to something like this is if the players get a massive pay rise.
 
It is easy now.


When foxtel says why you cancel service, i say, Jack Bowes trade
 
Daniher was a free agent
Signed a deal with Brisbane for 3 years under RFA then the next year they smoothed the deal to 5 years.

The formula the AFL use to decide what the compensation includes an emphasis on how much $ per annum is in the free agency contract.

This amount over 3 years led to the highest compensation Essendon could receive, leading to them not matching the deal and making Brisbane trade for him ala Jeremy Cameron & GWS.

The smoothing of that total amount over now 5 years and not 3 is one of the most blatant forms of tampering you can find.
 
Staggers me that the afl approve this yet the mega super dooper four club trade can’t go through without a future 4th round pick.

Genuine question: Do the AFL have the power to reject a trade on the basis of "fairness"?

My understanding of the rejection of the initial "mega deal" was that it would result in one of the clubs actually breaking the rules of trading (i.e. trade away rather than use a certain number of picks over a certain number of years). I.E. It wasn't rejected based on "fairness".
 
Genuine question: Do the AFL have the power to reject a trade on the basis of "fairness"?

My understanding of the rejection of the initial "mega deal" was that it would result in one of the clubs actually breaking the rules of trading (i.e. trade away rather than use a certain number of picks over a certain number of years). I.E. It wasn't rejected based on "fairness".
Don't let the truth get in the way of a good melt.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

FMD. It’s not that tough.

GC got into this mess in the first place by renegotiating Bowes initial deal. Moving around salary.

But now the Cats can’t do it because they won the flag? It’s pure jealousy, nothing else!
Exactly
 
Good bit of business this by the Cats. I'm just:
A) Filthy that if there was swindling afoot, my club couldn't manage to wet its beak
B) Amazed that a club (GC) would actually do such a deal. *-ended contracts. For experts only.
 
I think if GC didn't volunteer #7, Bowes would have found it in his heart to nominate a club able and willing to take on his salary as-is without the most lopsided trade in history accompanying it.
And 1 club that would have taken that contract on without a sweetener thrown in?
 
Jack Bowes trade is proof it pays to commit crime
 
Daniher was a free agent

Different kind of corruption.

Brisbane gave a bull s**t contract to give Essendon better compensation so they wouldnt match, then afterward gave him the real contract which gave similar money over more years which would have been less compensation.

Swans werent allowed to chsnge the Buddy contract. Nor should any other club given there is compensation involved.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top