Remove this Banner Ad

Justin Sherman

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

chef said:
If it was the Crows in this situation would you have a completely different opinion?.

It just sounds like a case of sour grapes that's all.
Click to expand...
I'd be pissed off if it happened to the Crows, but I'd have to accept that it's the right decision.

Kind of like the infamous "it happened right in front of me" free kick to Anthony at the end of the 2009 final. Hated that they paid it, having failed to pay it all night, but the free kick was definitely there...
 
Vader said:
I'd be pissed off if it happened to the Crows, but I'd have to accept that it's the right decision.

Kind of like the infamous "it happened right in front of me" free kick to Anthony at the end of the 2009 final. Hated that they paid it, having failed to pay it all night, but the free kick was definitely there...
Click to expand...

Fair enough. In the grand scheme of things I would probably prefer the AFL to say we have to use it on our F/S's as this would make the club hold on to it for a couple of seasons and use it in a normal draft. Rather than use it in a trade for a fringe player which is what we will be doing with it this year.
 
Anyway I'm confident that I'm correct. The transaction has yet to occur for Harbrow, i.e we don't know exactly what pick number it is. Therefore it can't be used in the F&S bidding.
 
Ant_ said:
Anyway I'm confident that I'm correct. The transaction has yet to occur for Harbrow, i.e we don't know exactly what pick number it is. Therefore it can't be used in the F&S bidding.
Click to expand...

You are right. We have to use our first 2 live picks on Wallis and Libba, which is what we get from our position. The F/S bidding has to be done before trade week, so we nominate those 2 picks. When trade week starts, we get our compo pick for Harbrow. Which we can do as we please with.

Straightforward enough I think. Fair or not, dems the rules.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Ant_ said:
Anyway I'm confident that I'm correct. The transaction has yet to occur for Harbrow, i.e we don't know exactly what pick number it is. Therefore it can't be used in the F&S bidding.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should ask Emma Quayle. ;)
 
Igloo said:
You are right. We have to use our first 2 live picks on Wallis and Libba, which is what we get from our position. The F/S bidding has to be done before trade week, so we nominate those 2 picks. When trade week starts, we get our compo pick for Harbrow. Which we can do as we please with.

Straightforward enough I think. Fair or not, dems the rules.
Click to expand...

Correct. You use round one and round 2 picks on Wallis and Libba and you can do whatever you like with the compo pick (trade, use, save for later).

Well played, Doggies!
 
I would love to have sherman at the saints. I would trade david armitage for him
 
Vader said:
Umm.. no. You're not trading Harbrow - and we're not trading Bock. GC have until the middle of trade week to sign uncontracted players, but our players are already gone and the picks have been announced.

The only club likely to be in this position is Geelong, but reports indicate that his defection will be formally announced on Friday (the day after their Club Champion award), with his Band 1 status a mere formality.

The AFL have made a real mess here. By saying that clubs can trade the compensation picks one year, with the receiving club using them in another year, they've really screwed things and created a lot of uncertainty. If I were in charge I would say that the dogs can't have their cake and eat it too - they either use their compo pick for the F/S bidding, or they are prevented from trading it in 2010. Then again, I'm not in charge...
Click to expand...

Probably because the rules specify that we must use our 'normal' picks to bid for father and sons. i.e. the free picks that every team gets.

Harbrows compensation pick is not a normal pick, nor is it free. Forcing us to use that for F/S would compound the injustice of the gold coast thievery.

but if you are that upset about it, how about we keep harbrow and you can have your stinkin compo pick back!!
 
stefoid said:
Probably because the rules specify that we must use our 'normal' picks to bid for father and sons. i.e. the free picks that every team gets.

Harbrows compensation pick is not a normal pick, nor is it free. Forcing us to use that for F/S would compound the injustice of the gold coast thievery.

but if you are that upset about it, how about we keep harbrow and you can have your stinkin compo pick back!!
Click to expand...
I think we'd all rather keep our players than the manifestly inadequate compensation picks the AFL have "given" us in return. :(:mad:
 
stefoid said:
Probably because the rules specify that we must use our 'normal' picks to bid for father and sons. i.e. the free picks that every team gets.

Harbrows compensation pick is not a normal pick, nor is it free. Forcing us to use that for F/S would compound the injustice of the gold coast thievery.

but if you are that upset about it, how about we keep harbrow and you can have your stinkin compo pick back!!
Click to expand...


I think us having to use our first and second round picks on father-sons is a disgrace in the first place.

