Funny how there's something that these three teams have in common that's not in common with St Kilda, Western Bulldogs, North Melbourne, GWS and Gold Coast
A very minor mathematical point as well but the wider salary cap is increasing at a marginally faster rate than the draftee/rookie/minimum contract amounts, which only increases the point that you're trying to make too - mathematically slightly more money available to the roughly two-thirds of...
Player managers and players are more risk-adverse than you think and even accepting all your points players generally don't turn down guaranteed money that isn't tied to performance requirements or triggers (as years 5 and 6 would be, not year 7).
You're underselling the probability that just...
What we got in a trade for Dunkley was pretty good in relation to the contract he got at Brisbane, but not necessarily so much to the player he was on the field (an incumbent best and fairest winner who got 14 brownlow votes at a finals team).
Smith will be the reverse - whatever draft picks we...
To be honest, if the Angwin/Norman situation happened again 20 years on, today, while the reaction would still be negative one would assume that the outrage would be nowhere near the levels it was in 2004. General society has changed, too.
I think the issue stems from the fact that the AFL wants the illicit drugs policy to mean different things to different people at different times.
It's clear as day that it was introduced as a public relations move in the aftermath of the Angwin/Norman event and the Eagles drugs culture. But...
doggies ftw is entirely correct.
There is a direct correlation between the size of the contract offer for an out-of-contract non-free agent traded player and the worth of the trade picks.
If the contract figures are true, Smith will roughly become a top-50 paid player. That kid of salary...
Confidentiality requirements doesn't prevent a doctor from potentially being in breach of an anti-doping code, that's the point. Michele Ferrari who doped Lance Armstrong can't claim confidentiality as to the reason why he's no longer allowed to be a doctor.
Of course that the players are...
Lot harder to find sponsors willing to help you circumvent the cap and selling the idea that you're more likely to play in a premiership when you're not actually winning games of football in the most recent season.
Right. So the AFL has admitted that it does not apply their own illicit drugs policy in a manner understood by the general public or by SIA itself (as SIA have come out and stated today that they're assessing the allegations), but we're led to believe that they're 100% complying with the WADA...
You don't think the AFL's self-admitted removal of players who may have performance enhancing substances on match day and pretending that they have an injury could be breaching one of those dot points?
The AFL's Anti-Doping code bans:
Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample
Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method
Evading, Refusing or Failing to Submit to Sample Collection by an Athlete
Whereabouts...
The Ollie Henry/Cooper Stephens/Tom Mitchell three-way trade answers both your questions if somewhat confusing because of the three-way-trade and salary dump elements of the trade made it somewhat confusing.
Callum Coleman Jones went a 2nd rounder (north's so Early 1st rounder) + two years of...
If the testing and pulling out of AFL clubs occurs on matchday, it is a breach of the code.
We don't know whether the AFL's own testing and pulling out players on match day or the day before or not, but by definition the AFL's press release is deceptive:
But this release by the AFL is...
This is a really good point that people are missing.
The AFL wants to avoid game-day performance enhancing positive tests, rather than telling players purely from a performance-enhancing point of view they take cocaine at their own risk. They then openly admit it in a press release.
Imagine if...
AFL will probably accept a slightly worse stadium if the Tas government agrees to up their $12 million per year commitment to the team. Which actually, in my view, is the more sensible way for Tasmania to spend its money/
Simply the projected economic benefit of the stadium, purely outside of...
And more likely than not - simply by virtue of the fact that Baz will be paid more than Holmes next year, whatever club each player ends up at - that the second round pick would actually go the other way, and we'd get Holmes + a 2nd round pick for Baz.
I simply don't understand why Geelong...
Yes, but they also would have communicated and briefed the terms of the signed contract with such people involved in Tasmanian politics.
The terms of the signed, binding agreement was a 23,000 seat, roofed stadium at Macquarie Point. That's the specific wording. If the stadium is different to...
You don't think we will be cleverer than this? We'll offer Smith a 5-year deal for 90% of the money that the other clubs are offering him, but only after we can be certain that he has his heart set on leaving up to the point that he gets traded. We played this very game with Dunkley.
There is no practical scenario in which a player the contract offered by another club makes them one of the highest-paid player in the league does not equate to a top draft pick also being traded. This discussion happens every year and people don't seem to understand that fact. People saying...
If in the absence of a new stadium the Tasmanian Government is happy to fund the team to the tune of tens of millions of dollars more per year than their previous $12 million per year commitment, in order to cover for the difference in revenue generation that the team is missing out on without...
The AFL has never, ever, ever tried to claim that they are committed to a team outside of a new stadium. That has been communicated with aboslute clarity right from the beginning:
https://www.afl.com.au/news/917878/full-statement-tasmania-awarded-19th-afl-licence
The blame would be entirely...
Colour me this - how many fans do you think would go to an Auckland AFL game if:
It was an Auckland expansion team vs. a large Melbourne team like Collingwood or Richmond
It was played in a marquee timeslot like a Friday or Saturday night
It was played in a new stadium in Auckland that was...
The thing is, I don't think anyone at all is really discussing what should be the main point - that it's just a bad look (and poor anti-doping integrity) to know that a player may test positive on game day, remove them from games, and lie about the reason why
Certain drugs are banned on...
But then by your definition they did have PED's in their system and therefore broke rules by the fact they theoretically could have benefitted from it. If you're claiming it wasn't intentional, then that's the basis for the 24 to 18 month discount. Obviously it's not the reason why players are...
Whatever the truth was with Josh Thomas and Lachie Keeffe, your example above was literally their version of events. They tested positive for PEDs, got it reduced from 24 to 18 months because it was accepted their ingestion of it was unintentional, and openly stated that it was related to their...
This is a very valid viewpoint, and in good faith.
Reading the main board and a few other clubs' boards there's lots of bad faith going on. Intelligent people deliberately missing the point.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.