Can a player refuse to go to a club after being drafted by them?

[coasting]

It changed when the AFL moved to 2 year minimum contracts for all drafted players to give the young guys some sort of sureity if they were moving interstate.

So yes they would need to sit out of football (and that means all levels) for the full 2 years.

DST

But there is no sureity for young guys moving interstate as we saw last year with the Dockers axeing Toby Stribling after one year.

 

[Antonius]

Gibbs will leave after his first year with the non-Adelaide club. Would be interesting if Port picked him up though, because he wouldn't need to move since he'd be at home. Also the links that Adelaide have to the past clubs are very dubious.

 

[swanniez1983]

No the Swans just wear a jumper that wouldn't look out of place in the Sydney Gay Mardi Gras parade.

keep them coming....but I think your bright blue jumper would fit in even better ...however, wearing that, they would be the perfect fill ins for the village people

I love your disgrace effort though...trying to say we're disgraceful after winning last year's premiership...and where has your team been on the ladder over the last few years?

Now back to the topc...

 

[linger_isgod]

Darren Jarman.

 

[Longy413]

If he enters the draft he goes where he is drafted or sits out of football (not just AFL) for the term of his contract. Which for a first time draftee is two years.

If things don't go the Crows way, they'd want to hope Gibbs goes to where he is drafted. Two years out of the system will do no end of damage to his development.

i have wondered about this, I remember some agents were reprimanded for giving players free gifts (signed ricky ponting bats) to help get them to their club, but i don't know how that works because if he was picked by a different club i doubt any player would sit out a whole season of football just because they recieved a signed bat from punter.

Different situation. This has nothing to do with getting players to clubs, it has everything to do with getting players on a management firms books.

The management business is very competitive and landing the next Judd, Conney etc is a big thing and means lots of exposure and potential earnings. The AFLPA has a system in place that restricts agents talking to junior players up until a certain date. It also has guidelines in place that rule out gifts that can be seen as an act of bribery to get a player on their books.

There was a player that was in Queensland last year for the U16 carnival and was given tickets to Big Brother for his family. That may well have been Gibbs, but I stand corrected.

The case with the signed Ponting bat has nothing to do with getting the youngster to a particular club, it was just an incentive to have that player sign to that particular management firm.

 

[gandaal]

keep them coming....but I think your bright blue jumper would fit in even better ...however, wearing that, they would be the perfect fill ins for the village people

I love your disgrace effort though...trying to say we're disgraceful after winning last year's premiership...and where has your team been on the ladder over the last few years?

Now back to the topc...

Bright?

I'd get your eyes tested if I were you.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

You are tied to the club that drafts you for two years. Gibbs or the Mortons can decide to play SANFL or WAFL for two years and then nominate for the draft again but if the Crows or Eagles aren't on the bottom, then they could get picked up by another club and have to start it all again. Though no other club would touch you after you sat out your first two years. If you announced that you were sitting out because of your club preference, this would amount to draft tampering and there would be further penalties.

As others say, may as well take the dough and the learning experience at another club and then asked to be traded.

 

[Longy413]

Gibbs or the Mortons can decide to play SANFL or WAFL for two years

Are you sure about that?
Wouldn't the club that drafted them have to release them?

 

[swanniez1983]

Bright?

I'd get your eyes tested if I were you.

My eyes are fine...i was referring to your M&M jumper

 

[ThePope]

But there is no sureity for young guys moving interstate as we saw last year with the Dockers axeing Toby Stribling after one year.

If we did actually delist him (we re-drafted him in the rookie draft), we would have had to pay out that second year of the contract, so he would have earnt a years salary for nothing, plus picked up whatever the SANFL/WAFL/VFL club would pay for his services.

Bottom line is no club can force a young player to play for them. They can force them to not play for anyone else though, and sit out for a year if they don't want to play for the drafted club. Where it gets tricky and borders on draft tampering, is if the player tells all clubs bar 1 (or 2 maybe for WA/SA?) that he won't play for them, only for team X. A 17/18 year old kid would probably be fine saying I want to stay at home for a year and finish my schooling/start uni etc. What happens at the end of that year is then up to the player, the club and the "preferred club". If the drafting club plays hardball, they can make them sit out a second year. If they see a suitable trade, they'll probably prefer to do that than have a kid wasting a spot on the 38 man squad. Otherwise they can throw the kid out and he can take his chances in the draft again.

