Link Here

Giants' draft rules explained

The entry rules for GWS Giants will be as follows:

1. National rookie access:

From the end of the 2010 season, GWS Giants has the right to select up to a dozen 17 year olds born in the January - April window (Jan-April 1993), with the option to relocate to Sydney for the 2011 season. The club also will have the option to trade some of this group to secure experienced AFL players from other clubs, consistent with the rule that applies to the Gold Coast FC.

2. 2011 NAB AFL Draft:

GWS Giants to have Pick No.1 in each round.

GWS Giants to have Picks 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 in round one. Please note that these selections have priority over any other special assistance/priority selections which may be available to other clubs, as per the rule that applies to the Gold Coast FC for the 2010 Draft.

3. 2010 NAB Rookie Draft:

GWS Giants to have Selections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

4. 2011 NAB Rookie Draft:

GWS Giants to alternate NSW priority selections with the Sydney Swans. GWS Giants to have first selection.

5. Zoned access:

GWS Giants to have zoned access to up to 16 NSW players from southern NSW/ACT and all areas outside the current NSW scholarship region during the period covering the 2010 to 2013 national drafts.

GWS Giants to be zoned players from the Northern Territory who will be draft eligible by the time of the 2011, 2012 and 2013 national drafts.

6. 2011 and 2012 post-season, AFL-listed player access:

GWS Giants to have capacity to pre-list 10 players who had previously nominated for the AFL Draft, or were previously listed with an AFL club. If the club does not sign 10 players after the 2011 season, it can sign the balance of up to 10 players at the end of the 2012 season.

GWS Giants to have capacity to sign up to 16 uncontracted players. Maximum of one player from other AFL clubs, unless a club agrees to trade more than one player to GWS Giants. If the club does not sign 16 uncontracted players after the 2011 season, it can sign the balance of up to 16 players at the end of the 2012 season.

7. Incentive to other clubs trading with GWS Giants in the 2011 and 2012 post-season:

GWS Giants to be given access to four 17-year-olds born in the January to April 1994 window, with all players to be traded to other clubs. Selections will be allocated to GWS Giants so the club can trade for established players, but the club will not have access to these 17-year-olds. If the four trades are not completed in the 2011 post-season, the balance of up to four trades may be used in the 2012 trading period.

Expanded list and increased salary cap:

GWS Giants will also have an expanded list size and TPP allowance in the club’s initial time in the competition, through to 2019, as follows:

2012 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2013 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2014 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2015 - 44-48 senior list, nine rookies with $640k - $880k TPP extra allowance;

2016 - 42-46 senior list, nine rookies with $520k - $760k TPP extra allowance;

2017 - 40-44 senior list, nine rookies with $400k - $640k TPP extra allowance;

2018 - 38-42 senior list, nine rookies with $200k - $520k TPP extra allowance;

2019 - 38 senior list, nine rookies in line with other AFL clubs.

Compensation picks

Further, as part of the entry rules and in line with the rules that are in operation for the Gold Coast Football Club, Demetriou said the AFL Commission had again confirmed that any club that lost a player to the expansion side would be eligible for a compensation pick.

Compensation picks will be tradeable and can be used by clubs at any time within five years covering the period 2011 to 2015. First round compensation picks can not be until the 2012 draft onwards. Clubs will be required to nominate the year in which they plan to use the compensation pick before the first round of the Toyota AFL season in that particular year.

As per the rules with Gold Coast, the compensatory pick would be assessed around the player’s age (greater weighting for younger players), club contract ranking (greater weighting for club key players), on field performance (greater weighting for strong club best and fairest performance) and draft position if less than four years experience.

This ranking system will then determine if a club is eligible for a compensatory pick in one of five spots -- first round pick, end of first round pick, second round pick, end of second round pick or third round pick. Under the model, the round one, round two or round three picks would be taken immediately after the pick the club already has in that round in the draft that year.

Link Here

Giants' draft rules explained

The entry rules for GWS Giants will be as follows:

1. National rookie access:

From the end of the 2010 season, GWS Giants has the right to select up to a dozen 17 year olds born in the January - April window (Jan-April 1993), with the option to relocate to Sydney for the 2011 season. The club also will have the option to trade some of this group to secure experienced AFL players from other clubs, consistent with the rule that applies to the Gold Coast FC.

2. 2011 NAB AFL Draft:

GWS Giants to have Pick No.1 in each round.

