Top up player rules.

[onemancyclone]

So Essendon are allowed to recruit washed up spuds, they should fit right in with the likes of Cooney, Giles, Gwilt,and Mckerwho.

You've got a brownlow in that group.

 

[ziad]

You've got a brownlow in that group.

Cuz will not pull on the boots for this tainted rabble

 

[Ancient Tiger]

If they are innocent, why aren't they playing?

Lots of other innocent players at other clubs seem to be playing.

I've asked the same question. The answer I got was just in case.

 

[Mofra]

What personal reasons? Can't ever remember players refusing to play.

Bootsma faked an illness to avoid playing a game on the Gold Coast - stupidly posted photos of him at the beach to his social media and was found out.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Why do the Essendon players get the priveledge of anonimity when Saad was announced (by the club) well before returning his B sample (announcement was on July 31, 2013)? And well before any hearing on the matter? And well before any provisional suspension?
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-07-31/silence-on-drugs-claim

Why do Essendon players get the priveledge of anonimity when former players at other clubs have been publically named?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Why do the Essendon players get the priveledge of anonimity when Saad was announced (by the club) well before returning his B sample (announcement was on July 31, 2013)? And well before any hearing on the matter? And well before any provisional suspension?
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-07-31/silence-on-drugs-claim

Why do Essendon players get the priveledge of anonimity when former players at other clubs have been publically named?

I take it you well and truly don't believe in two wrongs not making a right eh

 

[slashin_velvet]

I take it you well and truly don't believe in two wrongs not making a right eh

Ease up on the double negatives.

I'm not sure that anonimity in these cases is the right thing to do. At the end of the day, people arent going to specifically boo Heppell, they'll be booing your club in general.

Essendon supporters didnt care much for anonimity when trying to establish who mystery mum on Triple M was. I'm just suggesting you hold your own spotlight on yourselves.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Ease up on the double negatives.

I'm not sure that anonimity in these cases is the right thing to do. At the end of the day, people arent going to specifically boo Heppell, they'll be booing your club in general.

Essendon supporters didnt care much for anonimity when trying to establish who mystery mum on Triple M was. I'm just suggesting you hold your own spotlight on yourselves.

You're not sure it's the right thing to do, and yet it's a legislated right that the athletes have. So, you know.

As for the Triple M mum, does she have a legislated right to privacy? I dunno, maybe fictional characters have some rights that I'm not aware of. Great PR though

Oh, and I won't not stop using double negatives if you prefer.

 

[slashin_velvet]

You're not sure it's the right thing to do, and yet it's a legislated right that the athletes have. So, you know.

I'm not suggesting that they be specifically named, but that the club should not get additional concessions for players who are not playing for no specific personal reason.

 

[Albert Ross]

A question that needs to be asked in this does the club they coming from have to sign off on a contract transfer? It may be possible that clubs have the option to stop players departing this way.

No. AFL contracts override all other contracts in all cases.

It makes no more sense, to lumber the requirement to provide the players on just these clubs/ leagues either, to top up a cheating AFL club.

All the players being used in the VFL currently at non-aligned clubs are playing on permit from their 'real' clubs. All that is happening is instead of playing on permit for North Ballarat, they are playing on permit for Essendon. Every TAC Cup player is the same, registered at his suburban / country club but on a season long loan. Players switch back and forth all the time

Every week there is a list of players being 'released' on every local league website ... like all these http://www.foxsportspulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?c=1-118-0-0-0&sID=324694

All this stuff is only 'weird' if you only follow AFL. Players making appearances at other clubs during a season is commonplace.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Dont quite understand the "must have AFL experience" ruling although the "no more from two clubs" rule has merit. What if none or not enough of these ex AFL players takes them up on the offer?

 

[slashin_velvet]

Dont quite understand the "must have AFL experience" ruling although the "no more from two clubs" rule has merit. What if none or not enough of these ex AFL players takes them up on the offer?

