AFL corruption yet again

[PieLebo87]

Its not equal and fair though.

The footy states def have more opportunities outside of footy for players than those in non footy states.

The pies wouldnt def have more than most clubs due to the Eddie influence.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

I'm sorry but the Eddie influence isn't any bigger than some other clubs have. It's definitely the most publicised because of Eddie's media personality/Collingwood's exposure, but I've no doubt there are others out there who have equal to, if not more influence. Pratt/Carlton is one example with Judd.

 

[Colonial]

and any advantage to a Vic club justifies all the advantages non-Vic clubs get....Right?

Absolutely.
Good to see you have seen the light.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[Bokonon_]

That's true, but doesn't mean it's fair when in the process, the AFL can potentially hinder your chances of winning a Premiership in that transaction.

Not saying Collingwood would win the flag with Lynch but you can bet their chances would increase dramatically.

That is different to the AFL opting to give a priority pick or cash for off field endeavours which has an equal repercussion on all other 17 clubs.

They simply cannot try and manipulate direct on-field/trade transactions between two clubs.

Fair enough with that definition of intervention directly in a trade I agree.

 

[Colonial]

I'm sorry but the Eddie influence isn't any bigger than some other clubs have. It's definitely the most publicised because of Eddie's media personality/Collingwood's exposure, but there's no doubt their are others out there who have equal to, if not more influence. Pratt/Carlton is one example with Judd.

It may not be compared to other footy states.

But being based in a footy state does open up opportunities not available in other states.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[Hawk Dork]

If they think he is ambassador worthy state a figure and pay him where ever he goes or STFU the dirty cheating bastards

 

[telsor]

Absolutely.
Good to see you have seen the light.

Glad to see you recognise the ridiculousness of your position.

 

[Colonial]

Glad to see you recognise the ridiculousness of your position.

That there are advanatages across the board and it all evens out in the end?
Not ridiculous at all.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[PieLebo87]

It may not be compared to other footy states.

But being based in a footy state does open up opportunities not available in other states.

You aren't saying anything wrong, but I just have to look at an Adelaide and WCE to disagree with the notion that you can still be one of the most successful/stable clubs in this competition outside of Victoria.

*Agree though that WA & SA are much more footy states than QLD & NSW*

 

[Colonial]

You aren't saying anything wrong, but I just have to look at an Adelaide and WCE to disagree with the notion that you can still be one of the most successful/stable clubs in this competition outside of Victoria.

*Agree though that WA & SA are much more footy states than QLD & NSW*

Which is what i mean by footy states.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[sprockets]

Home finals benefit those clubs that play regularly at those grounds. Earning the benefit is why we play home & away.
Being gifted the benefit is good enough on Grand Final day and the major hurdle to any genuine attempt at integrity.
At least with the Grand Final those benefitting are transparent, whereas the FIXture is even more problematic & the 6/6/6 arrangement is not fair by any measure, its handicapping as surely as the Melbourne Cup field is handicapped, travel is also transparent ... bit rich to describe it as corrupt, but lacking integrity it surely is.

Hope you don't think you deserve any leg up because of your 100 year aside.

I never said we deserve a leg up. The fact is that Geelong play and train (4/5 times a week?) on their home ground and also play at the MCG fairly regularly, whereas we only play on ours and only once a year at SS, if that. Sure it's a slight advantage for us to play at home but playing at SS is too great an advantage, especially considering that just one less point in their drawn game would mean we'd finish ahead of them. The rules state that the side above on the ladder gets a home State final (not advantage), that's all.

Richmomd could potentially win a flag this year having played 2 finals against Geelong and Adelaide at home when they would have been playing away in a "fair" competition.

Yet Richmond would still complain that they are being hard done by!

Where are we complaining about being hard done by?

As I asked, what's a fair (to everyone) alternative?

 

[PowerForGood]

I never said we deserve a leg up. The fact is that Geelong play and train (4/5 times a week?) on their home ground and also play at the MCG fairly regularly, whereas we only play on ours and only once a year at SS, if that. Sure it's a slight advantage for us to play at home but playing at SS is too great an advantage, especially considering that just one less point in their drawn game would mean we'd finish ahead of them. The rules state that the side above on the ladder gets a home State final (not advantage), that's all.