GWS Giants to have Picks 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 in round one. Please note that these selections have priority over any other special assistance/priority selections which may be available to other clubs, as per the rule that applies to the Gold Coast FC for the 2010 Draft.

3. 2010 NAB Rookie Draft:

GWS Giants to have Selections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

4. 2011 NAB Rookie Draft:

GWS Giants to alternate NSW priority selections with the Sydney Swans. GWS Giants to have first selection.

5. Zoned access:

GWS Giants to have zoned access to up to 16 NSW players from southern NSW/ACT and all areas outside the current NSW scholarship region during the period covering the 2010 to 2013 national drafts.

GWS Giants to be zoned players from the Northern Territory who will be draft eligible by the time of the 2011, 2012 and 2013 national drafts.

6. 2011 and 2012 post-season, AFL-listed player access:

GWS Giants to have capacity to pre-list 10 players who had previously nominated for the AFL Draft, or were previously listed with an AFL club. If the club does not sign 10 players after the 2011 season, it can sign the balance of up to 10 players at the end of the 2012 season.

GWS Giants to have capacity to sign up to 16 uncontracted players. Maximum of one player from other AFL clubs, unless a club agrees to trade more than one player to GWS Giants. If the club does not sign 16 uncontracted players after the 2011 season, it can sign the balance of up to 16 players at the end of the 2012 season.

7. Incentive to other clubs trading with GWS Giants in the 2011 and 2012 post-season:

GWS Giants to be given access to four 17-year-olds born in the January to April 1994 window, with all players to be traded to other clubs. Selections will be allocated to GWS Giants so the club can trade for established players, but the club will not have access to these 17-year-olds. If the four trades are not completed in the 2011 post-season, the balance of up to four trades may be used in the 2012 trading period.

Expanded list and increased salary cap:

GWS Giants will also have an expanded list size and TPP allowance in the club’s initial time in the competition, through to 2019, as follows:

2012 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2013 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2014 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2015 - 44-48 senior list, nine rookies with $640k - $880k TPP extra allowance;

2016 - 42-46 senior list, nine rookies with $520k - $760k TPP extra allowance;

2017 - 40-44 senior list, nine rookies with $400k - $640k TPP extra allowance;

2018 - 38-42 senior list, nine rookies with $200k - $520k TPP extra allowance;

2019 - 38 senior list, nine rookies in line with other AFL clubs.

Compensation picks

Further, as part of the entry rules and in line with the rules that are in operation for the Gold Coast Football Club, Demetriou said the AFL Commission had again confirmed that any club that lost a player to the expansion side would be eligible for a compensation pick.

Compensation picks will be tradeable and can be used by clubs at any time within five years covering the period 2011 to 2015. First round compensation picks can not be until the 2012 draft onwards. Clubs will be required to nominate the year in which they plan to use the compensation pick before the first round of the Toyota AFL season in that particular year.

As per the rules with Gold Coast, the compensatory pick would be assessed around the player’s age (greater weighting for younger players), club contract ranking (greater weighting for club key players), on field performance (greater weighting for strong club best and fairest performance) and draft position if less than four years experience.

This ranking system will then determine if a club is eligible for a compensatory pick in one of five spots -- first round pick, end of first round pick, second round pick, end of second round pick or third round pick. Under the model, the round one, round two or round three picks would be taken immediately after the pick the club already has in that round in the draft that year.

So any compensation picks for a player taken by GWS can not be used until at least 2012.

Also it appears that if GWS wished to get O'Meara it could by refusing to deal on under 17 mini draft picks and finishing last next year and hoping that no other club gets a priority pick. That would mean GWS would be passing up some extra players and picks in following drafts. That is probably unlikely.

So any compensation picks for a player taken by GWS can not be used until at least 2012.

Also it appears that if GWS wished to get O'Meara it could by refusing to deal on under 17 mini draft picks and finishing last next year and hoping that no other club gets a priority pick. That would mean GWS would be passing up some extra players and picks in following drafts. That is probably unlikely.

The compensation picks can be used in 2011 but, because of all of the GWS picks which compromise the 2011 draft, they would be severely devalued if used in 2011 (except as trades to other clubs that wanted to stockpile them).

Where are the rules about clubs making application to the AFL in the case of anomalous situations that were reported about previously in the media?

The question really raised by this is whether the AFL is above the laws of the land?

The AFL is a big business. The TV rights alone generate well over $1billion over five years.

It's not my area of expertise but there are laws that govern the ability of participants to maintain a competitive position in the marketplace and I would suggest that the way these rules have been established fails all of the tests.

The AFL is badly conflicted in the way it's administering the rules with GWS receiving unreasonable benefits ahead of all of the other clubs in bidding for uncontracted players and the compensation rules are clearly inadequate. Further, the AFL is in a position to intimidate other clubs into submission if they were, for example, to challenge the level of compensation applicable. The fact that it appears the AFL is telling clubs in advance what the level of compensation would be is outrageous given that there's not even supposed to be a contract in place.

In short, what we are witnessing is a disgraceful sham and supporters of affected clubs should not be standing for it.

We've been told that the clubs agreed to this farce but the anecdotal evidence appears to be that if the clubs did agree (and that's by no means certain), then it was agreement under duress since certain clubs don't want to lose their rights in other areas.

We already see an uneven playing field in so many other areas such as fixturing etc where the stronger clubs get the biggest and best slice of the pie but where's the transparency in the case of these concessions?

Why is it that the main targets of the GWS raids that look like succeeding are all from the bottom clubs?

Why do people believe that the main beneficiaries of the 17 year old "mini draft" are likely to be clubs in the top half?

Is it because the rules are unfair and unconscionable? If so, why is the AFL so concerned about "integrity" over betting issues and not with "integrity" when it comes down to the competitiveness of it's member clubs?

Do we need to wait for one of the traditional clubs to be killed off before people sit up and start taking notice?

The compensation picks can be used in 2011 but, because of all of the GWS picks which compromise the 2011 draft, they would be severely devalued if used in 2011 (except as trades to other clubs that wanted to stockpile them).

What does this section mean then? First round picks only for use in 2012 and onwards.

"Compensation picks

Further, as part of the entry rules and in line with the rules that are in operation for the Gold Coast Football Club, Demetriou said the AFL Commission had again confirmed that any club that lost a player to the expansion side would be eligible for a compensation pick.

Compensation picks will be tradeable and can be used by clubs at any time within five years covering the period 2011 to 2015. First round compensation picks can not be until the 2012 draft onwards. Clubs will be required to nominate the year in which they plan to use the compensation pick before the first round of the Toyota AFL season in that particular year."

The question really raised by this is whether the AFL is above the laws of the land?

The AFL is a big business. The TV rights alone generate well over $1billion over five years.

It's not my area of expertise but there are laws that govern the ability of participants to maintain a competitive position in the marketplace and I would suggest that the way these rules have been established fails all of the tests.

The AFL is badly conflicted in the way it's administering the rules with GWS receiving unreasonable benefits ahead of all of the other clubs in bidding for uncontracted players and the compensation rules are clearly inadequate. Further, the AFL is in a position to intimidate other clubs into submission if they were, for example, to challenge the level of compensation applicable. The fact that it appears the AFL is telling clubs in advance what the level of compensation would be is outrageous given that there's not even supposed to be a contract in place.

In short, what we are witnessing is a disgraceful sham and supporters of affected clubs should not be standing for it.

We've been told that the clubs agreed to this farce but the anecdotal evidence appears to be that if the clubs did agree (and that's by no means certain), then it was agreement under duress since certain clubs don't want to lose their rights in other areas. 

We already see an uneven playing field in so many other areas such as fixturing etc where the stronger clubs get the biggest and best slice of the pie but where's the transparency in the case of these concessions?

Why is it that the main targets of the GWS raids that look like succeeding are all from the bottom clubs?

Why do people believe that the main beneficiaries of the 17 year old "mini draft" are likely to be clubs in the top half?

Is it because the rules are unfair and unconscionable? If so, why is the AFL so concerned about "integrity" over betting issues and not with "integrity" when it comes down to the competitiveness of it's member clubs?

Do we need to wait for one of the traditional clubs to be killed off before people sit up and start taking notice?

Good post.

Don't read this if TS stays.

If TS goes and if he cares about how he is viewed by MFC fans and if he cares about the MFC and its players, what would stop us asking him to put a condition on his move. That condition being that GWS do a deal with MFC to give us O'Meara for one of our compensation picks and maybe a player if necessary like Warnock, who would be a good get for the new club. GWS would do anything to get the TS move to happen and if he put this as a condition I would imagine they would agree as the upside of getting TS would be enormous for them. TS could then do something for us on the way out and repay some of what has been invested in him, in emotion, time, effort etc.

