Nostradamus Lives Dons Pursuing Stringer.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Feb 6, 2016
5,066
9,922
AFL Club
Carlton
That would be interesting. They have definitely breached their contract with him. So EFC shouldn't be rewarded for losing a player who was aggrieved because of a breach of contract.

This is what I'm saying. I dont have insider goss on the machinations of AFL house, and i dont read every single footy related article out there.

If I'm wrong about something, then educate me. The people who have said im wrong have only said "Nup. Bullshit.". As if im just going to believe some random on the internet who refuses to back up their statements.

This is exactly how Hurley got banned in the first place. Some idiot told him "Nah, these injections are ******* apples mate. She'll be right." and he believed him. Next thing you know...
 

Gingerbread man

All Australian
Aug 14, 2016
903
1,357
Geelong
AFL Club
Carlton
I can imagine the AFL doing all they can to prevent the competition from imploding, yet I can't see them really being too bothered if Hurley has to sit out for another year of football.

It doesn't have to come to that; Essendon will accept a reasonable trade for him (like Carlisle and like Ryder) and the onus is on his club of choice to provide one. We cannot be the only ones held responsible if negotiations break down. The issue will arise when a club is determined to get him for a very low price and not come to the table, but fortunately the standard of intellect is higher in football club staff than it is on bigfooty.


Yeah, nah.

We'll deal with the club he nominates, we'll deal with other clubs if it breaks a stand-off, we'll let him walk under free agency next year. We'll do everything that can be reasonably expected of a club when a player nominates a trade but we aren't letting him walk for nothing. Whether or not he gets a trade is up to the club he chooses to go to.

I bet you would have been one of the ones to say Hurley deserved his drug ban because he knew what he was taking at the start of the year, which makes the last sentence of your post absolutely hilarious. Cognitive dissonance is okay when your footy club benefits!
I'm not saying give them away for nothing but the bomber have been notoriously hard to deal with at the trade table, if the bombers want 2 first rounders for Hurley they should accept a first and a second not so much to rip Essendon off but to get Hurley to where he wants to go.
As for my stance on the whole saga, the players have been the victims, not at any point do I believe they intentionally took a banned substance, as for the club I will just say they were very lucky to only get the penalties they got.

Finally I bet your one of those Essendon supporters who believes still that your club has done nothing wrong.
 
So much vitriol. So little substance. Sad really.

For what its worth though, i did do some research and the most recent article i could find on the matter - which i mentioned prior to your little melt - was that if Hurley walked, then the EFC could receive no compo for him.

So as far as I'm concerned, you're just talking out your arse mate. Put up or shut up :)

I'd look up the Dunning-Kruger effect if I were you.

Trying to ask someone to prove a fact a second time because you don't understand it the first time is almost horrifying.
 
Sep 12, 2003
19,698
22,706
under the table
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Not important
This is what I'm saying. I dont have insider goss on the machinations of AFL house, and i dont read every single footy related article out there.

If I'm wrong about something, then educate me. The people who have said im wrong have only said "Nup. Bullshit.". As if im just going to believe some random on the internet who refuses to back up their statements.

This is exactly how Hurley got banned in the first place. Some idiot told him "Nah, these injections are ******* apples mate. She'll be right." and he believed him. Next thing you know...

You're right. It's exactly the same Malcolm Roberts.
 
Feb 6, 2016
5,066
9,922
AFL Club
Carlton
I'd look up the Dunning-Kruger effect if I were you.

Trying to ask someone to prove a fact a second time because you don't understand it the first time is almost horrifying.

It hasnt been proven a first time, so that makes your oh so clever little quip a bit of a flop. Repeatedly telling everyone how right you are doesnt make it so. But you keep swinging mate, you may just land one eventually :thumbsu:
 
It hasnt been proven a first time, so that makes your oh so clever little quip a bit of a flop. Repeatedly telling everyone how right you are doesnt make it so. But you keep swinging mate, you may just land one eventually :thumbsu:

Here are your two statements of idiocy:

Hurley is a free agent.

All banned Essendon players are free to walk this year as DFA, regardless of their contract status.

Now, I tried to be somewhat nice and offer you the opportunity to retract your moronic statements.

Why are they moronic? Because they can be refuted by fact.

Now making an error in fact is not the worst thing in the world. It happens, I do it on the odd occasion.

But when you are presented with a rebuttal, the wise thing to do is verify that you in fact made an error, learn from it and move on.

But no, not here, of course not.

Arguing with people like you is like playing chess with a pigeon - no matter how good I am, it'll s**t on the board and strut around like it won anyway.

So let's waste everyones time and provide the simplified version you so obviously need.

Hurley is a free agent.

No actually, Hurley is a contracted player.

Here's the AFLs list of free agents.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-03-03/the-2016-free-agent-list

Do you see Hurley's name on there?

Idiotic statement number 1 refuted, Hurley is NOT a free agent.

All banned Essendon players are free to walk this year as DFA, regardless of their contract status.

No player is free to walk out of a contract. Actually no one in any field walks out on a contract 'just because'. And certainly not 'regardless of their contract status' (the utter stupidity of which is staggering in its denseness).

24.1(f) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement

"The AFL and the AFLPA recognise that Standard Playing Contracts between AFL Clubs and Players create legally binding obligations and that the parties to such contracts have legitimate expectations that the terms of such contracts will be honoured."


Cale Hooker is a contracted and banned Essendon player. Can he walk 'regardless of his contract status'?

The same document also governs the process by which a grievance could be raised by a party (section 43) - once again reinforcing that no one can simply walk away from a contractual obligation; which in itself is also under the jurisdiction of the relevant judiciary authorities.

SO. MONUMENTALLY. STUPID.

Idiotic comment number 2 refuted.

Not that I would expect you to have the capacity to understand - again.

Christ is this really where we're at?
 
Feb 6, 2016
5,066
9,922
AFL Club
Carlton
Here are your two statements of idiocy:





Now, I tried to be somewhat nice and offer you the opportunity to retract your moronic statements.

Why are they moronic? Because they can be refuted by fact.

Now making an error in fact is not the worst thing in the world. It happens, I do it on the odd occasion.

But when you are presented with a rebuttal, the wise thing to do is verify that you in fact made an error, learn from it and move on.

But no, not here, of course not.

Arguing with people like you is like playing chess with a pigeon - no matter how good I am, it'll s**t on the board and strut around like it won anyway.

So let's waste everyones time and provide the simplified version you so obviously need.



No actually, Hurley is a contracted player.

Here's the AFLs list of free agents.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-03-03/the-2016-free-agent-list

Do you see Hurley's name on there?

Idiotic statement number 1 refuted, Hurley is NOT a free agent.



No player is free to walk out of a contract. Actually no one in any field walks out on a contract 'just because'. And certainly not 'regardless of their contract status' (the utter stupidity of which is staggering in its denseness).

24.1(f) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement

"The AFL and the AFLPA recognise that Standard Playing Contracts between AFL Clubs and Players create legally binding obligations and that the parties to such contracts have legitimate expectations that the terms of such contracts will be honoured."


Cale Hooker is a contracted and banned Essendon player. Can he walk 'regardless of his contract status'?

The same document also governs the process by which a grievance could be raised by a party (section 43) - once again reinforcing that no one can simply walk away from a contractual obligation; which in itself is also under the jurisdiction of the relevant judiciary authorities.

SO. MONUMENTALLY. STUPID.

Idiotic comment number 2 refuted.

Not that I would expect you to have the capacity to understand - again.

Christ is this really where we're at?

Wow. So much anger. All of what you posted hinges on the "fact" that contracts are ironclad when in fact they are not. Whether or not Essendon have breached the contract (which voids the agreement) is yet to tested in court which is an avenue that may be explored - regardless of how it upsets you so. And yeah, voiding his contract so he isnt legally bound to Essendon makes him a free agent, by definition.

I can also tell you that this option is very real as it was weighed up as an option for Ryder and was almost acted upon, but a deal was struck. I dont know the particulars of what was said during trade negotiations but i reckon Essendon blinked first.

I guess this is a bit of a Schrödinger's cat scenario. He is a free agent and at the same time he isnt. I guess it must suck not being as smart as you think you are. But please continue having your little melts, im enjoying reading them as you clearly are posting them :thumbsu:
 
Feb 6, 2016
5,066
9,922
AFL Club
Carlton
Leave the drugs stuff out of it as much as possible fellas.

Any chance we could get Jade to be more constructive with his/her posts or does s/he get to ride roughshod? I feel my post was salient when i touched upon the drug stuff as it directly relates and adds weight to the validity of my argument.

Truth be told, i think his market value is about a late first rounder and a decent player. This talk of two first rounders is nonsense on stilts when another club can just nuke Essendon from orbit. It all comes down to how aggrieved Hurley is - if at all.
 
A destination club is hardly one that attracts players like Cooney and Luey and players either not up to standard or past their prime. The last big name you got to the club was Goddard who has been reasonable but not to the same as his St Kilda best.

When was the last big big name Essendon attracted so you could at least have some chance of justifying this? Similar to Sydney's recruiting of Buddy or Tippet or Hawthorn getting Lake, Gibson, Burgoyne, Frawley...... that is the benchmark of a destination club.
How could you forget Brent Prismall?
 
Any chance we could get Jade to be more constructive with his/her posts or does s/he get to ride roughshod? I feel my post was salient when i touched upon the drug stuff as it directly relates and adds weight to the validity of my argument.

Truth be told, i think his market value is about a late first rounder and a decent player. This talk of two first rounders is nonsense on stilts when another club can just nuke Essendon from orbit. It all comes down to how aggrieved Hurley is - if at all.

You don't have an argument. Well no more than a person arguing the world is flat does.

You make statements that can be refuted by fact, and then claim you weren't wrong because you lack the capacity to understand why.

You're poor even for Bigfooty standards.
 
Feb 18, 2003
32,695
6,814
Hoppers Crossing
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Liverpool
A destination club is hardly one that attracts players like Cooney and Luey and players either not up to standard or past their prime. The last big name you got to the club was Goddard who has been reasonable but not to the same as his St Kilda best.

When was the last big big name Essendon attracted so you could at least have some chance of justifying this? Similar to Sydney's recruiting of Buddy or Tippet or Hawthorn getting Lake, Gibson, Burgoyne, Frawley...... that is the benchmark of a destination club.

That's not the definition of a destination club.

A destination club is one that players WANT to go to not end up going to.

All Sydney and Hawthorn are really doing is making a mockery of the salary cap and forcing lower clubs into extended periods without success by POACHING players by whatever means possible. Reminds me of Carlton from 1965-1990.
 
Aug 25, 2003
33,187
9,043
here
AFL Club
Collingwood
That's not the definition of a destination club.

A destination club is one that players WANT to go to not end up going to.

All Sydney and Hawthorn are really doing is making a mockery of the salary cap and forcing lower clubs into extended periods without success by POACHING players by whatever means possible. Reminds me of Carlton from 1965-1990.
If you think Essendon is currently a destination club, I'd suggest you've been visiting Dank's emporium of deluded potions.
 

SterlingArcher

Brownlow Medallist
May 16, 2014
12,163
15,983
AFL Club
Carlton
Stringer is like a young Mark Ricciutto. If he was actually available I'd hope my club throws in the kitchen sink in order to get him.

What's kitchen sink to you? Pick 1? I reckon he'd be worth that tbh, Daniher-Stringer would be a killer combo for the next 10 years.
 
What's kitchen sink to you? Pick 1? I reckon he'd be worth that tbh, Daniher-Stringer would be a killer combo for the next 10 years.
in a heart beat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back