List Mgmt. Should more clubs be willing to hold players to their contacts if they ask for a trade?

[Cleric]

It's always been said that you don't want a player at your club that doesn't want to be there, and that's been the motto of alot of clubs who have traded out players who have requested a trade mid contract.
The concern is that the player won't play his best football if he doesn't want to be there.

However, in every case where a player has been held to his contract, the player has kept up their form the following years.

 

[Purple Suit]

It's always been said that you don't want a player at your club that doesn't want to be there, and that's been the motto of alot of clubs who have traded out players who have requested a trade mid contract.
The concern is that the player won't play his best football if he doesn't want to be there.

However, in every case where a player has been held to his contract, the player has kept up their form the following years.

Not every case.

McCarthy sat out when he didn’t get traded for 12 months. I’m sure there are other examples too.

 

[Rich01]

Players have too much power.
They want juicy contracts and the safety of them when it suits them but also the ability to break them.

What will give some balance back is the ability of clubs to trade players that are under contract to ANY club they choose to maximise their return. Size and length of contract would be a consideration at first eg. Those that signed for 4+ years at $700k+ can be traded by clubs without player consent.

Because the players association have pushed so hard, they need to understand now that they are assets that need to be maximised and relationships are transactional.

If a player doesn’t want to play for a club any more, that’s fine. Trade them to the highest bidder.

 

[00Stinger]

Yes

Players want long term deals for security which clubs are obliging

Therefore players should honor that deal

 

[_Mike_]

It's been done before... Hawthorn & Buckenarra

 

[Cleric]

It's been done before... Hawthorn & Buckenarra

You have Sydney holding Papley, Geelong holding Kelly, Melbourne holding Petracca, Clary and Kossie last year, Carlton held Gibbs, and there's more. All of them played well the year after for the same club.

 

[_Mike_]

You have Sydney holding Papley, Geelong holding Kelly, Melbourne holding Petracca, Clary and Kossie last year, Carlton held Gibbs, and there's more. All of them played well the year after for the same club.

Dunkley still played well and held down an important midfield spot on his last year at the Dogs, when a trade to Essendon was refused. In hindsight I dont think he would regret that decision having gone to the Lions and won another flag, instead of going to Essendon.

 

[The Terrible Thinker]

Should there be a loyalty bonus or loyalty loading as a carrot for players to complete their contracts.

 

[Aristotle Pickett the3rd]

The way the Bulldogs were shafted by Geelong with Bailey Smith

3

Bailey Smith

Age

24

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

should have never happened.

 

[fnerd]

Of course they should*

* this only applies if the Victorian clubs and the player that wants to leave is looking to go back to a non vic club.

Of course if the roles are reversed then no , absolutely not ,.

said non vic club must release the poor captive player immediately, mental health/family/nightlife/better coffee, doesn’t matter the reason ,the player who wants to a Victorian club must be traded instantly and at an extremely discounted rate

This is only fair and humane

Don’t believe me ?… just go back over any Jon Ralph or Tom Morris article on trades between vic clubs and non vic clubs over the years.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Players have too much power.
They want juicy contracts and the safety of them when it suits them but also the ability to break them.

What will give some balance back is the ability of clubs to trade players that are under contract to ANY club they choose to maximise their return. Size and length of contract would be a consideration at first eg. Those that signed for 4+ years at $700k+ can be traded by clubs without player consent.

Because the players association have pushed so hard, they need to understand now that they are assets that need to be maximised and relationships are transactional.

If a player doesn’t want to play for a club any more, that’s fine. Trade them to the highest bidder.

Yeah can't trade every player because some players aren't paid that much in the scheme of things. Can't be paid $150k or $200k and be expected to move across the country next week. If on a good salary that could be a requirement as the player has the funds to easily rent a new place few a months. Don't want to take that risk? Then take a smaller contract

 

[Altum Volantes]

Some clubs regularly pursue contracted players, other clubs never do (West Coast is definitely in that category, for better or worse).

If there were actual rules/restrictions or penalties in place for either the player trying to break contract or the receiving club for pursuing said player then it might be more viable for clubs to push to retain want-away talent - by purely pointing at the contract they willingly signed - but ultimately the league doesn't want to appear to be making it any harder for players to move clubs whenever they feel like it, so i imagine it will always be a case by case basis with the majority of players getting their way on the basis of not wanting a disgruntled player at the club or coming to a mutually beneficial deal.

 

[Altum Volantes]

Yeah can't trade every player because some players aren't paid that much in the scheme of things. Can't be paid $150k or $200k and be expected to move across the country next week. If on a good salary that could be a requirement as the player has the funds to easily rent a new place few a months. Don't want to take that risk? Then take a smaller contract

Well no, you definitely can do that, that's how world sport works.

It is hard for AFL folk to grasp that I think but ultimately if you don't want to get paid $150k a year to play a sport that comes with the risk of being moved to another club then ya know, go get another job, because there are plenty of guys willing to do that.

The league is still stuck in a suburban mentality on stuff like this.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Well no, you definitely can do that, that's how world sport works.

It is hard for AFL folk to grasp that I think but ultimately if you don't want to get paid $150k a year to play a sport that comes with the risk of being moved to another club then ya know, go get another job, because there are plenty of guys willing to do that.

The league is still stuck in a suburban mentality on stuff like this.

You can earn 150k in other jobs pretty easily that don't have risk of move. In American sports they're paid millions

 

[Altum Volantes]

You can earn 150k in other jobs pretty easily that don't have risk of move. In American sports they're paid millions

Like i said, if they don't want to take everything that comes with playing at the top level, they can go and get one of those other jobs.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Like i said, if they don't want to take everything that comes with playing at the top level, they can go and get one of those other jobs.

The only thing I could say is if AFL were to go down that path then the AFL should pay for all moving expenses for player and family, including ensuring they have similar housing to what they had in the new city. Then the salary issues shouldn't be too much a problem.

 

[Altum Volantes]

The only thing I could say is if AFL were to go down that path then the AFL should pay for all moving expenses for player and family, including ensuring they have similar housing to what they had in the new city. Then the salary issues shouldn't be too much a problem.

Seriously?

That's not how it works - it's professional sport not social welfare.

I don't like the idea of the sport becoming a meat market either but part of the issue is that the players expect everything they want to be handed to them. If you are on the lower end of a list and can't make the realities of being a professional sportsman work with your current lifestyle then you go and do something else - that's how it works.