In my view this would soften his departure immensely and stop a lot of nastiness that would be sure to follow his departure both to him, GWS and the AFL.

We should be on the front foot if he leaves to get this done and every resource including Garry, the media and whatever else is available to us should be used. Lose the battle but not the war and it is a war.

PS. Mods I haven't posted on the TS thread so please don't move this to that thread or I will delete it as I don't wish to post on that thread.

Talk about trying to have your cake and trade it too...

This should be merged.

And, yes, it would be better, but the AFL would step in at this point and get Tom to just go.

"Melbourne will be compensated" they will say.

We won't be, but we might be able to manoeuvre a trade that will land us a ready made mid.

Really hope he stays...

"...greater weighting for strong club best and fairest performance."

Now that i think about it Scully had a sensational 2011; should win our B&F easily.

Talk about trying to have your cake and trade it too...

This should be merged.

And, yes, it would be better, but the AFL would step in at this point and get Tom to just go.

"Melbourne will be compensated" they will say.

We won't be, but we might be able to manoeuvre a trade that will land us a ready made mid.

Really hope he stays...

Firstly, unlike yourself I am not getting involved in sharing my opinion on whether he goes or stays and then posting a hundred times on the topic without ever adding anything new.

Secondly, this topic is about compensation if he goes, not whether he goes, so why should it be merged with a thread that deals with people's opinions on whether he will go ?

Thirdly, Demetriou has said in relation to Ward that whether a player goes to GWS is entirely up to the player and therefore if that player puts conditions on his going to them that would clearly be a matter for the player and GWS. If a player wanted to be tucked in bed at night, that would be up to negotiation between him and the club. The AFL can't tell TS and his manager what to ask for, can they?

The aim of this thread was that "IF" TS goes it gives him a chance to give us something on leaving and us a chance to get something better for losing him and perhaps take away some of the anger. On the other hand we could do nothing if he goes and take what we are offered and perpetuate the view of us a soft club.

Firstly, unlike yourself I am not getting involved in sharing my opinion on whether he goes or stays and then posting a hundred times on the topic without ever adding anything new.

Secondly, this topic is about compensation if he goes, not whether he goes, so why should it be merged with a thread that deals with people's opinions on whether he will go ?

Thirdly, Demetriou has said in relation to Ward that whether a player goes to GWS is entirely up to the player and therefore if that player puts conditions on his going to them that would clearly be a matter for the player and GWS. If a player wanted to be tucked in bed at night, that would be up to negotiation between him and the club. The AFL can't tell TS and his manager what to ask for, can they?

The aim of this thread was that "IF" TS goes it gives him a chance to give us something on leaving and us a chance to get something better for losing him and perhaps take away some of the anger. On the other hand we could do nothing if he goes and take what we are offered and perpetuate the view of us a soft club.

So you're suggesting that if Scully goes but is concerned at the level of compensation that Melbourne is going to get, he can say ...

"I'm prepared to sign with GWS but only if GWS sees to it that Melbourne gets proper compensation and not the unfair deal the AFL is offering"?

Firstly, unlike yourself I am not getting involved in sharing my opinion on whether he goes or stays and then posting a hundred times on the topic without ever adding anything new.

Secondly, this topic is about compensation if he goes, not whether he goes, so why should it be merged with a thread that deals with people's opinions on whether he will go ?

Thirdly, Demetriou has said in relation to Ward that whether a player goes to GWS is entirely up to the player and therefore if that player puts conditions on his going to them that would clearly be a matter for the player and GWS. If a player wanted to be tucked in bed at night, that would be up to negotiation between him and the club. The AFL can't tell TS and his manager what to ask for, can they?

The aim of this thread was that "IF" TS goes it gives him a chance to give us something on leaving and us a chance to get something better for losing him and perhaps take away some of the anger. On the other hand we could do nothing if he goes and take what we are offered and perpetuate the view of us a soft club.

I agree Redleg with all the above but be careful you will be branded a rabble rouser for suggestion we protest in any fashion.

Don't rock the boat Redleg for god sake you will scare the horses.

Is it because the rules are unfair and unconscionable? If so, why is the AFL so concerned about "integrity" over betting issues and not with "integrity" when it comes down to the competitiveness of it's member clubs?

Do we need to wait for one of the traditional clubs to be killed off before people sit up and start taking notice?

The AFL is only concerned with growing their brand. The only reason they're concerned about "intergrity" over betting issues is to protect their betting sponsorship money.

It's my understanding that the AFL is hesitant for the CBA to be challenged as it may make it invalid and all hell will break lose. Is it the same with the GWS rules?

I agree Redleg with all the above but be careful you will be branded a rabble rouser for suggestion we protest in any fashion.

Don't rock the boat Redleg for god sake you will scare the horses.

What? Hasn't the boat sunk yet old dee? I thought from your posts that there is no boat left to rock!

And please dont accuse TS of anything less than George Washington, " I cannot tell a lie, I chopped down the cherry tree". His reputation is immaculate and cant be impugned.

Of course if you are talking Dean Bailey, call him anything you like.

So you're suggesting that if Scully goes but is concerned at the level of compensation that Melbourne is going to get, he can say ...

"I'm prepared to sign with GWS but only if GWS sees to it that Melbourne gets proper compensation and not the unfair deal the AFL is offering"?

Absolutely. The added benefit for TS would be less bad publicity and anger. He would be seen as showing compassion and understanding to the club and its many fans who put their faith in him to help us to our next flag. What would it cost him, nothing, yet with so much to gain.

What? Hasn't the boat sunk yet old dee? I thought from your posts that there is no boat left to rock!

You give me far too much credit "Goag" It is a fairly big Boat and I doubt my jumping up and down will worry to many.

But if 5000 jumped up and down who know what would get wet!

At the end of the day I just want the MFC up in the top 25%.

I doubt there are many on here who do not want the same thing.

I think we all support the same team.

Go Dees

Edited September 9, 201113 yr by old dee

Absolutely. The added benefit for TS would be less bad publicity and anger. He would be seen as showing compassion and understanding to the club and its many fans who put their faith in him to help us to our next flag. What would it cost him, nothing, yet with so much to gain.

In other words if Tom decides to leave, he says to GWS - "Trade me and make sure that it's an honourable trade".

That's exactly what we expect in most trade deals between clubs behaving in a civilised manner instead of how the AFL is running things by trying to bludgeon clubs into submission on unequal trades.

Bear in mind that this would leave the door open for GWS to continue raiding us so we might be prudent and offer them an uncontracted player deal to go with it.

Sorry Red...pie in the sky stuff. His dealings with GWS will be limited. to.. "here open the bag..enough ?? OK !! "

Omeara on-trading will be totally withn GWS's domain and not for some kid to interject.

Fanciful at best..

In other words if Tom decides to leave, he says to GWS - "Trade me and make sure that it's an honourable trade".

That's exactly what we expect in most trade deals between clubs behaving in a civilised manner instead of how the AFL is running things by trying to bludgeon clubs into submission on unequal trades.

Bear in mind that this would leave the door open for GWS to continue raiding us so we might be prudent and offer them an uncontracted player deal to go with it.

No it wouldn't. It is not a trade by us for TS but GWS grabbing our uncontracted player, who merely insists that before he signs that his club gets a parting gift. The trade of picks or players therefore doesn't involve TS. For example AFL gives us picks 13 and 18 for TS compo. We give one pick to GWS and maybe Warnock and they give us pick 1 in the mini draft which means we get O'Meara. We also have a pick left to use whenever or ontrade.

Thread should be merged with the Scully thread - it's no different to WJ's we're about to get screwed thread from yesterday which was merged.

Disagree. Read point 2 in my post 3 above.

This is a different topic, it's about compensation if he goes and what we can do to improve it. It's not about whether he goes or stays.

This is about a solution to a problem we may be faced with. It shouldn't be buried in among the countless " yes he will no he won't" "you are a [censored]" posts.

Go merge your own thread. I am against mergers in football.

Edited September 9, 201113 yr by Redleg

Thread should be merged with the Scully thread - it's no different to WJ's we're about to get screwed thread from yesterday which was merged.

actually...over on the trade board

Disagree. Read point 2 in my post 3 above.

This is a different topic, it's about compensation if he goes and what we can do to improve it. It's not about whether he goes or stays.

Go merge your own thread. I am against mergers in football.

Well said

compensation refers to picks...picks and trades are about draffting.. Theres a whole board about drafting

Sorry Red..sorry OLd

merge this otherwise..

The "before he signs" bit is where your idea hits a snag.