NO Third Party for Melbourne

[XXX KINGS]

What a silly post, its just a cop out. You're only saying its okay coz you're a Carlton supporter. The fact is its just WRONG to allow it to happen only 4 years ago then disallow it now just because the AFL wants GWS to be successful straight away. GWS will fold in 10 years!

Are you dense mate? Where in my post did I suggest anything remotely close to this? Tom Scully should be entitled to receive third party payments for staying at Melbourne so long as the party providing him with money benefit from doing so as well, just like Judd with Visy.

 

[XXX KINGS]

Not really the exposure Visy would be looking for, surely. By your logic the cartel case Visy and Amcor settled with the ACCC a while back is good publicity.

I think it's fair to say that VISY using Chris Judd's name for marketing and having him make corporate appearances creates exposure that isn't exactly equivalent to what you suggest. I know what you're getting at however, but when Chris Judd makes a corporate appearance in front of 80 clients or prospective clients and talks about VISY being a great company and how great their support for Carlton is, VISY hold onto their clients.

Should Chris Judd supply his name and make these appearances for free?

Why is there no fuss made of the other 115 players recieving third party payments when we don't even know who is paying them? At least we've seen Judd make appearances supporting VISY, what are these players doing to earn their bucks?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

The game is so compromised that it is bordering on corruption. Draw, third party payments, MRP, umpires etc etc.

Now wonder crowds are down. Once again Carlton is allowed to cheat but not anyone else.

Dees should do whatever they want and then threaten the AFL with court action but as they provide funding they can do nothing but bend over and ask for some lube to ease the pain.

Its disgraceful because its so bloody obvious what their agenda is.

Agree. Sometimes I wonder why I bother to continue following this league. When I was younger I loved following the V/AFL. Now I only really enjoy following the MFC and the rigging of the league for financial benefit means it has become a business/product and not a sport/competition.

 

[stickman11]

edited for fat controller reasons

 

[melbournemartin]

Is Luke Ball also working for Visy on a $200,000 p.a contract?
That's nice for him.

As far as I was aware, Luke Ball put a massive price tag (let's say 600,000) to put off other teams from taking him and now is on almost minimum wage in his second so that his overall wage was something more reasonable.

Discussions about the legitimacy of free agency aside, I'd consider that a form of cheating the system, as they got Luke Ball for very little cost in terms of the draft/trade.

 

[willydave]

Anybody else listen to SEN around 6? apparently MFC had a 200K deal regected or something, for Scully to do work for REACH, Judd style

Obviously you weren't listening. Talk about a bad case of chinese whispers!!

Mark Robinson put the Reach deal forward as a stupid hypothetical. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[asanque]

No, it took them the best part of a year to develop the role, and THEN the AFL approved it. Judd did not start the role until then,

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...sun/comments/cap_doesnt_fit_not_so_visy_judd/

['As part of Judd’s move from West Coast to Carlton, he signed on as an environmental ambassador for Visy, the club’s major sponsor which happened to be run by its president, the late Richard Pratt.']

If the deal was part of Judd's transfer from WCE, how could it take a year to develop?

 

[Bosun]

The game is so compromised that it is bordering on corruption. Draw, third party payments, MRP, umpires etc etc.

Now wonder crowds are down. Once again Carlton is allowed to cheat but not anyone else.

Dees should do whatever they want and then threaten the AFL with court action but as they provide funding they can do nothing but bend over and ask for some lube to ease the pain.

Its disgraceful because its so bloody obvious what their agenda is.

How exactly can the governing body (technically) allow you to cheat??
We arent breaking their rules.

Anyway as soon as 3rd party deals were allowed (which didnt start with Judd) it pretty much made the salary cap void. The AFL need to make up their mind not some 50/50 wishy washy crap where some are allowed and some arent, its too open to corruption.

 

[Big Kahuna Boot]

..the whole 'carlton are cheating' is bogus histrionics.. ..the deal was created, the AFL checked it out and approved it.. ..as other deals were likewise made with other players, both before and after the Judd visy deal.. ..3rd party deals have been approved for ages, and are also not banned now either.. ..the rules have been tightened, i'm sure there's a clever way to still arrange 3rd party deals, it's simply that certain deals such as Judd's are no longer allowed [for now, to ensure expansion teams get their targets]..it's not a case of blues cheating, the afl approved, and still approve the judd deal.. ..otherwise they'd make the blues alter the deal until they did approve..

