Opinion 2021 Non-Crows AFL 3: Things Fall Apart!

[Sanders]

Does the fact Greenwood was contracted change anything? I'm not sure on the finer details of that one.
I suppose he doesn't have to agree knowing that he'd still get his coin regardless, which reinforces how dumb GC have been here.

he has a right to contractual payment. He doesn’t have a right to an AFL list spot.

they’re still gonna pay him, they just don’t need to keep on their list or play him

 

[Vader]

Here's the relevant section from the 2017-22 AFL/AFLPA CBA:

18. No Unjust Enrichment
Where an AFL Club employs a Player whose name has been delisted from the List of another AFL Club and where the terms of employment of such Player provide that the average of all payments which the Player would be entitled to earn over the whole of the period of the new contract is:
(a) the same or greater during the balance of the years in which the Player was delisted by his previous AFL Club or the year following his delisting (if the provisions of items 17(a)(iii) and 17(a)(iv) of this Schedule C apply), no termination payment shall be payable; or
(b) less during the balance of the years in which the Player was delisted by his previous AFL Club or the year following his delisting, the termination payment payable shall be reduced by the average payments which the Player would be entitled to earn under his new contract for the balance of the years in which the Player was delisted and the year following his delisting (if the provisions of items 17(a)(iii) and 17(a)(iv) of this Schedule C apply).
Accordingly:
(i) any amount payable by an AFL Club under items 17(a)(iii) and 17(a)(iv) of this Schedule C shall not be payable until 31 March in the year following that in which the Player’s name was deleted from the relevant AFL Club’s List;
(ii) any payment by an AFL Club of any amount purportedly in accordance with items 17(a)(iii) and 17(a)(iv) of this Schedule C shall be strictly without prejudice to the rights of the AFL Club under this item 18;
(iii) an AFL Club shall be entitled to be repaid any amount paid to a Player in excess of a Player’s actual entitlement; and
(iv) where a Player fails, refuses or neglects to repay any amount due to his former AFL Club in accordance with this item, within 7 days of a written demand for such payment, the AFL Club which has re-employed the Player shall pay the amount due to the former AFL Club and the Player’s entitlement to payments under his new contract shall be reduced accordingly.

 

[Vader]

The trigger clause is normally in the final Contract year (2022) .....so no-one can know if he will hit the trigger requirements, thus they surely couldn't be a responsibility of GC

Depends... It could be based on performance in the final year, but often it's the number of games played across the contract period. If he's already played enough games in years 1-3...

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Zorko this morning also indicating Jones wouldn't be the last player to retire in preference to having the jab

 

[Mr_Moogle]

View attachment 1281061

Zorko this morning also indicating Jones wouldn't be the last player to retire in preference to having the jab

 

[DJ75]

How about the AFL just get rid of the rookie list altogether? It's clearly not for rookies anymore, so why bother?

 

[skam85]

View attachment 1281061

Zorko this morning also indicating Jones wouldn't be the last player to retire in preference to having the jab

Elite banter if the new Roo is Greenwood
5D chess by the Suns

 

[chrisso crow]

How about the AFL just get rid of the rookie list altogether? It's clearly not for rookies anymore, so why bother?

Or just rename it as a supplementary list.

Is the only difference between the 'rookie' and main list the maximum number of years a player can spend on the list?

 

[Scorpus]

Bit of a slap in the face to Hugh to think he wouldn't attract interest of other clubs and amazing levels of hubris from the Suns.

They couldn't think of any other players that wouldn't attract interest, instead choosing a best 22 player? He's not even the least desirable former Crow on their list.

Gold Coast must have thought delisting a younger player would attract more interest.

If you look at their senior list a lot of their younger guys you probably wouldn't want to put back into the draft. They didn't have an obvious 4th round selection to ditch.

But there were still other options. Surely you'd delist a guy like Josh Corbett instead, or maybe a Nick Holman, Darcy Macpherson, etc.

 

[DJ75]

Elite banter if the new Roo is Greenwood
5D chess by the Suns

What does the Church say about the vaccine?

 

[GROTTO]

What does the Church say about the vaccine?

No major religion in Australia has expressly told its followers to forgo vaccination against COVID-19. In fact, many faith leaders have played a key role in combating vaccine misinformation in their communities.

Is there likely to be a religious exemption for the COVID-19 vaccine?

No major religions in Australia expressly prohibit vaccination, but that doesn’t mean religion doesn’t inform some people’s decision on whether to get a COVID-19 jab.

www.abc.net.au

 

[cmndstab]

Bit of a slap in the face to Hugh to think he wouldn't attract interest of other clubs and amazing levels of hubris from the Suns.

They couldn't think of any other players that wouldn't attract interest, instead choosing a best 22 player? He's not even the least desirable former Crow on their list.

This is the thing. They specifically chose Greenwood because they figured nobody else would take him. Presumably they even told him this, since I can't imagine the whole delisting thing happened without Greenwood (or his management) asking "why me and not anyone else?"

I'm fairly confident that Greenwood would even have gone back to GC and said "hey, North are offering me this much money and this many years to move. Do you have a counteroffer?"

If your plan is to get around list turnover requirements by abusing the system (trading out all your decent picks and then delisting three players with the explicit purpose of "drafting" them again), and you explicitly choose someone because you don't think anyone else will want them, and then when someone else does want them you decline to match the offer... how can this be on anyone but the Suns management team? Is Greenwood supposed to just ignore the significantly better deal on the table for the sake of loyalty? It's not like clubs show that kind of loyalty to their players.

 

[Vader]

This is the thing. They specifically chose Greenwood because they figured nobody else would take him. Presumably they even told him this, since I can't imagine the whole delisting thing happened without Greenwood (or his management) asking "why me and not anyone else?"

