No Opposition Supporters Re-signing Tex, Danger and Sloane *** Crows Only ***

Your thoughts on Dangerfield?


  • Total voters
    684
Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

daniel_4tw

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Posts
2,043
Likes
2,917
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Adelaide
WTF.

It's not like the matching the contract is a loophole or a mistake. It's the rules that the AFL rolled out, and this is the exact situation they expected teams to use it for.

Vic outrage is laughable.

I hope we do match and force a trade. Even if it's to show other clubs that they can't just waltz in and steal our players for free.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Posts
32,675
Likes
18,248
Location
Meekatharra
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
That last one is a load of shit. If restricted free agency was never meant to exist, and it would be abolished when used, why even bother making it in the first place?
I think the club needs to persevere with the "we will match the Geelong offer" but behind close doors talk to the AFL about changing (improving) the compensation clubs receive.
 

Scorpus

Enough is Enough
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Posts
29,700
Likes
62,940
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think the club needs to persevere with the "we will match the Geelong offer" but behind close doors talk to the AFL about changing (improving) the compensation clubs receive.
I agree. Though in some ways I would prefer:
  • Clubs being allowed to trade players wherever, without their consent
  • Free agency as it currently is, with restricted and unrestricted categories
  • No compensation for losing a free agent
Free trade would make up for no compensation as a club could trade a restricted free agent to wherever they want
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Posts
32,675
Likes
18,248
Location
Meekatharra
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
I agree. Though in some ways I would prefer:
  • Clubs being allowed to trade players wherever, without their consent
  • Free agency as it currently is, with restricted and unrestricted categories
  • No compensation for losing a free agent
Free trade would make up for no compensation as a club could trade a restricted free agent to wherever they want
I think these changes will occour when the new CBA is signed.
 

Allefgib

Premium Platinum
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Posts
21,134
Likes
13,251
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
GO YOU CROW BOYS
Thread starter #17,534
Hahaha.... is he trying to say restricted fa was not meant to exist?

If you cant match how else is it restricted?

If ppl dont want it to exist they should thank us for having the courage to get it abolished...
 

Scorpus

Enough is Enough
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Posts
29,700
Likes
62,940
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Adelaide
The main problem with the current trading/free agency system is that there is a chance a club can lose a player and not be able to replace them with someone of similar quality.

The system needs to be modified so that clubs can actively and fairly replace players
 

Cole Dammett

Backyard Cricket Hero
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Posts
1,213
Likes
1,567
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Glenelg Tigers, Adelaide Bite
'However, Dangerfield’s welfare would be a concern as it would leave the line breaking ball-carrier at risk of landing at an unwanted club, adding to the pressure and anxiety of his contract situation.'

Had to laugh at poor Dangerfield's welfare! Have some perspective, goddammit.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Pdub

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Posts
7,065
Likes
16,724
Location
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Adelaide
Hathorne could have matched; if they wanted to. No One stopped them. They chose not to and the godfather deal toward not matching was just an easy excuse.

As soon as the AFL remove comprensation, watch teams match every RFA deal or trade flight risk players a year before their deal expires.

I think we will see some massive changed to the trading system with the new AFL CBA

Hawthorn didn't match because they were worried Buddy would stay if they did and they couldn't afford to have him on a 10 year contract, because that is ridiculous. Hawthorn won't get rescued by the AFL like Sydney will be when it goes pear shaped.
We only match if would be happy for him to stay and play for the offer we use to match.
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,519
Likes
38,509
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
Don't see how Geelong could go round stating that without it warranting some level of investigation from the AFL. Are they saying they've already got an agreement with Dangerfield, despite him being a contracted player? They wouldn't be that stupid.

What I can imagine actually happened is that Geelong was telling recruits that they've got no intention of bottoming out. They're targeting players like Dangerfield, Henderson, and Selwood and intend to continue to push for premierships.
Crows were investigated for Betts after Mick's throwaway lines, cats should now be investigated of the Afl are consistent...
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Posts
32,675
Likes
18,248
Location
Meekatharra
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
Hawthorn didn't match because they were worried Buddy would stay if they did and they couldn't afford to have him on a 10 year contract, because that is ridiculous. Hawthorn won't get rescued by the AFL like Sydney will be when it goes pear shaped.
We only match if would be happy for him to stay and play for the offer we use to match.
That's not the point but. If they wanted to, they could match. They made the choice not to.
 

