I think Collingwood haven't delisted marsh yet because they are pissed off with Eagles and Freo. Neither were prepared to trade for him, even though both have delisted key backs (Brown, Silvagni). I bet one has promised to pick him up as soon as he is delisted for nothing. The Pies may be playing hardball for this reason.
List Mgmt. Marsh going home for personal reasons
- Thread starter good4footy
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Quite possible.
Bad Horse
Petfood
Collingwood Magpies - Brayden Sier 2019 Player Sponsor
Collingwood Magpies AFLW - Sarah Rowe Player Sponsor 2019
Collingwood - Jaidyn Stephenson Player Sponsor 2018
Collingwood - Matthew Scharenberg Player Sponsor 2017
Collingwood Magpies AFLW - Steph Chiocci 2017
- Mar 26, 2016
- 4,387
- 12,010
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Leave Buckley out of my beer thread, I don't want it contaminated
Bad Horse
Petfood
Collingwood Magpies - Brayden Sier 2019 Player Sponsor
Collingwood Magpies AFLW - Sarah Rowe Player Sponsor 2019
Collingwood - Jaidyn Stephenson Player Sponsor 2018
Collingwood - Matthew Scharenberg Player Sponsor 2017
Collingwood Magpies AFLW - Steph Chiocci 2017
- Mar 26, 2016
- 4,387
- 12,010
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Or perhaps they haven't delisted him yet because they believe the relationship, his health, and his position in the club is retrievable given time?
Quite possible.
- Jan 12, 2011
- 25,401
- 35,580
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Its more about TPP
If we delist him we have to pay out his existing contract
Then we use his vacancy to draft another player who would also be paid
We are effectively paying twice for the same list spot
- Nov 30, 2006
- 4,580
- 5,454
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Is there any other teams?
That makes sense. I was trying to work out why the journos were linking him being retained to our salary cap. We really need HIM to rip up his contract and walk.
Were GWS able to upgrade anyone in place of McCarthy this year? If so we may be able to put him on the LTI due to mental health reasons. Purely from a list perspective that would enable us to go with a list of 40 (4 ND picks) and be able to still upgrade Cox immediately next year.
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Apex36
Hall of Famer
- Mar 26, 2014
- 39,078
- 81,589
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
If he walks out on the club with the intention of never returning he's effectively broken his contract and the club doesn't have to pay him out. This has nothing to do with TPP.
It does because it frees up cap. The contract is torn up.
If the club delists him BEFORE he has officially walked our and broken his contract then we have to carry that cost in our salary cap. Not sure he has officially quit the club as yet. Pretty sure GWS had to carry McCarthys salary even though he broke the contract by refusing to play?
TPP implications are dependant upon which party terminates the contract and why.
Apex36
Hall of Famer
- Mar 26, 2014
- 39,078
- 81,589
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I'm aware of all that.
In regards to McCarthy, GWS probably could have ripped up his contract without having to pay him out, but as it stood it was in their best interests to retain him and trade him the next year. Doing that allowed them to procure a top 3 pick rather than letting him walk for free. Apples and oranges to the Marsh situation really given that Marsh never really had much trade value to begin with.
So why would we rip up his contract if he hasn't walked out on the club? Clearly he's rated highly internally, so delisting him without him requesting it makes no sense.
Which brings us back to my original point. This has nothing to do with TPP. Either Marsh has walked out on the club and broken his contract, or he has signaled that he wishes to continue on with us if possible in which case we retain him and put him on the LTI if he needs extended leave to sort himself out.
Fair enough its boiling down to semantics a bit now. We are pretty much on the same page....
Tarkyn_24
Okeydoke7 is [redacted]
- Dec 23, 2006
- 52,053
- 73,184
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Can confirm. Page 32.
Similar threads
