Oppo Camp OTHER CLUB Trade and F/A Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

whats the rules for DFA -- You can still be picked up even if you arent from an afl list in the last 12 months? Greene hasnt played for the dogs for about 2 years.. but is it because once delisted, no matter how much time has passed, you still qualify for DFA? Even if you had been playing for a VFL club.
Yep, once a free agent always a free agent when out of contract or not on an AFL list. For example a 2020 DFA signed on a two year deal becomes an unrestricted FA at the end of that deal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Anyone know if our contractual obligation to subsidise Grundy’s wages ceases if Melbourne chooses to trade him to another club?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Anyone know if our contractual obligation to subsidise Grundy’s wages ceases if Melbourne chooses to trade him to another club?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
From the Geelong board, a poster thought that the deal was between the Pies and Melbourne and not Grundy, assumption is that if Melbourne trade Grundy then the Pies are off the hook for any contribution to Grundy's new contract.
 
Anyone know if our contractual obligation to subsidise Grundy’s wages ceases if Melbourne chooses to trade him to another club?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
I can't see why Dee's would trade Grundy. Be great if they did and we were off the hook though 😆

But just can't see any reason why they would.
 
I can't see why Dee's would trade Grundy. Be great if they did and we were off the hook though 😆

But just can't see any reason why they would.
For the exact reason we did to improve their list with the cap space it frees up. He’ll be at Port next year.
 
I can't see why Dee's would trade Grundy. Be great if they did and we were off the hook though 😆

But just can't see any reason why they would.
Really? I don't think they're going to want to keep him around. They're paying him a decent amount, he doesn't fit alongside Gawn, and they would be better off using the resources on what they do need.

I would be surprised if they kept him, much as I was surprised that Melbourne showed any interest in the first place
 
For the exact reason we did to improve their list with the cap space it frees up. He’ll be at Port next year.
They're not using as much of their salary cap on Grundy like we were. And if Gawn goes down, they have no back up ruck. Unlike us.
 
They're not using as much of their salary cap on Grundy like we were. And if Gawn goes down, they have no back up ruck. Unlike us.
They're still using a fair amount of it on Grundy. I think they could pretty easily find a cheap back-up ruck (look at what we got Cameron for!), and still have resources to divert elsewhere
 
Really? I don't think they're going to want to keep him around. They're paying him a decent amount, he doesn't fit alongside Gawn, and they would be better off using the resources on what they do need.

I would be surprised if they kept him, much as I was surprised that Melbourne showed any interest in the first place
I'm surprised they were interested too, but here we are. If we are off the hook money wise, if Grundy goes to a third club, where does that leave Dee's and what they would have to pay to Port, for example? Grundy would still want his full whack.

And Dee's would still need to get a back up ruckman.

What if Grundy doesn't want to go to Port?
 
From the Geelong board, a poster thought that the deal was between the Pies and Melbourne and not Grundy, assumption is that if Melbourne trade Grundy then the Pies are off the hook for any contribution to Grundy's new contract.

What a brilliant outcome that would be!
Surely Grundy’s not going to be content playing for Casey, hoping for an injury call-up? The lost $$$ might make Dees very unwilling to let him leave.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
They're still using a fair amount of it on Grundy. I think they could pretty easily find a cheap back-up ruck (look at what we got Cameron for!), and still have resources to divert elsewhere
They'd also still need to be paying a large portion of it. Who pays the shortfall that we are no longer responsible for? Why would he do that? Particularly if he took a pay cut as part of the Dee's contract, if that rumour was true. What if he doesn't want to move back to SA?
 
I can't see why Dee's would trade Grundy. Be great if they did and we were off the hook though

But just can't see any reason why they would.

If he becomes vocally unhappy and an frustrated tithe point of becoming a distraction around the Club, they might have to bite the bullet and let him go.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
If he becomes vocally unhappy and an frustrated tithe point of becoming a distraction around the Club, they might have to bite the bullet and let him go.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
What if he doesn't want to go?
 
What a brilliant outcome that would be!
Surely Grundy’s not going to be content playing for Casey, hoping for an injury call-up? The lost $$$ might make Dees very unwilling to let him leave.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
It is an absolute furphy that we would be off the hook if Grundy was on-traded. The only way the on-trade happens is if we consent to having our obligations transfer with Grundy to the new club. That would be a simple formality which the AFL would want to see in place so as to preserve a club/player's right to trade/move.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top