And remember, it isn't only young kids doing this sort of thing... lots of brothers such as Rawlings, Bowden or players who had moved interstate (Stevens, Farmer, Headland, White) etc also wanted to move to particular clubs, some worked out deals, others didn't.

 

[ThePope]

Are you sure about that?
Wouldn't the club that drafted them have to release them?

Probably, as the norm for Vic clubs would be to have all non-AFL players playing for the VFL side...but I would think that most teams would prefer to have their players playing for someone, than really sitting out a year. For youngsters, it should only increase their worth if you are going to try to trade them if they've had a year of playing senior footy, not just juniors.

 

[sydney eagle]

If Collingwood can have its closet of Clokes and gaggle of Shaws I don't see why the Eagles shouldn't have a mob of Mortons !

 

[ThatThis]

Correction. It was the Adelaide Crows who drafted Chalmers, but he wanted to play for Collingwood. If I recall correctly Chalmers took the matter to court, but lost and he ended up playing a few games for the Crows.

Correction

Collingwood Drafted Chalmers the same year North drafted Pyman and McKay was drafted by Carlton.

Chalmers was found to have tampered witht he draft rules because he sent a letter to eash AFL Club stating he wanted to play only for Collingwood. Pyman and McKay put prices on their head, and those clubs were fined. Chalmers was banned for 2-3 years from playing with Collingwood i think, and was selected by Adelaide as a priority selection in one of the drafts, or zone selection

 

[Longy413]

Probably, as the norm for Vic clubs would be to have all non-AFL players playing for the VFL side...but I would think that most teams would prefer to have their players playing for someone, than really sitting out a year. For youngsters, it should only increase their worth if you are going to try to trade them if they've had a year of playing senior footy, not just juniors.

You can't trade them if they aren't contracted. They can just walk.
If you draft a kid and he sits out the two years, he doesn't have to agree to a trade.

If he's gone, and you're not going to get anything for him, where is the incentive for the club to release him to the SANFL.

If my club drafted Gibbs and he refused to come, well sorry kid. Say goodbye to your footy career because you can sit at home playing AFL on Playstation for 24 months. See if the Crows want you if you haven't played footy for two years.

 

[The Passenger]

Not sure about the system as it stands, but there is definately an strong opportunity for him (perhaps assisted by the Crows) to take the league to court on restraint of trade. Just hasnt happened yet as no-body has had enough incentive to rock the boat....

i've always argued that the clubs and AFL could easily dispute the restraint of trade law as they are not stopping someone from being employed by the originasation - they are simply stopping them playing in official AFL matches.

At the end of the day it's the AFL's competition and they can choose who they want as a registered AFL footballer.

If Bryce Gibbs was drafted at number 1 by Richmond (for instance) and he said "no i'll stay home and play with Adelaide" there is nothing to stop him doing that, but the AFL will not register him as an official AFL footballer for 2 years (i.e. the initial draft period). And Gibbs is under no obligation to sign a contract with Richmond.

Adelaide can then employ Bryce Gibbs to do whatever they want - he can train, coach the other players, be the club doctor if he wants, but when he runs out to play an official AFL game for Adelaide, the AFL does not have to let him out onto their field. Effectively, it would be no different to a suspended player attempting to run out onto the field - the AFL has the right to stop him from running onto an official AFL field.

That's my take on it anyway?? Agree or disagree??

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Are you sure about that?
Wouldn't the club that drafted them have to release them?

You may be right. I just remember that the Jarman's continued to play SANFL but the conditions on entering the draft would probably have been tightened now. If you enter the draft though, and you don't sign a contract, I don't see how you can be stopped from playing in another competition. You would just be banished from playing for an AFL club wouldn't you?

Do you sign a contract when you enter the draft or an agreement?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

If my club drafted Gibbs and he refused to come, well sorry kid. Say goodbye to your footy career because you can sit at home playing AFL on Playstation for 24 months. See if the Crows want you if you haven't played footy for two years.

Your club couldn't say that though because you have no contract with the kid. The most you could do is insist the AFL invoke its draft conditions and not allow him to be registered as an AFL player for two years. Unless their is a stipulation in that agreement that you can not play football anywhere for two years, then they could go back to a state league. This would be at the AFL's insistence, the drafting club that doesn't have a contract has no say over anything and has just wasted a pick for no input. The draft system would be corrupted if this was to happen as the AFL would be keen to compensate that club the following year.

They say the clubs need to do their homework so they don't pick players that won't perform for them but the rules state that a player can not declare intention to only play for certain clubs. It's a pretty tough gig.

 

[Longy413]

Adelaide can then employ Bryce Gibbs to do whatever they want - he can train

He won't be able to train at the club. Non-listed players need permission from the AFL to train with a club at any stage.

Essendon for example has several Melbourne based Bendigo Bombers players training with them. Doering, Blumfield, Beasy and the like. Essendon had to get permission for these players to train with them.

Not sure Gibbs would be afforded the same luxury.

Do you sign a contract when you enter the draft or an agreement?

I can't remember.

But what is the difference? If you sign an agreement to go to the club you are drafted to or sit out of football all together aren't you in effect signing a contract? I'm happy to admit I know very little about contract law.

 

[The Passenger]

He won't be able to train at the club. Non-listed players need permission from the AFL to train with a club at any stage.

Essendon for example has several Melbourne based Bendigo Bombers players training with them. Doering, Blumfield, Beasy and the like. Essendon had to get permission for these players to train with them.

Not sure Gibbs would be afforded the same luxury.

i think that's something that could be contested in a court of law. It is of no effect to the AFL who a club has training with them and that is stopping someone from working with an organisation.....

If a club wanted to have me or your or anyone come train with them i'd be very interested to see how the AFL would actually stop them from doing that....

 

[Longy413]

i think that's something that could be contested in a court of law. It is of no effect to the AFL who a club has training with them and that is stopping someone from working with an organisation.....

If a club wanted to have me or your or anyone come train with them i'd be very interested to see how the AFL would actually stop them from doing that....

Simply, it is considered draft tampering.
You don't pay players to train, so that rules out the employment avenue.
And if you are paying a player to train, it comes under the salary cap.

If the Crows wanted to challenge the salary cap, all well and good. But at the end of the day they'd have to make a decision on what is for the greater good of the game.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I can't remember.

But what is the difference? If you sign an agreement to go to the club you are drafted to or sit out of football all together aren't you in effect signing a contract? I'm happy to admit I know very little about contract law.

A) Does the agreement say that you will sit out of football altogether?
B) If it does, does the AFL have the right to stop a player playing in a competition it has no control over?

Case in point, an NRL player (can't remember his name) received a very lengthy suspension. He went over to play in the English Super League as penalties from the NRL do not carry over, only penalties from International body sanctioned events carry over.

 

[Longy413]

A) Does the agreement say that you will sit out of football altogether?
B) If it does, does the AFL have the right to stop a player playing in a competition it has no control over?

I don't know to be honest.

But I'm not sure it is the AFL that would be stopping the player. I think it is more a question of whether or not the agreement means the player is contracted with the club he is drafted to the second his name is read out. Player contracts are fixed for the first two years.

If that's the case, I presume the club would be in a place of power, not the AFL.

 

[m.diddy]

Lets assume Bryce Gibbs says he refuses to play for any other club but Adelaide and Hawks take a risk and pick him up

Can he stay home refuse to go and be picked up the next year in the PSD or something by the Crows....?, Could he refuse to go, be delisted next year re enter the draft then go to the Crows??, anyone know

Nafan Buckley board.

 

[Minkus_Swan]

As others say, may as well take the dough and the learning experience at another club and then asked to be traded.

Exactly, I mean they want to play football at the highest level don't they.

I'm sure that everyone who has seen "The Draft", understands the pressures involved in the whole process. But there are plenty of modern day examples that prove you can go back to your home state if you really wish to - Des Headland, Shannon Grant, Darren Gasper etc.

 

[The Don't Argue]

I think this recent judgement by the AFL (which will stop Gibbs and brothers Morton go to their desired clubs) is pretty ordinary. Father/Son rule is one of the few things that give the competition some tradition and prestige.

For example.... If I was a top-notch accounting graduate, I could choose from any firm across the land, for a whole array of different salaries. I could pick and choose where to live and what offer / role to take. That would be the reward for being the best accountant in the land.

Now take the best young footballer in the country (eg: Gibbs). He also is the best in his chosen profession, but his only reward for this is being sent to a club of which he has no choice, for which he must accept a standard contract.

I think the AFL by having recently limited the father/son scope are really dehumanising the game. Perhaps as Pavlich said a few years back, turning kids into "football mercenaries."