by holden78 » Wed Feb 18, 2015 9:56 pm
by philcas » Wed Feb 18, 2015 9:59 pm
Jim05 wrote:philcas wrote:I seem to have missed something why are the players from essondon not playing in the NAB challenge i understand it has something to do with the supplement saga but who has stopped the essondon players playing
Please explain.
The 18 who got infraction notices are provisionally suspended so thats fair enough they miss. What I and many others dont like is that the other 7 on our list from 2012 have also pulled out. This is supposed to protect the identities of who received infraction notices which I think is a crock of crap because everyone knows who the 18 are. My understanding is Essendon and the AFL wanted these 7 to play but the AFLPA came over the top with threats against both Essendon and the AFL not to play them. Not sure which player is the chief instigator but the 7 players have the power
by Jim05 » Wed Feb 18, 2015 10:10 pm
philcas wrote:Jim05 wrote:philcas wrote:I seem to have missed something why are the players from essondon not playing in the NAB challenge i understand it has something to do with the supplement saga but who has stopped the essondon players playing
Please explain.
The 18 who got infraction notices are provisionally suspended so thats fair enough they miss. What I and many others dont like is that the other 7 on our list from 2012 have also pulled out. This is supposed to protect the identities of who received infraction notices which I think is a crock of crap because everyone knows who the 18 are. My understanding is Essendon and the AFL wanted these 7 to play but the AFLPA came over the top with threats against both Essendon and the AFL not to play them. Not sure which player is the chief instigator but the 7 players have the power
Are players such as patty rider & gus monfries affected by this suspension?
by DOC » Wed Feb 18, 2015 10:53 pm
Rising Power wrote:DOC wrote:ALL clubs should be together on this. If you go, there is no coming back is the clear and distinct message they should get.
However, six clubs have no credibility on sticking together and could not be trusted to carry this out. This is where the yes vote by those six now leaves us. Disjointed.
Would , if you were a current player or club official,, welcome any one back who buggers off just before the start of the season to play practice matches for another club?
This piffle that it is an opportunity as sprouted by quite a number of VFL and SANFL officials is farcical. An opportunity for what?
So South can line up with every other club for Mitch Clisby's signature after North boot him out for desertion? I don't think this situation has any connection to the reserves vote, it would be happening regardless.
by woodublieve12 » Thu Feb 19, 2015 7:37 am
by stan » Thu Feb 19, 2015 7:39 am
Wedgie wrote:I'm still trying to work out why clubs will be disrupted to replace some players who won't even be suspended!
Those players should be delisted forever if the AFL or Essendon had any balls.
Essendon, you have replaced Port as the weakest link, goodbye.
by stan » Thu Feb 19, 2015 7:40 am
by Booney » Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:54 am
woodublieve12 wrote:wasn't sure where to put this... i found it amusing.
http://titusoreily.com/everything-you-n ... the-sanfl/
by whufc » Thu Feb 19, 2015 10:01 am
by Hazydog » Thu Feb 19, 2015 10:41 am
Jim05 wrote:philcas wrote:Jim05 wrote:philcas wrote:I seem to have missed something why are the players from essondon not playing in the NAB challenge i understand it has something to do with the supplement saga but who has stopped the essondon players playing
Please explain.
The 18 who got infraction notices are provisionally suspended so thats fair enough they miss. What I and many others dont like is that the other 7 on our list from 2012 have also pulled out. This is supposed to protect the identities of who received infraction notices which I think is a crock of crap because everyone knows who the 18 are. My understanding is Essendon and the AFL wanted these 7 to play but the AFLPA came over the top with threats against both Essendon and the AFL not to play them. Not sure which player is the chief instigator but the 7 players have the power
Are players such as patty rider & gus monfries affected by this suspension?
Yes
by PatowalongaPirate » Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:03 am
by Wedgie » Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:15 am
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by stan » Thu Feb 19, 2015 12:20 pm
Wedgie wrote:The AFL actually have a lesser hold on the SANFL now than a year ago, since the SANFL paid back the Ten Million it loaned for the Port basket case from the AFL. Word has it the AFL weren't keen for the SANFL to pay it back so they could have more power over the SANFL.
by Rising Power » Thu Feb 19, 2015 6:32 pm
DOC wrote:
No. Read the first sentence. No coming back to the league.
Could you trust the clubs to stick together? No.
This has every connection with the reserves vote. United we stand, divided we fall. We are divided and the trust to operate as a collective is gone.