When Geelong racked up all their father-son selections, they only had to relinquish third rounders.

As for the compo pick for Jarrod Harbrow. That is a disgrace too. We should've been given at least a first rounder with a second rounder for future drafts.

To say he's only worth as much as Bock and Brown is a joke.

And, I agree, I'd much rather take Harbrow back then have the first round pick :mad:
 
westernrangers said:
Cheer up Quigley, Justin Sherman just isn't worth as much as you think he is.

Would the Lions be getting rid of him if he was worth his pinch of salt?

He's too much at $400,000 a year.
Click to expand...

Agreed. He is in and out of a side that was awful this year, which also had a large number of injuries.

$400k for each of the next 2 years? What imbecilic management.

Either release him for a peppercorn, or pay at least a third of his contract
 
westernrangers said:
Cheer up Quigley, Justin Sherman just isn't worth as much as you think he is.

Would the Lions be getting rid of him if he was worth his pinch of salt?

He's too much at $400,000 a year.
Click to expand...
Perhaps although I am pretty comfortable with the compensation which has been mooted in the media. Perhaps you are the one who is delusional here.

The Lions are not getting rid of him. He has requested to be traded after conflicting with our high performance manager and Voss backing the HPM. He is also offside with a few of the players.

400k a year is too much for him and thats why I expect the Lions to pay some of that in order to realise better value in a trade.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Quigley said:
Perhaps although I am pretty comfortable with the compensation which has been mooted in the media. Perhaps you are the one who is delusional here.

The Lions are not getting rid of him. He has requested to be traded after conflicting with our high performance manager and Voss backing the HPM. He is also offside with a few of the players.

400k a year is too much for him and thats why I expect the Lions to pay some of that in order to realise better value in a trade.
Click to expand...

Don't worry Quigley, I understand completely.

I would be more than happy if the Dogs got Sherman.

Everitt for Sherman seems fair to me.
 
UpTheGuts said:
Agreed. He is in and out of a side that was awful this year, which also had a large number of injuries.

$400k for each of the next 2 years? What imbecilic management.

Either release him for a peppercorn, or pay at least a third of his contract
Click to expand...
After a very good season last year Sherman signed for 900k over 3 years. 300k per year being a reasonable remuneration based on his performance. To help the Lions with their cap situation this year he took only 100k last year leaving two years at 400k. In isolation 400k per year is too much but 900k over the course of his contract is okay. There are plenty of back ended contracts out there (or front ended) where a particularly player gets paid more in a particular year then they are worth. The bit dim out there don't seem to comprehend that this is something which is done all the time and you need to look at the contract over its full term.
 
Dogs Rule said:
Don't worry Quigley, I understand completely.

I would be more than happy if the Dogs got Sherman.

Everitt for Sherman seems fair to me.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't have a problem with that trade but I am not sure Everitt would go for it. I am sure he would be keen to go to a team where he can be confident of walking into a starting 22 position. He would have Patfull and Staker ahead of him playing very similar roles.
 
Quigley said:
I wouldn't have a problem with that trade but I am not sure Everitt would go for it. I am sure he would be keen to go to a team where he can be confident of walking into a starting 22 position. He would have Patfull and Staker ahead of him playing very similar roles.
Click to expand...

The good thing about Everitt is you can play him wherever the hell you want. He plays wing, can pinch hit in the ruck and do alright, play forward, or play back.

But I am also unsure Everitt would go for that deal.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Quigley said:
I wouldn't have a problem with that trade but I am not sure Everitt would go for it. I am sure he would be keen to go to a team where he can be confident of walking into a starting 22 position. He would have Patfull and Staker ahead of him playing very similar roles.
Click to expand...

Maybe a three-way trade then.
 
Quigley said:
I wouldn't have a problem with that trade but I am not sure Everitt would go for it. I am sure he would be keen to go to a team where he can be confident of walking into a starting 22 position. He would have Patfull and Staker ahead of him playing very similar roles.
Click to expand...


No deal!

I'd keep Everitt over Sherman any day.

WE MUST KEEP EVERITT.

TALL rebounding defenders are hard to come by.
 
UpTheGuts said:
Agreed. He is in and out of a side that was awful this year, which also had a large number of injuries.

$400k for each of the next 2 years? What imbecilic management.

Either release him for a peppercorn, or pay at least a third of his contract
Click to expand...

Go on, keep showing your teeth and keep snarling.. I will repeat it for you again..

1. he is contracted
2. we are not trying to offload him.

so no deal on either of your dumb suggestions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top