..if there weren't any expansion teams entering the comp, these kind of 3rd party deals would still be going on as per normal.. ..these rule changes is purely the afl's way of limiting a club's ability to compete with the war chests of their expansion clubs..

 

[DermiesLuvChild]

As far as I was aware, Luke Ball put a massive price tag (let's say 600,000) to put off other teams from taking him and now is on almost minimum wage in his second so that his overall wage was something more reasonable.

Discussions about the legitimacy of free agency aside, I'd consider that a form of cheating the system, as they got Luke Ball for very little cost in terms of the draft/trade.

You are correct, his first contract was front loaded. He then signed a second contract for a lower amount. No rules broken.
Melbourne were free to take Ball with their pick 18 (Tapscott), however they declined (like every other club did prior to pick 30).
Collingwood offered pick 30 & or Tyson Goldsack during trade week, yet St Kilda refused to trade an uncontracted player...so he walked.

 

[Big Kahuna Boot]

You are correct, his first contract was front loaded. He then signed a second contract for a lower amount. No rules broken.
Melbourne were free to take Ball with their pick 18 (Tapscott), however they declined (like every other club did prior to pick 30).
Collingwood offered pick 30 & or Tyson Goldsack during trade week, yet St Kilda refused to trade an uncontracted player...so he walked.

..actually you offered pick 30 and Wellingham!! and crazy Rossy said no.. ..so he walked.. ....the [perhaps] unsavoury part was Ball refusing to meet with any other club and the high price tag together.. ..either one perhaps not so bad but it was sending a blatant message that he didn't wanna go anywhere else.. ..again, nothing unusual since player's nominate preferred clubs all the time for trade talk, just not common in regards to draft talk..

edit - ..in regards to 'unsavoury', meaning no slight on Ball.. ..i reckon he's a champ and was ultimately dudded by a club he loved and bled for, and is now repaying the faith the pies showed in him by the truckload.. ..in a way saints forced his hand, they should have taken the offered trade from the pies.. ..lose Ball in the off-season, and chase Lovett for high cost in the same off-season..??.. ..dodge, so dodge..

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...sun/comments/cap_doesnt_fit_not_so_visy_judd/

['As part of Judd’s move from West Coast to Carlton, he signed on as an environmental ambassador for Visy, the club’s major sponsor which happened to be run by its president, the late Richard Pratt.']

If the deal was part of Judd's transfer from WCE, how could it take a year to develop?

That is Mark Robinson's take on it.

The Visy approach was independent of the Carlton approach. In fact, during a large gathering at Raheen, a Visy manager floated the idea to Judd and he was keen. The club were not in on the deal.

As I said, it then took some time to develop the role as he had to be doing something tangible from the outset. The AFL did not sign off on it until late in the 2008 season, regardless of what Robinson said for the sake of expediency.

 

[liz]

That is Mark Robinson's take on it.

The Visy approach was independent of the Carlton approach. In fact, during a large gathering at Raheen, a Visy manager floated the idea to Judd and he was keen. The club were not in on the deal.

As I said, it then took some time to develop the role as he had to be doing something tangible from the outset. The AFL did not sign off on it until late in the 2008 season, regardless of what Robinson said for the sake of expediency.

If there was a legitimate role at Visy for an "environment ambassador", why did it take some time to develop the actual role so that he was doing something tangible? Surely the role would have come first, and the best person to fill the role second?

Or was this a case of a party clearly related to Carlton (in a real sense, if not a strictly legal sense - at the time) trying to manufacture a justification for paying a Carlton player outside the cap?

Seems like a quite straightforward question to answer.

 

[Simple Jack]

Agree. Sometimes I wonder why I bother to continue following this league. When I was younger I loved following the V/AFL. Now I only really enjoy following the MFC and the rigging of the league for financial benefit means it has become a business/product and not a sport/competition.

I know, we should really piss off the draft and salary cap and go back to zoning, that was a great fair and equitable competition.

To be honest I agree with you about the AFL corruption, if the Saints folded, I literally wouldn't watch one game a year (well maybe the GF). Much prefer the VFL/Local footy.

 

[Ando727]

That is Mark Robinson's take on it.

The Visy approach was independent of the Carlton approach. In fact, during a large gathering at Raheen, a Visy manager floated the idea to Judd and he was keen. The club were not in on the deal.

As I said, it then took some time to develop the role as he had to be doing something tangible from the outset. The AFL did not sign off on it until late in the 2008 season, regardless of what Robinson said for the sake of expediency.

Hilarious. You don't think the president of both Carlton and owner of Visy, Dick Pratt, had any hand in uniting these two parties? I'm not generally one for conspiracy theories, but this one is too obvious for anyone to ignore. It's an ultimately meaningless role he has at Visy. It was created with the sole intention of giving Judd a job to entice him to Carlton. This "job" is not actually profitable for Visy - it doesn't generate big dollars for them, and their commitment to the environment, please... In any normal setting, this would be considered a conflict of interest at best, and cheating the salary cap at worst. Because it's the AFL, it is overlooked.

 

[morgoth]

How exactly can the governing body (technically) allow you to cheat??
We arent breaking their rules.

Anyway as soon as 3rd party deals were allowed (which didnt start with Judd) it pretty much made the salary cap void. The AFL need to make up their mind not some 50/50 wishy washy crap where some are allowed and some arent, its too open to corruption.

Oh please. We all know what Carlton did. I don't begrude them but the AFL via its new rules has admitted that you went outside the spirit of the rules. The fact is the AFL was desperate to stem the losses at Carlton and turned a blind eye.

It was so blatant, your president arranges for a high paying, nothing job, at the company he owns. Would Judd have got that role if he did not come to Carlton, no.

Maybe you did not technicaly cheat but you certianly went against the spirit of the salary cap and the AFL was a party to it. Now because they want Scully at GWS they tighten the rules. Its sickening.

 

[stickman11]

Oh please. We all know what Carlton did. I don't begrude them but the AFL via its new rules has admitted that you went outside the spirit of the rules. The fact is the AFL was desperate to stem the losses at Carlton and turned a blind eye.

It was so blatant, your president arranges for a high paying, nothing job, at the company he owns. Would Judd have got that role if he did not come to Carlton, no.

Maybe you did not technicaly cheat but you certianly went against the spirit of the salary cap and the AFL was a party to it. Now because they want Scully at GWS they tighten the rules. Its sickening.

There would still be nothing stopping a third party from offering Scully some form of employment, or to endorse a product or service outside of footy. Especially if no link can be established between the private company and club. And how are you going to really prove any known link.

 

[Brasher]

Reading through some of the comments makes me think there is a belief that 3rd party payments started with Judd, Carlton and Visy.

Outside of the football club payments have been happening since the days of your full forward having to close his butcher shop on Saturday to line up for the local pub side.

The AFL has created this mess by on one hand promoting the level playing field of salary caps and drafts and then on the other handing out priority picks, concession drafts, compromised draws and financial rescue packages. It creates rules designed to preserve the heritage and romance of our great game (father/son, traditional rivalry games) whilst independently implementing rule changes without the capacity to comprehend the negative consequences of these changes.

The Scully saga is just the latest chapter in a very poorly written book and sums up everything that is wrong with this administration.

- How can a 30 game, 20 year old be able to earn $5m in a salary cap controlled league? Where is GWS's corporate governance and fiscal responsibility.....but then again, its so much easier to spend it when you haven't earnt it I suppose.
- Scully came to the Demons via probably the most inequitable rule of recent times - priority picks and the ability of clubs to be rewarded for poor performances. I remember Demons fans ringing up talk back radio as early as June 2009 with their phantom multi-pick first round drafts.
- How can the AFL not have a formula for clubs losing players to GWS? Maybe if Melbourne knew what they were getting in return if they lost Scully they may let him go and the $1M per season on offer may turn out to be lower and more in line with market expectations.
- Does the AFL have any plan on how to ensure the long term viability of the GWS and GC for that matter when the initial gloss wears off? Or will there be a series of last minute crisis meetings when the situation becomes critical to build rescue packages where the AFL comes out smelling like roses at the expense of the struggling tradional clubs?

The AFL choses to rule the league without compromise until it suits their own broader (and personal performance package incentives & egos) goals.

 

[Deesgusting]

The Scully saga is just the latest chapter in a very poorly written book and sums up everything that is wrong with this administration.

- How can a 30 game, 20 year old be able to earn $5m in a salary cap controlled league? Where is GWS's corporate governance and fiscal responsibility.....but then again, its so much easier to spend it when you haven't earnt it I suppose.
- Scully came to the Demons via probably the most inequitable rule of recent times - priority picks and the ability of clubs to be rewarded for poor performances. I remember Demons fans ringing up talk back radio as early as June 2009 with their phantom multi-pick first round drafts.
- How can the AFL not have a formula for clubs losing players to GWS? Maybe if Melbourne knew what they were getting in return if they lost Scully they may let him go and the $1M per season on offer may turn out to be lower and more in line with market expectations.
- Does the AFL have any plan on how to ensure the long term viability of the GWS and GC for that matter when the initial gloss wears off? Or will there be a series of last minute crisis meetings when the situation becomes critical to build rescue packages where the AFL comes out smelling like roses at the expense of the struggling tradional clubs?

