Recommitted Tim Kelly [requested a trade to West Coast]

[AsterixTheGaul]

Not sure what grounds there'd be for a restraint of trade case. If one party doesn't want the trade on offer then what trade is being restrained?

A lawyer friend on mine thinks there may be grounds for a player to challenge the draft if they want to move locations and are blocked. Who the employer is may be questioned. The ability for an employee to hold back a player from living in their desired location is pushing limits. It is one of the concerns that I’d holding the AFL back from trading players against their wishes.

Without knowing all the nuances and legal issues, I believe the concern is real.

 

[Kwality]

Do you know what pick upgrades are?

Because you seem to be totally ignoring them.

What would pick 16 plus another pick or player get the Eagles?

What would picks 18 plus 22 net?

22 plus the Eagles 2020 1st?

The Eagles have a lot of options with picks and potentially players.

As for Freo the player needs to agree. They are a basket case. AFLPA investigating their medical program after player manager raised concerns from a group of players at Freo he mqnagers, players getting released in season, both Hills looking at leaving, Landon as well, assistant coaches being let go, the senior coach on shakey ground and at board level the pressure is on.

The only reason a player would nominate Freo is $$$$$ and only $$$$$. Which is great for the Eagles because you want team first players not selfish money grabbers.

The Eagles are only in the box seat IF Kelly wants to go there.
Many players want to see their current club looked & in the circumstances I'd be staggered if Kel doesnt feel he owes the Cats.
Sure unless he still has an objection to Freo, money might overcome that but more likely contract term would swing him, both clubs will be around the same in money terms.

 

[Kwality]

A lawyer friend on mine thinks there may be grounds for a player to challenge the draft if they want to move locations and are blocked. Who the employer is may be questioned. The ability for an employee to hold back a player from living in their desired location is pushing limits. It is one of the concerns that I’d holding the AFL back from trading players against their wishes.

Without knowing all the nuances and legal issues, I believe the concern is real.

Its been there for ever, restraint of trade.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

A lawyer friend on mine thinks there may be grounds for a player to challenge the draft if they want to move locations and are blocked. Who the employer is may be questioned. The ability for an employee to hold back a player from living in their desired location is pushing limits. It is one of the concerns that I’d holding the AFL back from trading players against their wishes.

Without knowing all the nuances and legal issues, I believe the concern is real.

Again not a lawyer but I guess any one is free to dispute the terms and conditions of their employment contract. It's not like these terms and conditions aren't well understood by all parties as the time of signing the contract though.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Its been there for ever, restraint of trade.

Don't think it's restraint of trade in the AFL on the grounds that the players are still employees of the AFL. They're not actually being transferred from one employer to another, ergo there's no trade to restrain

 

[Kwality]

Don't think it's restraint of trade in the AFL on the grounds that the players are still employees of the AFL. They're not actually being transferred from one employer to another, ergo there's no trade to restrain

Nope.

 

[fnerd]

freo won't respect that
they have a massive chip when it comes to WC
"if" Kelly nominates the Eagles, freo will do everything they can to undermine the eagles

Sounds like you are the one who has the chip

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Don't think it's restraint of trade in the AFL on the grounds that the players are still employees of the AFL. They're not actually being transferred from one employer to another, ergo there's no trade to restrain

One of the lines could be along “piercing the veil” whereby they look behind a monopoly that has structures in place to hide what would normally be expected as independent organisations and ability for an employee to move in an open market. Now without getting a bunch of QC’s on the board, there are a few options I heard hence the view there may be a case that cracks open the validity of the draft.

How about it gets left as an potential sleeper unless we have an employment lawyer responding.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

OBS of the lines could be along “piercing the veil” whereby they look behind a monopoly that has structures in place to hide what would normally be expected as independent organisations and ability for an employee to move in an open market. Now without getting a bunch of QC’s on the board, there are a few options I heard hence the view there may be a case that cracks open the validity of the draft.

How about it gets left as an potential sleeper unless we have an employment lawyer responding.

Yeah, tag a lawyer of you know one but my guess is that they're not independent organisations so normal need not apply.

 

[West World]

The Eagles are only in the box seat IF Kelly wants to go there.
Many players want to see their current club looked & in the circumstances I'd be staggered if Kel doesnt feel he owes the Cats.
Sure unless he still has an objection to Freo, money might overcome that but more likely contract term would swing him, both clubs will be around the same in money terms.

What do you define as looking after their club though?

As to owing the Cats I dont agree.

Kelly has been paid rookie wages for two seasons and his output for the club would be valued at three to four times higher that what he was paid. That in itself actually indicated the Cats owe him.

They drafted him? Well the Eagkes would have a couple of picks later.

Cats developed him? He was a mature age recruit who develiped himself and delivered from day 1.

So Geelong used a 2nd rounder which they will get back in a trade PLUS an extra 1st as a min. Profit to the Cats in draft picks.

All of these kpi's are in the Cats favour MASSIVELY!

So what MORE does Kelly owe them? He shoukd sacrifice going to his preferred employer and a chance of success so Geelong can get a better draft pick 10 places in the draft potentially better than what the Eagles have, potentially?

Cats fans on here need to just step back and think about all that. What has Kelly done for the club. Are they that selfish and self centred that they believe their club would force an out of contract player with legitimate family issues to a club not of his choice simply to move up the draft ladder several places?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

What do you define as looking after their club though?

As to owing the Cats I dont agree.

Kelly has been paid rookie wages for two seasons and his output for the club would be valued at three to four times higher that what he was paid. That in itself actually indicated the Cats owe him.

They drafted him? Well the Eagkes would have a couple of picks later.

Cats developed him? He was a mature age recruit who develiped himself and delivered from day 1.

So Geelong used a 2nd rounder which they will get back in a trade PLUS an extra 1st as a min. Profit to the Cats in draft picks.

All of these kpi's are in the Cats favour MASSIVELY!

So what MORE does Kelly owe them? He shoukd sacrifice going to his preferred employer and a chance of success so Geelong can get a better draft pick 10 places in the draft potentially better than what the Eagles have, potentially?

Cats fans on here need to just step back and think about all that. What has Kelly done for the club. Are they that selfish and self centred that they believe their club would force an out of contract player with legitimate family issues to a club not of his choice simply to move up the draft ladder several places?

It's not Kelly that owes the cats, it's club Kelly nominates a trade to. Nice try at deflection though

 

[Obeanie1]

Again not a lawyer but I guess any one is free to dispute the terms and conditions of their employment contract. It's not like these terms and conditions aren't well understood by all parties as the time of signing the contract though.

Does a draftee even have a choice?

Its sign and accept or you are not elligable to be drafted.

 

[Obeanie1]

It's not Kelly that owes the cats, it's club Kelly nominates a trade to. Nice try at deflection though

WW was replying to a post saying Kelly "may feel like he owes the Cats". How was the response a deflection?

If anything your post is a deflection from the issue.

Do you think Kelly owes Geelong?

Kelly has performed better than any mature recruit I can recall for two seasons on rookie wages plus match fees, $250k ish per year. There are players getting $600k + a season not preforming even close to his level.

Clubs have used top 3 picks on players who turned out to be duds, an early 2nd landed the Cats a top three mid in their team without having to develop him for years.

Looks to me that Kelly has well and truly earned his money three times over.

So does Kelly owe the Cats? Or are the Cats miles in front?

I would say the Kelly investment has paid massive returns and will continue to do so come trade time should he want to move.

So do the Cats push Kelly against his will to another club simply to get a slightly better trade result? Or do they admit that the guy has done the right thing by the club and grant him his wish and they get slightly less at the trade table?

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

WW was replying to a post saying Kelly "may feel like he owes the Cats". How was the response a deflection?

If anything your post is a deflection from the issue.

Do you think Kelly owes Geelong?

Kelly has performed better than any mature recruit I can recall for two seasons on rookie wages plus match fees, $250k ish per year. There are players getting $600k + a season not preforming even close to his level.

Clubs have used top 3 picks on players who turned out to be duds, an early 2nd landed the Cats a top three mid in their team without having to develop him for years.

Looks to me that Kelly has well and truly earned his money three times over.

So does Kelly owe the Cats? Or are the Cats miles in front?

I would say the Kelly investment has paid massive returns and will continue to do so come trade time should he want to move.

So do the Cats push Kelly against his will to another club simply to get a slightly better trade result? Or do they admit that the guy has done the right thing by the club and grant him his wish and they get slightly less at the trade table?

Good call. Kelly owes Geelong nothing. As you put it, they have not had to carry and develop him. Straight into best 22 and 2 years on minimum wages pumping out some great football.

Geelong are entitled to get something for him. There is no obligation or emotional duty - just common sense.

If he leaves Coriolanus Bay, Geelong will be a winner with 1 excretory 2 very good picks from a second round pick that Wells is on record saying they do not rate very high.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Does a draftee even have a choice?

Its sign and accept or you are not elligable to be drafted.

Sounds not substantially different to corporate graduate programs where applicants are sent wherever they are needed not where they want to go. Their choice is to go there or work for some other company. Could you imagine someone accepting a job then taking their employer to court over not being transferred to another city? It's a system that's unusual to a lot of people but hardly unprecedented

 

[catman2006]

WW was replying to a post saying Kelly "may feel like he owes the Cats". How was the response a deflection?

If anything your post is a deflection from the issue.

Do you think Kelly owes Geelong?

Kelly has performed better than any mature recruit I can recall for two seasons on rookie wages plus match fees, $250k ish per year. There are players getting $600k + a season not preforming even close to his level.

Clubs have used top 3 picks on players who turned out to be duds, an early 2nd landed the Cats a top three mid in their team without having to develop him for years.

Looks to me that Kelly has well and truly earned his money three times over.

So does Kelly owe the Cats? Or are the Cats miles in front?

I would say the Kelly investment has paid massive returns and will continue to do so come trade time should he want to move.

So do the Cats push Kelly against his will to another club simply to get a slightly better trade result? Or do they admit that the guy has done the right thing by the club and grant him his wish and they get slightly less at the trade table?

trade will all be down to Wells and what he thinks is a fair price and what he can pick up interms of players/draftees

 

[Obeanie1]

Good call. Kelly owes Geelong nothing. As you put it, they have not had to carry and develop him. Straight into best 22 and 2 years on minimum wages pumping out some great football.

Geelong are entitled to get something for him. There is no obligation or emotional duty - just common sense.

If he leaves Coriolanus Bay, Geelong will be a winner with 1 excretory 2 very good picks from a second round pick that Wells is on record saying they do not rate very high.

Kelly's conduct has been exemplary, outstanding effort. He could not have done more to repay the club.

Another player may have sulked about not being traded, not really trained or played well and lowered their trade value.

I get it that the Cats should push hard at the club he nominates to get a fair deal but do the Cats 'throw the lego out the cot' because of 5-6 spots in the draft?

Its not like they didn't win massively in every other measure regarding Kelly.

 

[Obeanie1]

trade will all be down to Wells and what he thinks is a fair price and what he can pick up interms of players/draftees

Posted on our board that Wells was acceptable to 3 2nd rounds last season but Scott over ruled.

What is fair is subjective. Fair for who?

Would you as a list manager shaft Kelly and refuse his preference over 5 or 6 spots in the draft?

 

[VicBased]

Good comments^^^ above.

 

[catman2006]

Posted on our board that Wells was acceptable to 3 2nd rounds last season but Scott over ruled.

What is fair is subjective. Fair for who?

Would you as a list manager shaft Kelly and refuse his preference over 5 or 6 spots in the draft?

Scott actually doesnt have authoirty to over rule Wells, he can suggest but Wells has the ultimate say

 

[Obeanie1]

Scott actually doesnt have authoirty to over rule Wells, he can suggest but Wells has the ultimate say

Drafting I agree with.

Trading and value.........that's different.

If Wells was holding all the power why was he ringing Scott in the UK.? For advice or approval?

Sounds like the deal was done and Scott vetoed it.

In reality only the club really knows who pulls the strings.

 

[catman2006]

Drafting I agree with.

Trading and value.........that's different.

If Wells was holding all the power why was he ringing Scott in the UK.? For advice or approval?

Sounds like the deal was done and Scott vetoed it.

In reality only the club really knows who pulls the strings.

The club and Cook actually really transparent about how they do things and areas of responsibility.

 

[Obeanie1]

The club and Cook actually really transparent about how they do things and areas of responsibility.

Responsibility is one thing.

Influence is another.

Wells did ring Scott as he admitted as such.

It's a moot point in any case.

 

[JackOutback]

Sounds not substantially different to corporate graduate programs where applicants are sent wherever they are needed not where they want to go. Their choice is to go there or work for some other company. Could you imagine someone accepting a job then taking their employer to court over not being transferred to another city? It's a system that's unusual to a lot of people but hardly unprecedented

The only problem is the AFL is essentially a monopoly with regards to professional football; they can't go work for another professional Australian football league, only the VFL or WAFL.

 

[freofc1994]

Its a clear restraint of trade the moment that the contract is up and the player can still be traded by the club he was last contracted.

Was sorted out in Association Football many years ago with the Bosman ruling in the European Courts.

It has never had to be challenged in the AFL landscape because the deals have always been completed where the player is happy. As soon as a case emerges where the player who is out of contract is traded to a destination that he doesn't want and its challenged then we wont see a change.

This is why all season trading is going to become a reality. Much like the NBA, teams wont want to see an asset that isn't going to re-sign walk away for nothing. These players will be traded mid season to whomever ponies up the best deal.