Much is made about the Salary Cap. It supposd to be the governing limit of payments which brings an equalityto the league. It supposedly tempers the desires of the well-to-do clubs with those struggling year-to-year. Its touted as the Great Leveler, ht ewonder tool that evokes fair competition all the whiles providing an environment under which all clubs can fairly compete.

And yet we in only days have seen such revelations as:

AFL defends extra payments..

and

Desperate Cats cast wide net for extra cash...

Now , as but a lay appreaciator of the game I woul dhave thought these flew directly in face of the Salary Cap, to the point of all but rendering it a lame duck and a total farce. many observers have wondered at the financial dealings of say carlton and have cast their collective concern in the direction of other clubs over the years. The Richmond land-development scandal comes to mind. But all these were supposedly illegal fromteh sports point of contention and yet he we have anotherclub opening suggesting that the difference between its star staying or going will be how much it can conjur inthird party payments. Surely this is nothing more than condoned Salary Cap rorting by any other definition. Apparently it (AFL) feels there is onlyconcern for rorting whenFree Agency comes in, apparently the level of rorting now is acceptable? I though NO RORTING was the ACCEPTABLE stance.

So not only is there an Elephant in the room but its trumpeting with abject abandonement.

You either have a Salry Cap and enforce itwith gusto or..its open slather. There may as well be No salary cap if this is to be allowed to happen. Further to this it only confirms what weall suspected...there are no real rules for those prepared to flout them and in so doing Demetriou and Co show us again that the AFL is nothing more than Hypocrisy incorporated.

Can we ( MFC ) compete where the norm will be having to package remunerations icluding 'ambassadorial' components ?

Stop this now AFL..or it will be the ruin of this competition. You only have to lok overseas to understand what havoc awaits if you cant contain player payments.

The league is in the stone-ages. It has been regarding trading and free agency for a loooooooooong time.

It's quite simple. The salary cap should include all payments that don't classify as official endorsements and match bonuses. Very, very simple. That's how they do it in the NBA and NFL.

The AFL is actually quite amateurish, and it's practically being run by the AFLPA and football agents. The league needs to grow some balls and get nasty, just like David Stern of the NBA: if you don't like the way things are run, then BAM! 10 game suspension and $15,000 fine. I mean really, do you think Ball wanted to go for Collingwood just for their facilities? What about Judd to Carlton?

The AFLPA has far too much power, and I'd love to run that little Wiesel in Ricky Nixon over with my car.

I think that free agency will make it easier to enforce the salary cap

I think that free agency will make it easier to enforce the salary cap

on what basis ? It been shown now that is obviously a cinch to flout the cap. Why will it be any different with agency ? All Free Agency really affects is the method and availability of players to move between clubs. The money can still be rorted unless the AFL get serious. If anything free Agency will make extra payments more attractive...and required.

on what basis ? It been shown now that is obviously a cinch to flout the cap. Why will it be any different with agency ? All Free Agency really affects is the method and availability of players to move between clubs. The money can still be rorted unless the AFL get serious. If anything free Agency will make extra payments more attractive...and required.

If a player wants to leave via free agency (assuming he is one of the top 10) then his club has the ability to match any offer he is given WITHIN THE CAP.

To outbid his original team another club can only play within the cap, otherwise the player must roll the dice in the draft, or a suitable trade must be worked out.

I predict teams will become more ruthless in demanding better compensation for players who defect.

Edit: Feel free to prove me wrong - this isn't a topic I've spent much time thinking about. This is just my initial reaction.

If a player wants to leave via free agency (assuming he is one of the top 10) then his club has the ability to match any offer he is given WITHIN THE CAP.

To outbid his original team another club can only play within the cap, otherwise the player must roll the dice in the draft, or a suitable trade must be worked out.

I predict teams will become more ruthless in demanding better compensation for players who defect.

Edit: Feel free to prove me wrong - this isn't a topic I've spent much time thinking about. This is just my initial reaction.

I hear what you are saying but as I see it this only deals with the process of going from A to B... does nothing to adress ex-party payments as obviously nothin gis in place at the present either...despite all the hot air from Vlad & Co.

Free agency is an aside to all of this.. Underboard payments are a different issue..as i see it.

If a player wants to leave via free agency (assuming he is one of the top 10) then his club has the ability to match any offer he is given WITHIN THE CAP.

To outbid his original team another club can only play within the cap, otherwise the player must roll the dice in the draft, or a suitable trade must be worked out.

I predict teams will become more ruthless in demanding better compensation for players who defect.

Whilst I agree, my concern is how much the "watch dog" (Ken Wood's department) actually observes. As long as 3rd party payments (legal) remain just that and have no influence on the offer within the cap or even the matching offer within the cap, then that's okay and seems fair.

Simple* solution: bring the extra payments into the salary cap.

* Simplistic?

I hear what you are saying but as I see it this only deals with the process of going from A to B... does nothing to adress ex-party payments as obviously nothin gis in place at the present either...despite all the hot air from Vlad & Co.

Free agency is an aside to all of this.. Underboard payments are a different issue..as i see it.

Clearly any club which gets done for Salary Cap breaches is just plain dumb ! Suggest we crank up the Mates of Melbourne

I just get the impression you can pay anyone what yo like now ...just call it an ambassadorial role and its all cool. Its a joke....the CAP isnt one at all.. more a hairnet !!

Simple* solution: bring the extra payments into the salary cap.

* Simplistic?

Where do you draw the line though?

What constitutes a 3rd party payment and what doesn't?

How does it differ from, for example, Michael Hurley getting a generous sponsorship deal from Skins if the CEO just happens to be an Essendon supporter but has no ties other than a membership?

The problem is that this is so hard to define and police.

I just get the impression you can pay anyone what yo like now ...just call it an ambassadorial role and its all cool. Its a joke....the CAP isnt one at all.. more a hairnet !!

I think those extra payments have always existed, it isn't too hard to hide payments in Family Trusts etc, if you are careful.

Easiest way to keep tabs on these payments is via the tax system and tax file numbers. But does the AFL have the Balls to do this?

Much is made about the Salary Cap. It supposd to be the governing limit of payments which brings an equalityto the league. It supposedly tempers the desires of the well-to-do clubs with those struggling year-to-year. Its touted as the Great Leveler, ht ewonder tool that evokes fair competition all the whiles providing an environment under which all clubs can fairly compete.

And yet we in only days have seen such revelations as:

AFL defends extra payments..

and

Desperate Cats cast wide net for extra cash...

Now , as but a lay appreaciator of the game I woul dhave thought these flew directly in face of the Salary Cap, to the point of all but rendering it a lame duck and a total farce. many observers have wondered at the financial dealings of say carlton and have cast their collective concern in the direction of other clubs over the years.

You either have a Salry Cap and enforce itwith gusto or..its open slather. There may as well be No salary cap if this is to be allowed to happen.

The idea that third-party deals are either disallowed and/or unrestricted by the AFL is a myth.

On top of the salary cap is a 'marketing/sponsorship' cap that, as far as I can tell, runs along the same lines as the salary cap.

However, there's no minimum that Clubs must pay (unlike the salary cap stipulation of ~92.5% iirc).

Fwiw, I've posted about this before.

For the system to work as intended then all player payments that arise because he plays for a particular club need to be added to a "salary cap", sponsorship and jobs for Visy included. Any other system is legalised cheating and involves the AFL pandering to the wishes of the rich clubs. What is getting lost here by the AFL and these clubs is that the integrity of the competition is being slowly eroded.

The question required of clubs needs to be. Would you employ Judd for this role if he played for another club?

Personally I think the Players Union is the main problem here. There constant push for higher renumeration for it's members will eventually lead to a grossly uneven competition, ruining the game for everybody. Don't for a second think that they are happy with the new free trade agreement. This is the tip of the iceberg and it won't be long before the restrictions get weakened and it's a free for all. I hope this doesn't happen but I'm not confident. Greed has f@@@ed everything else up why wouldn't do the same to Football as we know it.

For the system to work as intended then all player payments that arise because he plays for a particular club need to be added to a "salary cap", sponsorship and jobs for Visy included. Any other system is legalised cheating and involves the AFL pandering to the wishes of the rich clubs. What is getting lost here by the AFL and these clubs is that the integrity of the competition is being slowly eroded.

The question required of clubs needs to be. Would you employ Judd for this role if he played for another club?

Personally I think the Players Union is the main problem here. There constant push for higher renumeration for it's members will eventually lead to a grossly uneven competition, ruining the game for everybody. Don't for a second think that they are happy with the new free trade agreement. This is the tip of the iceberg and it won't be long before the restrictions get weakened and it's a free for all. I hope this doesn't happen but I'm not confident. Greed has f@@@ed everything else up why wouldn't do the same to Football as we know it.

I think theres something in all of this. I agree that his is only the start. All payments must come under some sort of the same umbrella of capping. The longer nothing is done tostem the duality of accounting then more and more will move to outside the fields of control. This can only lead to shades of the bad ol days of power clubs and the others.

I must admit, I don`t understand how it all works. The only thing that seems clear to me is this-

Tell the AFL that you intend to rort the system and pay players outside the salary cap and you will get the green light.

Neglect to tell them that you are paying players outside the cap, and you are in all sorts of trouble!

For the system to work as intended then all player payments that arise because he plays for a particular club need to be added to a "salary cap", sponsorship and jobs for Visy included. Any other system is legalised cheating and involves the AFL pandering to the wishes of the rich clubs. What is getting lost here by the AFL and these clubs is that the integrity of the competition is being slowly eroded.

The question required of clubs needs to be. Would you employ Judd for this role if he played for another club?

Personally I think the Players Union is the main problem here. There constant push for higher renumeration for it's members will eventually lead to a grossly uneven competition, ruining the game for everybody. Don't for a second think that they are happy with the new free trade agreement. This is the tip of the iceberg and it won't be long before the restrictions get weakened and it's a free for all. I hope this doesn't happen but I'm not confident. Greed has f@@@ed everything else up why wouldn't do the same to Football as we know it.

I tend to agree with this, but the system is inevitable-it is going to happen. I believe it will be in place for about 5-10 years before a large % of clubs are totally broke. Then the AFL may instigate a massive rescue program.

What i want to see the MFC do in this position is be shrewd and proactive. There is no need for us to be a small or little club. It does not have to be the MFC that goes Broke.

The Club can Prosper through this if it is carefull. Greed is going to kill Clubs in the next decade with this system.

Remember Collingwood went almost Belly up in the Mid 80's and again before Eddie stepped in around 98-99. West Coast & Adelaide i see as the Vultures on first impression.. Lets just see.

The league is in the stone-ages. It has been regarding trading and free agency for a loooooooooong time.

It's quite simple. The salary cap should include all payments that don't classify as official endorsements and match bonuses. Very, very simple. That's how they do it in the NBA and NFL.

The AFL is actually quite amateurish, and it's practically being run by the AFLPA and football agents. The league needs to grow some balls and get nasty, just like David Stern of the NBA: if you don't like the way things are run, then BAM! 10 game suspension and $15,000 fine. I mean really, do you think Ball wanted to go for Collingwood just for their facilities? What about Judd to Carlton?

The AFLPA has far too much power, and I'd love to run that little Wiesel in Ricky Nixon over with my car.

Yes except payments made to players from separate organisations eg VISY etc are nothing to do with the clubs themselves (other than being a sponsor) and using players in ambassador roles is good for their organisations. You could never police it and thats why clubs that can tend to flaunt it openly. I suggest we use some of this notion that melbourne supporters are all well off ski-holidaying rich toffs and find some ambassadorial roles to offer players from our pool of company owning members!

Fines threat over deals

"THE AFL last night warned clubs of "massive" penalties if they cultivated outside payments to help keep marquee players. League operations manager Adrian Anderson said" the age

Weve heard all this before...yet amazingly little is ever done.

Yes except payments made to players from separate organisations eg VISY etc are nothing to do with the clubs themselves (other than being a sponsor) and using players in ambassador roles is good for their organisations. You could never police it and thats why clubs that can tend to flaunt it openly. I suggest we use some of this notion that melbourne supporters are all well off ski-holidaying rich toffs and find some ambassadorial roles to offer players from our pool of company owning members!

realy the sal cap is just one hole bs. the AFL uses the cap in a way to make sure curtin clubs win flags, the lions where givin three flags by the AFL,by the way of the cap giving them extra money, so they where able to keep more player together,now they are useing it again to help GWS and gc17 a much easy way of winning flags with extra money,carlton will not win a flag with JUDD unles more carlton player became visy embas,he cames at too much of a high price, also in his heart he is only at carlton for money, and not love.

Under the free agency if the 'Judd deal' repeated this would be worst for WCE because they would probably only get a 1 first round pick (prob to be judged as pick 1) instead of Josh Kennedy and two other picks.

The 'Ball deal' would have been better for St. Kilda because I believe the AFL would have judged him to be worthy of a top 10 compensation and that is what St. Kilda wanted from Collingwood not pick 30 and another slow midfielder.

All in all I believe that free agency will take the desperation out of the market at trade week; a team desperate for a KPP will able to make offers and that will be that. The posturing that some clubs do about what they think that player is worth or what they think their trades are worth will be negated.