Scorpus

Enough is Enough
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Posts
29,700
Likes
62,940
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Adelaide
'However, Dangerfield’s welfare would be a concern as it would leave the line breaking ball-carrier at risk of landing at an unwanted club, adding to the pressure and anxiety of his contract situation.'

Had to laugh at poor Dangerfield's welfare! Have some perspective, goddammit.
Poor Dangerfield, having to play at an AFL club he didn't choose for nearly a million dollars a year. Really feel for the bloke.
 

SmegHead

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Posts
4,092
Likes
4,608
AFL Club
Adelaide
'However, Dangerfield’s welfare would be a concern as it would leave the line breaking ball-carrier at risk of landing at an unwanted club, adding to the pressure and anxiety of his contract situation.'

Had to laugh at poor Dangerfield's welfare! Have some perspective, goddammit.
Yet all that pressure and anxiety could go away tomorrow if he just stayed...
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Posts
32,675
Likes
18,248
Location
Meekatharra
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
Why is the word "restricted" used on restricted free agent to distinguish from those which are not restricted...

Jay should have basic English skills of he is claiming to be a journalist!
I don't think it's Jay Clake who has got it wrong; I think it's the AFL who are trying to have ot both ways and are praying to god thst no club will match any offer and make them look silly.

I feel the AFL have an issue and they will have to find a way to deal with it.
 

SmegHead

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Posts
4,092
Likes
4,608
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't think it's Jay Clake who has got it wrong; I think it's the AFL who are trying to have ot both ways and are praying to god thst no club will match any offer and make them look silly.

I feel the AFL have an issue and they will have to find a way to deal with it.
It will no doubt be changed. The AFL have probably already drafted the change to the FA agreement and are waiting for a team to match RFA before they introduce it.
 

cmndstab

Premium Platinum
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Posts
28,298
Likes
16,943
Location
Ingle Farm
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't think it's Jay Clake who has got it wrong; I think it's the AFL who are trying to have ot both ways and are praying to god thst no club will match any offer and make them look silly.

I feel the AFL have an issue and they will have to find a way to deal with it.
Exactly right. Again, the AFL has come up with a system where they've tried to not just say "okay players can move wherever they like" but have set it up so that, really, that's what can happen.

If clubs start using the system in a way that players can't just move wherever they like, then the AFLPA will put pressure on to change the system so they can. And as always, the AFLPA will get their way.

That being said, I have absolutely no problem being the one club to benefit from the AFL's pissweak efforts to sit on the fence before it gets changed.
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,519
Likes
38,509
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
I don't think it's Jay Clake who has got it wrong; I think it's the AFL who are trying to have ot both ways and are praying to god thst no club will match any offer and make them look silly.

I feel the AFL have an issue and they will have to find a way to deal with it.
Jay has got it wrong as we just intend to follow the free agency rules which the Afl agreed to. He is suggesting we ignore the rules which would be incompetent as we would be worse off.

Why distinguish between restricted & unrestricted free agency players of you really want them all to be unrestricted?

The rules are the rules, so the Afl, cats & anyone else can't whinge when we choose to follow them.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Posts
32,675
Likes
18,248
Location
Meekatharra
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
Jay haw got it wrong as we just intend to follow the free agency rules which the Afl agreed to.

Why distinguish between restricted & unrestricted free agency players of you really want them all to be unrestricted?

The rules are the rules, so the Afl, cats & anyone else can't whinge when we choose to follow them.
because he is just delivering a message.
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,519
Likes
38,509
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
because he is just delivering a message.
Which is to not match even though we are fully entitled to & in Afc's best interests to.

Afc have also sent a message that we intend to match within the rules.

No media campaign will change their mind...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom