Oppo Camp Dangerfield's Gone (Zero tolerance to trolling) - READ THREAD LINKED IN OP BEFORE POSTING

[relapse]

I don't think that is the case, and would be the last thing the Crows, Patty, or Geelong want. Not sure how true but apparently Danger wants to return home to Geelong as a preference but it does not HAVE to be Geelong. Although I dare say this is just the rumblings of gossip, but if true.....game on.

The more the merrier for the Crows. If it is just Geelong then Geelong will attempt to protect their best interests as will the Crows. They will know they have to better a round 14 to be ahead, but would also know the Crows would want (and probably deserve) more.

I reckon 1st round this year and next. Crows can use those first round picks to either grab an established player or attempt to make up for TippetGate.

I think that this will be the trade as well.

Dwayne Russell intimated on 5AA that Adelaide and Geelong have already informally agreed to terms on the 2015 and 2016 first round pick trade

It's not the greatest deal, but it's most probably the best we're gunna get.

 

[Jack McKraken]

Well sure if you misinterpret what public interest means, then of course you could claim its public interest. Just like those other public interest entities Coca Cola and McDonalds

You should let the Courts know they've been applying the test wrong then!

I think you are confusing the overriding public policy of a person having the right to trade freely, and the second limb of the reasonableness test which very much looks to the injury which may be suffered by the public and their interests in the particular circumstances.

Not sure what coca cola has to do anything.

 

[douglyzia]

I think that this will be the trade as well.

Dwayne Russell intimated on 5AA that Adekaide and Geelong have already informally agreed to terms on the 15 and 16 first round pick trade

It's not the greatest deal, but it's most probably the best we're gunna get.

15 and 16? Sorry, can you explain which picks Adelaide are getting again, and where they are coming from?

 

[Scorpus]

15 and 16? Sorry, can you explain which picks Adelaide are getting again, and where they are coming from?

2015 and 2016 first round picks from Geelong

 

[J_Crow]

Ok didnt Tony Abbott try this on with those ungrateful indonesians and their Tsunami relief?

Those pesky Indonesians owe us one!!

GTOA appears to be one of those people who mistaken himself for Football Club Incarnate, or at the very least the CEO and/or chairman.

 

[Don Muraco]

GTOA appears to be one of those people who mistaken himself for Football Club Incarnate, or at the very least the CEO and/or chairman.

Or a plonker

 

[Jack McKraken]

Self interest, not public interest. The code could continue without the draft.

That's the crux of the argument. Could it? If a vital equalisation tool was taken from them?

 

[Allefgib]

Nup 100% Mardi, Danger quite clearly no longer makes the decisions

Look - clearly Mardi has been a strong consideration in this process. But I consider it extremely disrespectful - and also removes his accountability which I DO NOT like - to to talk about it in this way.

 

[Allefgib]

It would be the same as saying "hey, if you come to us we might give your partner a job wink,nudge"

It isn't enforceable, and it isn't happening until after the contract is signed, but it is still illegal.

Pretty sure there are rules around this that can be enforced?

 

[vinum coupe]

Where did people rank our F/S players?

Yep. You won't get an argument from me on that one.

 

[Jack McKraken]

That's not reverting to fair value, that's paying overs to price others out and then paying unders to bring the total over the 4 years to a fair value.

Nobody is being fooled by that. Saying, "We made the deal after" is an excuse nobody is buying in that situation.

which is draft tampering of the player is picked up from the draft

 

[Niximus]

Pretty sure there are rules around this that can be enforced?

It's the rules around having outside agreements. Everything needs to go in the contract submitted to the AFL.

We went down because they had evidence of the side deal in the form of an email. That's not the only evidence they can use though, it isn't a criminal court. If there's a huge drop in salary after an initial 2 year mega deal all signs point to it being dodgy.

 

[TexForPM]

I hope for Danger he has a long, happy, and prosperous life with Mardi and their families and his mind isn't at the AFC.

 

[TexForPM]

Being screwed? Being screwed?

How about this? We lost the best player of the last twenty years (Gary Ablett jnr) by an AFL plot to strengthen GC by allowing GCS such a big salary cap that, to match, we would have to pay our whole cap just on Ablett alone.

At least the AFL haven't directly intervened in making sure that a player of yours ends up at a club by engineering a situation where two new clubs can price anyone out of a bidding war.

You got 2 firsts. Already had flags etc

 

[Allefgib]

Needs to be declared

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-warns-clubs-on-shady-deals-20150916-gjoao5.html

As are doing dodgy deals outside of the compo, all in the article, it will be played with a straight bat. Ironic thing about the article Dangerfield is pictured as if big brother want be watching!

That's my point really. IF there is an enforaceable agreement made - it needs to be declared. But if no such contract exists, of cours eyou can do it. This is where the player is at risk. They get a career ending injury and they can't come back and ask for that extension or money that was discussed - because there is no enforceable agreement as such things have to be declared.

Saying, look - if you're still going great guns I reckon we'll probably come to terms at the end of two years is nothing that needs declaring.

 

[Niximus]

That's my point really. IF there is an enforaceable agreement made - it needs to be declared. But if no such contract exists, of cours eyou can do it. This is where the player is at risk. They get a career ending injury and they can't come back and ask for that extension or money that was discussed - because there is no enforceable agreement as such things have to be declared.

Saying, look - if you're still going great guns I reckon we'll probably come to terms at the end of two years is nothing that needs declaring.

Only the contents of the official AFL contract are ever enforceable. Outside deals, either in other contracts, verbal, emailed or winked are all illegal as the players and clubs agree to that with their registration.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

So, you would have no problem with a deal where the club wins, but the AFC screw Geelong and Danger, then?

Do you want to see a win-win-win situation here, or one where AFC win, and everyone else loses?

I don't see that it's any different to your mob (supporters )...on your board what percentage of people are saying they would like the AFC adequately compensated for danger ???

I'd predict zilch

Thankfully I think your clubs tradings history is a little more pragmatic than your supporters attitudes

I'd expect the crows would ask for 2 first round draft picks and a player eg murdoch, gregson or kolidashnij and then geelong will say no that's too much but you can have the 2 first round draft picks and the deal will be done there and then

That's presuming you don't blow us out of the water with a 6 year $1.2 million deal that we struggle to match (although we may be able to )

So it's clear that if you want danger enough you will either fork out a big offer for him or a couple of 1st round draft picks

If fyfe came knocking at AFC today and we paid with it with 2 first round draft picks I probably wouldn't work for a week in celebration

So in summary you guys win the deal despite losing 2 first round draft picks so stop acting like f####### sooks while meanwhile accusing us of being the whingers.

Danger wants to play for geelong, I get it , make it
happen

 

[Allefgib]

It's the rules around having outside agreements. Everything needs to go in the contract submitted to the AFL.

We went down because they had evidence of the side deal in the form of an email. That's not the only evidence they can use though, it isn't a criminal court. If there's a huge drop in salary after an initial 2 year mega deal all signs point to it being dodgy.

That does not mean there is an enforceable contract agreed to though.

I keep referring to the player getting injured as I think that's a good way to think about it.

If the player was injured would they be able to claim that extra period of time as money they are due? (even if it is at a reduced rate).
Or alternatively - would the club be able to ask them to continue playing or could they go elsewhere at the end of the 2 years...

They are the risks both player and club have to consider when they have a nice chat about 'possibilities' that don't end up as as contract. It's a big risk.

 

[Allefgib]

Only the contents of the official AFL contract are ever enforceable. Outside deals, either in other contracts, verbal, emailed or winked are all illegal as the players and clubs agree to that with their registration.

Gotcha.

Going to be hard to argue something was in place then isn't it

 

[Niximus]

That does not mean there is an enforceable contract agreed to though.

I keep referring to the player getting injured as I think that's a good way to think about it.

If the player was injured would they be able to claim that extra period of time as money they are due? (even if it is at a reduced rate).
Or alternatively - would the club be able to ask them to continue playing or could they go elsewhere at the end of the 2 years...

They are the risks both player and club have to consider when they have a nice chat about 'possibilities' that don't end up as as contract. It's a big risk.

What I'm saying is that enforceability is irrelevant.

It isn't only illegal if it is enforceable.

 

[Bonkers000]

If the rumors are true, that trade has already been agreed, it's possible that we won't be the first team to match a free agency offer. They might just skip free agency and wait until the first day of trade.

 

[SydCrow]

I would take their 2015 and 16 first round picks. Except that if they get him, the 2016 pick could be #18

 

[TheLeftFist8]

Fairness would be the 2 1st and a player worth a 2nd round pick.

We should start our claim with 2 1st and Motlop, and then we either drop a 1st or Motlop for Murdoch.

There are plenty of clubs sniffing around who I'm sure could offer Danger a lot more $$$ than Geelong which will easily pay for his fuel costs travelling in to Melbourne, or for rent at a cushy townhouse near training so he doesn't have to commute every day.

Unfortunately if Danger went this way fearing the Crows and Cats are at an impasse then he could accept RFA offer from another club which we can't match. As long as we are confident we can match any deals and Danger def won't stay here then we are in the box seat. Honestly we should get a decent steak knife on top of the 1sts.

 

[hippyhippy]

This years and next years is way unders... need a decent player on top. Make them make it happen. They will lose so much face if it doesnt. Id be pissed if the afc just took 2 crappy picks.

 

[TheLeftFist8]

I would take their 2015 and 16 first round picks. Except that if they get him, the 2016 pick could be #18

Doubtful 18 but yes Geelong quite possibly could have 1 last spike with this list + Danger before dropping down. So could be around pick 15.

9 + 15 for the 2nd best player in the competition…pathetic.