The Haze Poll

[Geoff]

Pretty simple really. Cast your vote.
Should the club give Haze the two years he wants?
Or
Should Haze accept the clubs one year offer?

 

[sansian]

I havent voted yet because I just don't know.

On one hand rewarding a club legend, an awesome player and a valued club stalwart.

On the other really like seeing the clubs tough stance, this is the way we are doing this from now on, don't like it tough bickies.

So i guess from that, Hase taking the one year probably is the better option.

 

[Side Bet]

Haze, I love you and want you to stay. The passion you have shown this year has been a key to our young guys success.

But.... you should not want a 2 year deal. If you played well next year, you'd get another 1 year contract. If you didn't play well next year you should hang up the boots.

Peter Bell was better than you and retired for that very reason.

 

[leungtl]

He has no leverage.

He knows that no club will offer him a 2 year contract, and it's unlikely any other club would be able to offer him the kind of money we're offering (especially those in a premiership window).

Just take the 1 year deal already and end the drama Hase...

 

[The Night Shift]

Is there like a performanced based contract with a second year option, like NBA ???

On one hand I like the club playing hardball and I can understand where they are coming from as they appear to try to change and shift and improve the way or club operates with contracts and realistic expectations...

HOWEVER

Hasleby is player we need. He wins the ball, good kick, generally isn't played off the park, experienced and can put through the odd goal. A long time player of the club.

I would hate the club to cut off it's own nose to spite it's face, but also I would hate ego to throw away playing for a club over something like a period of contract. Surely the money isn;t the issue, just the lenght of time.

I'm gonna vote for the 2 years, however, I do like the club developing some nads when it comes to contracts. I just hope the club applies playing hardball correctly.

 

[jinxd]

Ain't age a bitch?!

 

[Freo Shark]

I would hate the club to cut off it's own nose to spite it's face, but also I would hate ego to throw away playing for a club over something like a period of contract. Surely the money isn;t the issue, just the lenght of time.

Good point here NF. I reckon its not so much the period but the money and security it offers.

IF you were to believe Hackdorn and hes had his pay cut significantly thats where it grates with me. I'm prepared to give the club the benefit over the length but to cut someones pay like Hase who has played well this year is where the professionalism of the club is undone. There must be more than just what we have heard. Surely he was worth at least what he was on if not more. Theres enough players who deserves a massive pay cut if not a pink slip.

 

[Rabbitoh]

Love The Haze, always loved The Haze, wanna see The Haze in purple, finish his career in purple.....one year at a time.seems fair.

 

[Rob]

Never had a problem with a 2 year deal, although the 2nd year should have a performance element and I would have thought $250-300k a year is reasonable.

I'd add though that there seem to be other issues that aren't public - perhaps Hasleby isn't the great role model I thought he was.

 

[jinxd]

It'd be a shame to see Hase leave our club... but I'd still only offer him the one year deal. The pay cut is probably due to rebuilding/salary cap issues. I think these days you'd only pay him what he's worth, not what he could be worth. (i.e. Performance-based instead of experience-based salary).

I know he's just returned from a knee injury last year, but until he shows the club that he's superstar or a "game-breaker", they're not going to give him what he wants.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

200 K one year deal with monetary incentives on top, if he doesnt like it, he can try his luck at another club, sad that it is becoming such a public dispute, but i believe the club is in the right here

 

[dominguez]

Is there like a performanced based contract with a second year option, like NBA ???

That seems the fairest option.

Lets say he's worth $250,000pa the club could pay him $250K in a standard contract next season then in 2011 have a contract along the lines of $60,000 base pay + $10,000 per game or a little less per game then some incentives based on finishing top 10 in the B&F.

 

[Nodgey]

2 years. If Hase isn't in our best 22 in 2011 I'd be very surprised.

 

[Notorious_29]

2 years.

Just do it.

 

[BeinPurplenGreen]

Is there like a performanced based contract with a second year option, like NBA ???

I thought those contracts were not allowed under the terms of the AFLPA bargaining agreement, but apparently Brendan Gale agreed two years ago that they were acceptable so long as the first year was guaranteed and they didn't run for more than 1 option clause. Certainly Cameron Cloke has one, as do a number of other Melbourne based players over 25. If it is good enough for Cloke surely its good enough for Hase??

On one hand I like the club playing hardball and I can understand where they are coming from as they appear to try to change and shift and improve the way or club operates with contracts and realistic expectations...

HOWEVER

Hasleby is player we need. He wins the ball, good kick, generally isn't played off the park, experienced and can put through the odd goal. A long time player of the club.

I'm gonna vote for the 2 years, however, I do like the club developing some nads when it comes to contracts. I just hope the club applies playing hardball correctly.

I agree that it is a difficult situation. Now that the dispute is out in the public domain, I fear that the club will feel it has to be seen to be staying tough, which just makes it even harder to resolve.

I read Harv's public statement in the press conference as being an end to negotiations on the length of the deal - basically a take it or leave it at 1 year. Hopefully I'm wrong and the parties keep talking.

200 K one year deal with monetary incentives on top, if he doesnt like it, he can try his luck at another club, sad that it is becoming such a public dispute, but i believe the club is in the right here

Personally, I'd be offering $285,000 for 2010, and some incentives (like an extra $80k if he is in the 2010 Doig top 5, and another $60K if he plays 20+ games in 2010). Plus an option clause that triggers a second year if those benchmarks are met. Those incentives would put him in the best paid players at the club.

If the club sticks to 1 year though, I'll back the club on this one - but only because I have no time for Vanderweedscum. His consistent public leaking of contract negotiations is garbage.

I'm also not too sure about the flow on effects of the dispute (which some posters seem to think will affect other Freo players approach to contracts). I'd be very surprised (and disappointed) if, as some are suggesting, the dispute with Hase is enough to trigger Sandi and Pav to leave, or our kids to fear for their future at the club. If it was to cause Murphy to walk out a year early that would just be tragic too...

Personally, I think it's just part of the business of pro sport these days -particularly given the impact that GC and Demetriou's WestSydWombats entering the comp are going to have on player salaries from 2011-2016.

 

[bigkev bleeds purple]

I sympathise with Hase, a two year deal is not unreasonable and from his personal perspective is more desirable.

However, I think he needs to walk a mile in the club's shoes. If he really loves the club as much as he says he does, he will understand that it makes sense from their perspective to take things a year at a time and he will work hard to ensure next season is not his last with the club.