Where are we complaining about being hard done by?

As I asked, what's a fair (to everyone) alternative?

You didn't finish ahead of Geelong, getting close only counts in horseshoes and atomic bombs.

How many times you play at an opponent's home ground is irrelevant to "fairness", esp if you are discussing this with a non-Victorian team.

The fair alternative is to award each game on its merits, ahead of financial interests and deals that specifically favour 9 of the 18 clubs.

 

[Gavin Excell]

You didn't finish ahead of Geelong, getting close only counts in horseshoes and atomic bombs.

How many times you play at an opponent's home ground is irrelevant to "fairness", esp if you are discussing this with a non-Victorian team.

The fair alternative is to award each game on its merits, ahead of financial interests and deals that specifically favour 9 of the 18 clubs.

Absurd

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Dyson Heppel is an "ambassador"

 

[StevenwellerHFC]

AFL gets more pathetic everyday.

 

[sprockets]

You didn't finish ahead of Geelong, getting close only counts in horseshoes and atomic bombs.

How many times you play at an opponent's home ground is irrelevant to "fairness", esp if you are discussing this with a non-Victorian team.

The fair alternative is to award each game on its merits, ahead of financial interests and deals that specifically favour 9 of the 18 clubs.

Wrong answer. The system dictates that the side that finishes above gets a home State final. What's more 'fair' about it being at the Cattery compared with the MCG?

 

[BK Eaglesfan]

Nice of Fox to make this a story, which Robbo has now jumped all over. McLachlan was specifically asked if the AFL was concerned about Lynch leaving Gold Coast and whether they would look at an ambassador role to incentivise him to stay. Given the question I thought he did a pretty good job of dead batting it without saying outright no, which would have people up in arms if it then happened down the track.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Rules on the run to benefit the AFL bottom line is a farce.
Rules need to be consistent for all.
Not just for teams who cannot manage their operation and create an environment that encourages players to want to stay.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

“Are we worried? He’s shown great loyalty and he’s a great player,” McLachlan said.

They're so corrupt they don't even understand that the above quote is a complete conflict of interest. The AFL shouldn't have any concerns about any players staying or moving to any club. It's an absolute disgrace.

They did the same thing with Buddy, saying they'd pay him as an ambassador to go to GWS. Then they stop other clubs having players with 3rd party deals (Cotton On were going to pay Ablett if he stayed at Geelong from memory which they AFL knocked on the head).

They are circumventing their own salary cap, such a laughable farce of an organisation.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Ill have this argument every year you get additional assistance and people refuse to accept that GWS and Gold Coast are newly established teams needing support.

Support is one thing but it should be within the parameters of the competition. Extra payments outside the salary cap is ludicrous just as getting extra home games or extra draft picks would be.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Next up you'll be telling me diverging crazy like Collingwood offering fat Footy Show contacts to players who can barely string two words together that strangely line up with their playing contracts!

Of course I wouldn't believe you.

Oh come on, everyone knows it was Travis Clokes dream to be a Channel 9 newsreader ever since he was a boy. Footy was just a means to that end.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/buddy-must-earn-pay-as-ambassador-20130720-2qbat.html

Its a whole lot of smoke and shadows under the window stuff.

Of course AD was lying when he said Buddy would have to earn it when he went to GWS. They would have happily thrown even more money his way.

It all changed when he chose the Swans.

Yep then Fitzpatrick threw a tanty at Colless and barred the Swans from trading.

 

[Farm Boy]

The AFL want to allow Gold Coast to pay Tom Lynch as an ambassador to keep him from leaving.

Why can't other teams get that perk?

I think it is a disgrace.

It is only fair if all other sides are afforded this luxury.

The league isn't even. No level playing ground. Some teams are advantaged over others.

Another thing to add to the joke of a league AFL is.

 

[Roovolution]

Does anyone on the Gold Coast know who Tom Lynch is?

Plays for Adelaide and goes alright.

 

[The King!]

Lot of VFL commissioners from the 70s and 80s on here

 

[Roovolution]

Sounds like you're mad that Gold Coast expect something of value from Geelong in exchange for a contracted player that could help you win the 2018 flag.

Don't mind them, they're just the most entitled fans in footy. Turn your lights on for Gary.