Contacting and contracting an already contracted player is, at least to my simple view, wrong. Speaking to the club first to seek permission is not difficult and not something that you forget. I think that assertion is a bare faced lie.
by Bounce of the ball » Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:17 pm
Wedgie wrote:The AFL actually have a lesser hold on the SANFL now than a year ago, since the SANFL paid back the Ten Million it loaned for the Port basket case from the AFL. Word has it the AFL weren't keen for the SANFL to pay it back so they could have more power over the SANFL.
by kickinit » Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:33 pm
by whufc » Fri Feb 20, 2015 8:13 am
kickinit wrote:I think what everyone is forgetting or doesn't know, is that Essendon think they are bigger then the AFL itself. You only have to look how they have dealt with the drugs issue to see it and look at the golden boy Hird.
The reason why the AFL wants them to pick players who have played AFL in the last 2 years is because if this spills into the proper season, Essendon are allowed to sign players who have played AFL in the last 2 years but have not been drafted again. The AFL could of allowed them to tai players from the VFL and come season time take these players anyway. I think it's better to do it now then a day before the start of the season. At least it gives the clubs some time to restructure find some sort of replacement (even if it is to top up the reserves) before the start of season. The problem that the SANFL clubs have is that these players more then likely have a clause in their contract to leave if resigned in the AFL.
I have no sympathy for Essendon and think the club is a absolute disgrace. My view is if the club hasn't got enough players to play then they forfeit, if they haven't got enough for the year then they are out of the comp. But the AFL is a business and a large chunk of it's income is from the tv rights deal, which must have Essendon playing. The AFL was always going to look after Essendon when it come down to them losing income, like any business/club would do.
by DOC » Fri Feb 20, 2015 9:29 am
Rising Power wrote:DOC wrote:
No. Read the first sentence. No coming back to the league.
Could you trust the clubs to stick together? No.
This has every connection with the reserves vote. United we stand, divided we fall. We are divided and the trust to operate as a collective is gone.
Contacting and contracting an already contracted player is, at least to my simple view, wrong. Speaking to the club first to seek permission is not difficult and not something that you forget. I think that assertion is a bare faced lie.
A bit extreme. Might as well extend that to include only recruiting players who have no interest in playing AFL. Or ammo/country footy for that matter.
by stan » Fri Feb 20, 2015 9:32 am
DOC wrote:Rising Power wrote:DOC wrote:
No. Read the first sentence. No coming back to the league.
Could you trust the clubs to stick together? No.
This has every connection with the reserves vote. United we stand, divided we fall. We are divided and the trust to operate as a collective is gone.
Contacting and contracting an already contracted player is, at least to my simple view, wrong. Speaking to the club first to seek permission is not difficult and not something that you forget. I think that assertion is a bare faced lie.
A bit extreme. Might as well extend that to include only recruiting players who have no interest in playing AFL. Or ammo/country footy for that matter.
We are not talking end of year recruiting here. These players are contracted to their clubs who are starting competitive trial games themselves. What team first mentality do any of these players exhibit? As I stated previously, this is an opportunity for what? The real opportunity was for those players to exhibit that their obligations to their SANFL and VFL clubs was their priority and to quote Arthur Daily, "my word is my bond".
When it comes to recruiting and more so at this level, a players personal attributes and not just their football prowess is weighed heavily.
Think Shaun McKernan.
by Jim05 » Fri Feb 20, 2015 9:37 am
stan wrote:DOC wrote:Rising Power wrote:DOC wrote:
No. Read the first sentence. No coming back to the league.
Could you trust the clubs to stick together? No.
This has every connection with the reserves vote. United we stand, divided we fall. We are divided and the trust to operate as a collective is gone.
Contacting and contracting an already contracted player is, at least to my simple view, wrong. Speaking to the club first to seek permission is not difficult and not something that you forget. I think that assertion is a bare faced lie.
A bit extreme. Might as well extend that to include only recruiting players who have no interest in playing AFL. Or ammo/country footy for that matter.
We are not talking end of year recruiting here. These players are contracted to their clubs who are starting competitive trial games themselves. What team first mentality do any of these players exhibit? As I stated previously, this is an opportunity for what? The real opportunity was for those players to exhibit that their obligations to their SANFL and VFL clubs was their priority and to quote Arthur Daily, "my word is my bond".
When it comes to recruiting and more so at this level, a players personal attributes and not just their football prowess is weighed heavily.
Think Shaun McKernan.
I have bit of a laugh when I think of him. The things are going he'll be playing CHF for Essendon this season.
I get what your saying though. But in the end it will likely be only a few players effected. Probably a few too many but I believe the rules are that they can only take 2 players from leagues outside the VFL.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |