SA Footy

hawks21 wrote:Not sure why the afl public is so torn on this one. This sort of 'bump' has been getting games for several years now (rightly or wrongly) under the past couple of MRP's

except for cotchin

Port Adelaide challenging the 1 match ban.

Booney wrote:Port Adelaide challenging the 1 match ban.

will be interesting to see how many teams burn the 10k and challenge this year. i am guessing a lot more. Gray is on more than 10k per week so its not really that expensive.

these sorts of things heavily rely on the West coast medical report. I havent read it, but if it says mcgovern was concussed in any way, however minor, he wont be getting off

bennymacca wrote:

Booney wrote:Port Adelaide challenging the 1 match ban.

will be interesting to see how many teams burn the 10k and challenge this year. i am guessing a lot more. Gray is on more than 10k per week so its not really that expensive.

these sorts of things heavily rely on the West coast medical report. I havent read it, but if it says mcgovern was concussed in any way, however minor, he wont be getting off

The $10k gets added to your football department "soft cap" spend ( coaches etc ) at the end of the year.

Not sure where Port would fit into that cap, so far as being close to the "soft" cap or not.

Who is over-seeing the tribunal now?

every dollar over the soft cap just gets taxed basically, right? so it might cost you 15k instead of 10 if you have hit the cap.

Still not that much money.

I think it will go back to the says where clubs challenge the severity of the grading and try and reduce the penalty etc. But who cares. still better than the early plea rubbish

Bombers4EVA wrote:Who is over-seeing the tribunal now?

Michael Christian is the sole panel member

bennymacca wrote:Every dollar over the soft cap just gets taxed basically, right? so it might cost you 15k instead of 10 if you have hit the cap.

Still not that much money.

I think it will go back to the says where clubs challenge the severity of the grading and try and reduce the penalty etc. But who cares. still better than the early plea rubbish

Correct, so if you're under the cap then it's only the $10k, only the clubs would know where they sit at this point on that I guess.

I can’t see the AFL allowing Christian’s first decision in the chair on the bloke’s game being overturned.
That would be some serious egg wiping off the face of AFL house...

If Port are over the soft cap this appeal will cost $17,500

What is a soft cap?

My understanding is that all teams have an amount they can spend up to for off field activities/people but teams can spend more but have to pay a "tax" to the equalisation fun therefore it is known as a soft cap.

The Bedge wrote:What is a soft cap?

The football departments at each club has a "soft cap" that they run to, $9.5m, it's not to say you can't spend more than that, you can spend as much as you like, but anything over the $9.5m will be taxed.

It's hurt lots of assistant coaches the most, blokes like Ben Hart, Brett Montgomery and Mark Williams all left the AFL system for a year ( or in Williams' case longer ) because they couldn't get a job that was in a department under the "cap".

It's really to stop the likes of Collingwood spending $20m on their department ( because they can ) and then the likes of the Bulldogs do the same to "keep up with the Jones'" and compete.

Cheers for that! Makes sense!

In terms of the Gray appeal, I think it's probably a good appeal - watching the video in real time he appears to be heading in a straight line towards the ball which is travelling towards him, and then McGovern comes in from the side, puts his head over the ball and the contact at that point is unavoidable.

Gray appears to realise at the last moment and braces himself for contact.

He's running hard at the ball, and attacking the ball, at no point leading up to that contact did he have any intention to bump rather than getting the ball.

If he sticks his own head over the ball ends in a vicious head clash.
If McGovern is half a second earlier Gray probably pulls out and lays the tackle
If McGovern is half a second later, Gray probably collects the ball.

I hate that all these incidents are slowed right down to super slow motion and judged like that.

Do Port have their joint major sponsor signed up yet?

MW wrote:Do Port have their joint major sponsor signed up yet?

Hasn't been any announcement on that front other than Haneco Lighting increasing it's sponsorship and Thrifty Care Rental coming on board.

I've been getting whispers since before Xmas about a name or two, can't see it happening now, this close to the season with merchandise ( shirts, guernseys ) printed and sold.

I have noticed the new polo lay out changed a little, looks like they've made room for another sponsor.

Booney wrote:

The Bedge wrote:What is a soft cap?

The football departments at each club has a "soft cap" that they run to, $9.5m, it's not to say you can't spend more than that, you can spend as much as you like, but anything over the $9.5m will be taxed.

It's hurt lots of assistant coaches the most, blokes like Ben Hart, Brett Montgomery and Mark Williams all left the AFL system for a year ( or in Williams' case longer ) because they couldn't get a job that was in a department under the "cap".

It's really to stop the likes of Collingwood spending $20m on their department ( because they can ) and then the likes of the Bulldogs do the same to "keep up with the Jones'" and compete.

Who cares what clubs spend?
History has shown that there is little correlation between big spending and success. Collingwood and Essendon have 2 flags between them in the last 20 years despite spending heaps on their football spend.

Jim05 wrote:

Booney wrote:

The Bedge wrote:What is a soft cap?

The football departments at each club has a "soft cap" that they run to, $9.5m, it's not to say you can't spend more than that, you can spend as much as you like, but anything over the $9.5m will be taxed.

It's hurt lots of assistant coaches the most, blokes like Ben Hart, Brett Montgomery and Mark Williams all left the AFL system for a year ( or in Williams' case longer ) because they couldn't get a job that was in a department under the "cap".

It's really to stop the likes of Collingwood spending $20m on their department ( because they can ) and then the likes of the Bulldogs do the same to "keep up with the Jones'" and compete.

Who cares what clubs spend?
History has shown that there is little correlation between big spending and success. Collingwood and Essendon have 2 flags between them in the last 20 years despite spending heaps on their football spend.

I'm sure the Bulldogs despite winning the 2016 flag didn't top the soft cap spend either.

bennymacca wrote:every dollar over the soft cap just gets taxed basically, right? so it might cost you 15k instead of 10 if you have hit the cap.

Still not that much money.

I think it will go back to the says where clubs challenge the severity of the grading and try and reduce the penalty etc. But who cares. still better than the early plea rubbish

Bombers4EVA wrote:Who is over-seeing the tribunal now?

Michael Christian is the sole panel member

Who does this Michael bloke follow in the AFL?

Western Australian that played for Collingwood (used to be a commentator for ch10 back when they had the rights)

bennymacca wrote:Western Australian that played for Collingwood (used to be a commentator for ch10 back when they had the rights)

Hmmm so when a Collingwood, West Coast or Fremantle player gets sighted to the tribunal. Could be some lenience from Michael. #anythingisforsalefortherightamount.