Are we just going to sit here and act like the AFL isn't corrupt?

[jatz14]

Spare me. I don't turn a blind eye when the issue suits me. I'm consistent whenever their is injustice.

Convenient when both your clubs have been the biggest beneficiary of AFL's bias in recent years. You're part of the problem, not the solution so the AFL can rely on you to do their dirty work for them. Yes AFL is entertainment but fleecing money from people and putting it in their own pockets under the guise of "fair" is morally corrupt.

AFL is basically a pyramid scheme at this point.

Their pockets? Define their? Gills? If this is so, call the police, present your evidence, have him arrested.

If you mean AFL operational funds, yes, that's their job, or would you prefer they operate more like Australian Rugby or soccer, so strapped for cash that cashflow is the determining factor in strategic decisions.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Spook]

Where is the line between "side deals" and "interests outside of football"?

I think this is obviously outside of footy for McGovern. This is hilarious if anyone (not you) thinks McGovern is making large extra money form a private very small construction company. Great that he is doing something outside of football that is real work, trying to sell house builds.

There are provisions for outside cap earnings and players and clubs are scrutinized more than most people and in conjunction the with ATO?

The times where Nigel Satterley gave investments houses to Judd are long gone.

 

[Groin guru]

I’m on Tapatalk, I can’t see you support North, I was talking about OP.

It comes off very woe is me because 99% of the OP is listing failed North targets.

The discussion wasn’t framed as “why is this legal and should we be looking in to this”, it was framed as “are we just going to sit here and pretend my club isn’t being bullied”.

There’s a discussion for whether this s**t should be legal (probably not) but corruption implies some sort of malice or advantage, when it’s just possibly a poor practice that everyone has access to. It only becomes an issue when half the clubs bring similar deals to the table and the AFL knocks them back, which hasn’t been put forward in this thread once as best I can tell.

Not at all. I listed examples that have come across my desk. Most of those are North related. A brisbane supporter poster his opinion regarding crisp and Melbourne players. Others would add their knowledge but as per usual those that get the good treatment are coming in here trying to act like nothing is wrong or turning the focus to north.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Not at all. I listed examples that have come across my desk. Most of those are North related. A brisbane supporter poster his opinion regarding crisp and Melbourne players. Others would add their knowledge but as per usual those that get the good treatment are coming in here trying to act like nothing is wrong or turning the focus to north.

Ok but I’ve asked you before and you copped out. The AFL are ticking it off. Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t every club do it until told otherwise? Are you aware of examples where these sorts of arrangements were attempted but not approved by the league?

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Ok but I’ve asked you before and you copped out. The AFL are ticking it off. Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t every club do it until told otherwise? Are you aware of examples where these sorts of arrangements were attempted but not approved by the league?

And i'll ask you the question why should any club be allowed to do deals like the McGovern one presented in this thread?

 

[Sir_Loin]

Okay 80% of the Victorian clubs are more corrupt then the rest of them

If you mean morally corrupt then you might have a point. It’s not illegal.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

And just to clarify, i don't have any problem with a Dusty/ Puma deal providing the following:

1. That the service Dusty provides Puma goes beyond the deal Puma has with the Richmond Football Club.
2. That it is clear what Dusty's responsibilities are towards Puma for the money they are paying him.
3. That it is assured that Dusty meets his commitments.

The McGovern deal however makes no sense and is totally unfeasible

 

[HoneyBadger35]

And i'll ask you the question why should any club be allowed to do deals like the McGovern one presented in this thread?

Because you’re allowed to work multiple jobs for a living if you choose. The insinuation is that something underhanded is going on here, arranged by a footy club, with zero proof. Deals such as this, money from media commitments, money from being an ambassador etc, are all scrutinised and cleared by the AFL. You’re the one saying it has something to do with a club, not just an individual and a business.

Why shouldn’t a player be allowed to work a second job? Where do you draw the line? Can a player write a weekly column in the paper? Can a player do regular appearances on radio? Can a player work an apprenticeship? Where’s the line between what constitutes legitimate second employment and what you’re assuming is some corrupt on the sly brown paper bag deal?

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Because you’re allowed to work multiple jobs for a living if you choose. The insinuation is that something underhanded is going on here, arranged by a footy club, with zero proof. Deals such as this, money from media commitments, money from being an ambassador etc, are all scrutinised and cleared by the AFL. You’re the one saying it has something to do with a club, not just an individual and a business.

Why shouldn’t a player be allowed to work a second job? Where do you draw the line? Can a player write a weekly column in the paper? Can a player do regular appearances on radio? Can a player work an apprenticeship? Where’s the line between what constitutes legitimate second employment and what you’re assuming is some corrupt on the sly brown paper bag deal?

I raised my genuine concerns in my first post about the McGovern deal. None of which you have directly rebutted i believe?

 

[HoneyBadger35]

I raised my genuine concerns in my first post about the McGovern deal. None of which you have directly rebutted?

Mate, you asked

And i'll ask you the question why should any club be allowed to do deals like the McGovern one presented in this thread?

And I answered. Because players are allowed other jobs. If it’s a paper round, or a radio gig, or an apprenticeship, or a corporate sales job, players are allowed second jobs. The only people drawing a link between these jobs and the club are some spurned lovers on BigFooty.

What are these points I haven’t directly rebutted?

OP’s argument also loses some credibility when he’s linked Jack Redden building a house with Gov’s company as a ‘side-deal’.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Mate, you asked



And I answered. Because players are allowed other jobs. If it’s a paper round, or a radio gig, or an apprenticeship, or a corporate sales job, players are allowed second jobs. The only people drawing a link between these jobs and the club are some spurned lovers on BigFooty.

What are these points I haven’t directly rebutted?

OP’s argument also loses some credibility when he’s linked Jack Redden building a house with Gov’s company as a ‘side-deal’.

Go back and read my first post in this thread which you immediately replied to.

I am not typing it again

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Go back and read my first post in this thread which you immediately replied to.

I am not typing it again

This one? That I already answered?

I think what is being suggested here is that the AFL have obviously signed off on an agreement with an external club where they would be paying a significant sum of money to McGovern to do a full time job that:

A: Would normally require a significant amount of experience which i seriously doubt McGovern would have due to his age and being a professional footballer.
B: Would require at minimum 50 working hours per week to perform the job adequately which is time McGovern wouldn't have.

So bearing in mind the above, what exactly would they actually be paying him for?

And, if the AFL were concerned about protecting the legitimacy of the salary cap which is claimed to be the main driver behind equalisation, why wouldn't they be scrutinising this fully? If they did, i see no way how this could be allowed.

Alright, I’ll go through it piece by piece.

The AFL have obviously signed off on an agreement with an external club where they would be paying a significant sum of money to McGovern to do a full time job

I am assuming, as you’ve said, the AFL have signed it off. If they haven’t, questions need to be asked. I’m not sure about external club, I guess you mean external party, ie this Vicore Construction place.

You’ve invented “significant sum of money” with no evidence whatsoever. How could you possibly know?

“Full time job” again just thrown out there with no evidence. Going off the only link that’s been posted, in the OP:

With a new born baby in the house and a budding AFL career set to take him all the way to the MCG in October, it may be hard to imagine that there’s a spare minute in the day to take on such a demanding role.

Luckily, Jeremy’s club are flexible with allowing their players to embark on exciting projects outside of sport. With the full support of both teams; The West Coast Eagles and Vicore Construction, there’s nothing our super Sales Director can’t tackle.

Wanky corporate talk aside, that doesn’t sound like a full time role in any capacity. Next you said:

A: Would normally require a significant amount of experience which i seriously doubt McGovern would have due to his age and being a professional footballer.

A: Another assumption. Gov has worked as a tradie and owns a plumbing business, so it’s not like he’s some clueless nobody in the construction world. I’m more than sure could handle a sales role, given most people would probably be pretty juiced to be chatting to an AFL player. Also he debuted at 22, having been on an AFL list since 18. I’m not sure if you’re across the schedule of footy players, but in my experience of living with one of the Eagles kids, the contact hours are pretty light for the young guys not getting a gig. Plenty of time to get whatever qualifications you deem necessary.

B: Would require at minimum 50 working hours per week to perform the job adequately which is time McGovern wouldn't have.

Assumption. 50 working hours per week? Based on what exactly? What about that blurb above there makes you think the role requires a work week 125% the size of a standard 9-5 job?

So bearing in mind the above, what exactly would they actually be paying him for

As OP was so kind enough to post (and insinuate was a side deal), Jack Redden built a home with them. I’d say they pay him to sell people homes, as he’s the Sales Director.

And, if the AFL were concerned about protecting the legitimacy of the salary cap which is claimed to be the main driver behind equalisation, why wouldn't they be scrutinising this fully? If they did, i see no way how this could be allowed

Where is the proof that they aren’t? Where is the evidence that there is anything untoward going on here? How is this different to a guy having a weekly paid radio spot? How do you know this wasn’t scrutinised “fully”? What constitutes “fully”? To what level did they scrutinise it before approval?

It’s literally one giant post of insinuation and assumption.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

This one? That I already answered?



Alright, I’ll go through it piece by piece.



I am assuming, as you’ve said, the AFL have signed it off. If they haven’t, questions need to be asked. I’m not sure about external club, I guess you mean external party, ie this Vicore Construction place.

You’ve invented “significant sum of money” with no evidence whatsoever. How could you possibly know?

“Full time job” again just thrown out there with no evidence. Going off the only link that’s been posted, in the OP:



Wanky corporate talk aside, that doesn’t sound like a full time role in any capacity. Next you said:



A: Another assumption. Gov has worked as a tradie and owns a plumbing business, so it’s not like he’s some clueless nobody in the construction world. I’m more than sure could handle a sales role, given most people would probably be pretty juiced to be chatting to an AFL player. Also he debuted at 22, having been on an AFL list since 18. I’m not sure if you’re across the schedule of footy players, but in my experience of living with one of the Eagles kids, the contact hours are pretty light for the young guys not getting a gig. Plenty of time to get whatever qualifications you deem necessary.



Assumption. 50 working hours per week? Based on what exactly? What about that blurb above there makes you think the role requires a work week 125% the size of a standard 9-5 job?



As OP was so kind enough to post (and insinuate was a side deal), Jack Redden built a home with them. I’d say they pay him to sell people homes, as he’s the Sales Director.


Where is the proof that they aren’t? Where is the evidence that there is anything untoward going on here? How is this different to a guy having a weekly paid radio spot? How do you know this wasn’t scrutinised “fully”? What constitutes “fully”? To what level did they scrutinise it before approval?

It’s literally one giant post of insinuation and assumption.

How many hours per week do you think would be required to adequately perform a "Sales Director" role in any company?

 

[Beutbrute]

And i'll ask you the question why should any club be allowed to do deals like the McGovern one presented in this thread?

I'll ask the question, what proof do you have that the club has done a deal like the McGovern one presented in this thread?

 

[HoneyBadger35]

How many hours per week do you think would be required to adequately perform a "Sales Director" role in any company?

I don’t know. I’m not starting a thread claiming to know either? The company’s website says he’s really flexible with his hours and fits it in where he can? 4 hours? 6? 15? 20? Who knows?

Such a strange thing to be hung up on when you yourself said the AFL would have approved it, and have nothing other than baseless claims of substantial income and 50 hour work weeks to go off. This is more pointless than the majority of BigFooty merry go rounds.

17 clubs and the AFL are corrupt, can’t believe that quick Google search brought the whole operation down

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Better Loosen Up - What’s more suspect; an AFL footballer working in a business with no visible connection to his footy club whatsoever, or an AFL footballer being paid by his club’s major partner to be a spokesperson and ambassador?

 

[jatz14]

Another way to approach this. For AFLW, clubs are positively encouraged to boost players pay with side deals. There are several or more players with full time jobs for the clubs they play for, and direct marketing gigs are encouraged.

The reason for this is that the high profile players of the comp cannot devote the time that the comp requires, given the payment levels for playing contract.

It's an even playing field in that all clubs are able to do it, it's in the interest of the players and the competition.

It is hard to mount a case that the non corrupt, moral position that the AFL should take, is to ban such deals.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Doashuey]

Jeez the Gaff rejection is still very raw for some.
Carry on, I for one am amused.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Better Loosen Up - What’s more suspect; an AFL footballer working in a business with no visible connection to his footy club whatsoever, or an AFL footballer being paid by his club’s major partner to be a spokesperson and ambassador?

What are you referring to?

 

[HoneyBadger35]

What are you referring to?

It’s just a generic question. Do you think it’s more suspect that McGovern is with an external company with (seemingly) no link to West Coast, versus if he was working with say BHP or an Eagles major partner?

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Jeez the Gaff rejection is still very raw for some.
Carry on, I for one am amused.

Got nothing to do with Gaff... haven't even mentioned him. I've even mentioned in this thread that i can accept the legitimacy of a Dusty/ Puma deal.

Judging by your post and the lack of any constructive contribution suggests you are clearly out of your depth. Maybe you should try some easier topics in another thread?

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Another way to approach this. For AFLW, clubs are positively encouraged to boost players pay with side deals. There are several or more players with full time jobs for the clubs they play for, and direct marketing gigs are encouraged.

The reason for this is that the high profile players of the comp cannot devote the time that the comp requires, given the payment levels for playing contract.

It's an even playing field in that all clubs are able to do it, it's in the interest of the players and the competition.

It is hard to mount a case that the non corrupt, moral position that the AFL should take, is to ban such deals.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

No issue with AFLW. That's completely different. None or very few of them are being paid a professional wage as a footballer.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

I don’t know. I’m not starting a thread claiming to know either? The company’s website says he’s really flexible with his hours and fits it in where he can? 4 hours? 6? 15? 20? Who knows?

Such a strange thing to be hung up on when you yourself said the AFL would have approved it, and have nothing other than baseless claims of substantial income and 50 hour work weeks to go off. This is more pointless than the majority of BigFooty merry go rounds.

17 clubs and the AFL are corrupt, can’t believe that quick Google search brought the whole operation down

I wouldn't exactly say that expecting someone in a Sales Director position to work 50+ hours is a baseless claim.

Being as flexible as McGovern would need to be allowed to be sounds like the dream job! Especially earning a Sales Directors wage!

It would be a shame if the Salary Cap is corrupted as it would completely undermine a fair and even competition.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

I wouldn't exactly say that expecting someone in a Sales Director position to work 50+ hours is a baseless claim.

Being as flexible as McGovern would need to be allowed to be sounds like the dream job! Especially earning a Sales Directors wage!

It would be a shame if the Salary Cap is corrupted as it would completely undermine a fair and even competition.

Baseless claim on baseless claim on baseless claim. Just making it up as you go along.

It would be a shame if Mazda were paying Jack Ziebell illegally outside of the cap for his ambassadorial work.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Baseless claim on baseless claim on baseless claim. Just making it up as you go along.

It would be a shame if Mazda were paying Jack Ziebell illegally outside of the cap for his ambassadorial work.

Lol... yeah ok. Baseless claims