I'm fairly confident that Greenwood would even have gone back to GC and said "hey, North are offering me this much money and this many years to move. Do you have a counteroffer?"

If your plan is to get around list turnover requirements by abusing the system (trading out all your decent picks and then delisting three players with the explicit purpose of "drafting" them again), and you explicitly choose someone because you don't think anyone else will want them, and then when someone else does want them you decline to match the offer... how can this be on anyone but the Suns management team? Is Greenwood supposed to just ignore the significantly better deal on the table for the sake of loyalty? It's not like clubs show that kind of loyalty to their players.

This is exactly what happened, according to this article:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-16/north-melbourne-hugh-greenwood-gold-coast-suns-afl/100623450

Short version:
David Noble's wife noticed that Greenwood had been cut, and drew Noble's attention to it. North then put together a deal, and made their offer to Greenwood. Greenwood took it to GC, who said they couldn't match it - and wished him all the best.

 

[GROTTO]

This is exactly what happened, according to this article:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-16/north-melbourne-hugh-greenwood-gold-coast-suns-afl/100623450

Short version:
David Noble's wife noticed that Greenwood had been cut, and drew Noble's attention to it. North then put together a deal, and made their offer to Greenwood. Greenwood took it to GC, who said they couldn't match it - and wished him all the best.

If the Suns really wanted to keep Greenwood they could have matched the offer and he would have stayed?

The irony of a decent player wanting to stay at the Suns and they decide in the end to let him go?

 

[DJ75]

If the Suns really wanted to keep Greenwood they could have matched the offer and he would have stayed?

The irony of a decent player wanting to stay at the Suns and they decide in the end to let him go?

Basically, it was
GC: "No-one will want you so we are going to use you to screw around with draft picks"

*Someone wants him*

Greenwood: "Yeh North want me. For more years. On more money. So, do YOU want me?"

GC: "Oh crap"

 

[Truck25]

No major religion in Australia has expressly told its followers to forgo vaccination against COVID-19. In fact, many faith leaders have played a key role in combating vaccine misinformation in their communities.

Is there likely to be a religious exemption for the COVID-19 vaccine?

No major religions in Australia expressly prohibit vaccination, but that doesn’t mean religion doesn’t inform some people’s decision on whether to get a COVID-19 jab.

www.abc.net.au

And yet I know many hand waving, tongue speaking, spirit filled Christians are also Anti-vaxxers that the connection is undeniable. If the pastor say's it, there is no question you must believe to prove your faith. I still keep in touch with quite a few from my younger days looking for an answer to the question. Still looking.

 

[skam85]

Gold Coast must have thought delisting a younger player would attract more interest.

If you look at their senior list a lot of their younger guys you probably wouldn't want to put back into the draft. They didn't have an obvious 4th round selection to ditch.

But there were still other options. Surely you'd delist a guy like Josh Corbett instead, or maybe a Nick Holman, Darcy Macpherson, etc.

Every time I see him on the field I'm shocked that Nick Holman is still on an AFL list.

 

[Vader]

If the Suns really wanted to keep Greenwood they could have matched the offer and he would have stayed?

The irony of a decent player wanting to stay at the Suns and they decide in the end to let him go?

The whole point of delisting 3 contracted players was because they already have a full roster. The implication of this is that their salary cap is already fully programmed for 2022, and they didn't/don't have room to match North's offer.

 

[Thetrader15]

The whole point of delisting 3 contracted players was because they already have a full roster. The implication of this is that their salary cap is already fully programmed for 2022, and they didn't/don't have room to match North's offer.

The irony of the the academy concessions the AFL gave to improve them on field has cost them one of their best players.

Not to mention they gave away pick 19 for nothing this year and traded pick 11 in 2020 for pick 27 in 2019 (Sharp).

 

[Vader]

I suspect there would be a lot of clubs which would have difficulty matching an offer made to one of their players, at this late date. Clubs generally keep 1-2 uncontracted players in reserve at trade time, allowing them to delist them (gaining the required salary cap space) if they need to make or match an offer - but those players are all now contracted or delisted and salary caps are programmed.

Of course, few clubs would be stupid enough to delist a player like Greenwood while still contracted...

 

[Deaneus!]

what are they supposed to say? Look at how ridiculous Sydney appeared throwing their toys out of the pram.

Greenwood went back to GC, they upped their offer but not to the same level as North.

they left themselves open, and unfortunately it backfired.

no benefit in throwing a tantrum for the crowds now

I’d have loved to be in that meeting… Norf did WHAT?

What does the Church say about the vaccine?

“JABS FOR JESUS”

 

[1970crow]

No doubt his initial Tweet was instructed by the SUNS PR team.


The bloke was shafted, and it bit the Suns in the arse.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

How was he shafted, he was guaranteed to be drafted back in same terms plus the opportunity to snare a better deal and not have the hassle of the new club having to negotiate a trade.

 

[1970crow]

what are they supposed to say? Look at how ridiculous Sydney appeared throwing their toys out of the pram.

Greenwood went back to GC, they upped their offer but not to the same level as North.

they left themselves open, and unfortunately it backfired.

no benefit in throwing a tantrum for the crowds now

as bad as their LM is, you’d think the players selected for this process were the ones that they were least worried about losing.

 

[Sanders]

as bad as their LM is, you’d think the players selected for this process were the ones that they were least worried about losing.

Maybe they thought Hugh wouldn’t be the type too

anyhoo, I see Noble said that as Hugh was late coming to football he had less miles on the clock and they expected to him to have more longevity than his age suggests.

whereas we wouldn’t give him more than a 2 year contract back when he was 26/27

 

[Peter Doherty]

“JABS FOR JESUS”

Yeah, but what do they say about the vaccines?