Because this guy (and fat Vlad) say so.

 

[Deesgusting]

AFL is a not-for-profit organisation, and we would rovvve to see every crub prosper evenry. Prease crose this thread. Thankyou

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

Anybody else listen to SEN around 6? apparently MFC had a 200K deal regected or something, for Scully to do work for REACH, Judd style

REACH provides support services to young people and if this would be the case I'd be annoyed that Scully would be paid that much through this organisation. The money should be spent on disengaged youth.

I love footy and want Scully to stay but not like this.

 

[stickman11]

REACH provides support services to young people and if this would be the case I'd be annoyed that Scully would be paid that much through this organisation. The money should be spent on disengaged youth.

I love footy and want Scully to stay but not like this.

I am pretty sure REACH was just a made up example.

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

I am pretty sure REACH was just a made up example.

Good but even to use it as an example is wrong. Footy is important to us yes but services like REACH are way more important.

Why can't Joe Gooknick hire Scully in some way? Do we still have contact with him?

 

[00Stinger]

That is Mark Robinson's take on it.

The Visy approach was independent of the Carlton approach. In fact, during a large gathering at Raheen, a Visy manager floated the idea to Judd and he was keen. The club were not in on the deal.

As I said, it then took some time to develop the role as he had to be doing something tangible from the outset. The AFL did not sign off on it until late in the 2008 season, regardless of what Robinson said for the sake of expediency.

Having Dick Pratt as president of CFC and on the board at Visy surely this would be a conflict of interest, would it not?

I know that Visy would say that Pratt was not involved in any board room meetings when the Judd deal was put together ext. but geez I don't see why this deal would be approved and Melbournes knocked back

 

[Demonheart]

Reading through some of the comments makes me think there is a belief that 3rd party payments started with Judd, Carlton and Visy.

Outside of the football club payments have been happening since the days of your full forward having to close his butcher shop on Saturday to line up for the local pub side.

The AFL has created this mess by on one hand promoting the level playing field of salary caps and drafts and then on the other handing out priority picks, concession drafts, compromised draws and financial rescue packages. It creates rules designed to preserve the heritage and romance of our great game (father/son, traditional rivalry games) whilst independently implementing rule changes without the capacity to comprehend the negative consequences of these changes.

The Scully saga is just the latest chapter in a very poorly written book and sums up everything that is wrong with this administration.

- How can a 30 game, 20 year old be able to earn $5m in a salary cap controlled league? Where is GWS's corporate governance and fiscal responsibility.....but then again, its so much easier to spend it when you haven't earnt it I suppose.
- Scully came to the Demons via probably the most inequitable rule of recent times - priority picks and the ability of clubs to be rewarded for poor performances. I remember Demons fans ringing up talk back radio as early as June 2009 with their phantom multi-pick first round drafts.
- How can the AFL not have a formula for clubs losing players to GWS? Maybe if Melbourne knew what they were getting in return if they lost Scully they may let him go and the $1M per season on offer may turn out to be lower and more in line with market expectations.
- Does the AFL have any plan on how to ensure the long term viability of the GWS and GC for that matter when the initial gloss wears off? Or will there be a series of last minute crisis meetings when the situation becomes critical to build rescue packages where the AFL comes out smelling like roses at the expense of the struggling tradional clubs?

The AFL choses to rule the league without compromise until it suits their own broader (and personal performance package incentives & egos) goals.

Have to agree with this post and also other comments like Morgoth's, the AFL continues to damage it's brand on this issue, integrity left the building years ago.

It's clear that the AFL want Scully to go to GWS and they just continue to up the ante and tweak the rules to make it impossible for Melbourne to compete and for Scully to say no. They're clearly having trouble signing quality players.
Listening to people who know the kid it sounds like he wants to stay at the club, but it's going to be bloody hard. I don't blame him at all if he goes, he hasn't asked for any of this and he hasn't made any demands, just a matter of being at the right place and the right time.

On the Carlton matter it's not their fault either, the AFL signed off on it so they didn't cheat, it's just the AFL massaging the rules to cover their previous incompetent decisions (ie previous penalties).