Its so they can be seen to have a duty of care to players. AFL players would be aware of the conditioning and fitness requirements, where some VFL listed players may not be ready.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I'm not suggesting that they be specifically named, but that the club should not get additional concessions for players who are not playing for no specific personal reason.

Protecting the privacy of suspended players is a legitimate reason for not playing. All 2012 listed players have a right to not play. Anybody else will need to prove hes either injured or a junior in development not yet ready for three consecutive senior games.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Its so they can be seen to have a duty of care to players. AFL players would be aware of the conditioning and fitness requirements, where some VFL listed players may not be ready.

Ex AFL players are likely to be in worse condition!!! Perhaps they should have put a minimum age limit on it instead...eg 21 and over.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Ex AFL players are likely to be in worse condition!!! Perhaps they should have put a minimum age limit on it instead...eg 21 and over.

Not necessarily. Retired players yes, but guys like Brock McLean would still be a reasonable contributor to a side that had no-one. If they can find enough guys like that from the last couple of years, they should be able to field a reasonably strong squad. Even more-so if they had all available players from 2012 being selectable.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Not necessarily. Retired players yes, but guys like Brock McLean would still be a reasonable contributor to a side that had no-one. If they can find enough guys like that from the last couple of years, they should be able to field a reasonably strong squad. Even more-so if they had all available players from 2012 being selectable.

Thats my question, whether they can. Youre assuming that they all would be fit ready available and most of all, INTERESTED. Some might not have the faintest intererest in it. They may have coaching and development roles at their new clubs and may be more interested in developing their new careers at the vital stage of the preseason, rather than helping some drug cheats play a meaningless practice match. They may be living interstate. They may be out of condition. They may be injured, often players are delisted because of injury. Its possible this rule has thinned the pool too much. Only those who think it may restore their AFL playing careers might think about it fleetingly.

Plus....they dont have the 2012 players selectable. That decision is made so your point is moot.

It will be interesting if this "must have played AFL " rule thins the pool out too much.

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

 

[andrewb]

Cuz will not pull on the boots for this tainted rabble

Cuz couldn't afford to bend over to pull on the boots. He might drop his anal cargo.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Protecting the privacy of suspended players is a legitimate reason for not playing. All 2012 listed players have a right to not play. Anybody else will need to prove hes either injured or a junior in development not yet ready for three consecutive senior games.

Why is it a legitimate reason to not play?

 

[slashin_velvet]

Thats not really a lot of money for people with other commitments. Ex-AFL players joining state leagues would have likely already taken other job opportunities - be it full time work or study - so a player is supposed to re-locate from SA for $8k and some match payments. Tell em they're dreamin.

 

[Albert Ross]

Thats not really a lot of money for people with other commitments. Ex-AFL players joining state leagues would have likely already taken other job opportunities - be it full time work or study - so a player is supposed to re-locate from SA for $8k and some match payments. Tell em they're dreamin.

Take 4 weeks Annual Leave. Double-dip. $10k for a 4 week working holiday. Back in SA for round 1 of the SANFL season.

 

[ThirtyFive]

Won't worry Essendon. As long as they continue to call the shots, write the narrative and everything is run for their benefit, they couldn't give a rats toss about SANFL clubs.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Take 4 weeks Annual Leave. Double-dip. $10k for a 4 week working holiday. Back in SA for round 1 of the SANFL season.

Assuming its only a casual position or short term contract and you dont have to sign on for the whole season.

 

[Muggs]

Take 4 weeks Annual Leave. Double-dip. $10k for a 4 week working holiday. Back in SA for round 1 of the SANFL season.

Plus match payments.

Likely EFC pay and arrange for accommodation. Can see a player who got delisted who thought they were not given a fair chance taking that risk. Not many people in thier 20s are on the equilivant of 100k a year plus bonus.

Don't think any big name retirees will go for it though.

 

[onemancyclone]

Would an aspiring actor take a role in a shit movie to build capital for their career?