Phil Scully offered GWS gig in November 2010!

[Trisul 664]

There were multiple criteria for compensation. Ablett did not score well on all criteria, neither did Thomas.

Serious question: If the size of the contract has grown by 11%, and is a key determinate for compensation, why wouldn't it be re-visited (beyond the nefarious)?

Not chasing the ambulance here. Am as 'over it' as I think I'll ever be, but there are accepted or professed rules of action or conduct that must be (re-)applied.

[The Chazz 4,077]

There were multiple criteria for compensation. Ablett did not score well on all criteria, neither did Thomas.

Serious question: If the size of the contract has grown by 11%, and is a key determinate for compensation, why wouldn't it be re-visited (beyond the nefarious)?

Not chasing the ambulance here. Am as 'over it' as I think I'll ever be, but there are accepted or professed rules of action or conduct that must be (re-)applied.

Trident, is it written in black and white somewhere that, should all criteria be met, there is an absolute maximum compensation? If so, then maybe we have something to argue. But if the rules state that maximum compensation with what we got with him, then you are wasting your breath, regardless of if you think we were hard done by.

I'm not saying I have seen such document, I'm asking if anyone has.

[McQueen 17,867]

C'mon guys. We got the top band of compensation. The same as Geelong received for Ablett. You know, the best player in the AFL?

The regime was never fair per se. If it was fair, Geelong would've received two top three picks (what WCE got on the open market for Judd). They didn't. We would've received one top three pick. We didn't.

The facts don't actually change our situation. The AFL have clearly stated that the duration and size of the contract are the key determinant of compensation. Even with Phil's wages included, that still sits Scully at about $6.7m over six years which is well short of Ablett's $9m over 5 years. We have absolutely no grounds for further compensation, even if the manner of the dealings have a stench to them that makes it all a bitter pill to swallow.

The only way I will ever feel vindicated in this whole sordid affair is if shithead turns out to be a dud and our 2 first rounders turn out to be very good players.

Comparing this to the Ablett scenario is absolutley ridiculous. Geelong got massive value from him, his Dad is a legend of the game and of Geelong.

We got nothing of what a number 1 draft pick is chosen for. Absolutley zilch in my eyes - no value.

[jayceebee31 761]

I am going to ask, and will most likely get shot down, but why do we deserve extra compensation? Especially considering we got equal to what Geelong got for Ablett.

Billy, it never hurts to ask! Also the club was under the pump for the whole year due to the saga.If it can be determined that certain people have not acted in the best interests,then they should be fined, we compensated or both

[Radar Detector 1,347]

There were multiple criteria for compensation. Ablett did not score well on all criteria, neither did Thomas.

Serious question: If the size of the contract has grown by 11%, and is a key determinate for compensation, why wouldn't it be re-visited (beyond the nefarious)?

Not chasing the ambulance here. Am as 'over it' as I think I'll ever be, but there are accepted or professed rules of action or conduct that must be (re-)applied.

We received First Band compensation because, as stated by the AFL "Compensation is based primarily on the new contract offer to the player". There is no higher band meaning that the question of an upwards revision is moot. An increase of 11% and subsequent re-application of the rules would see us getting... First Band compensation.

[The Chazz 4,077]

We received First Band compensation because, as stated by the AFL "Compensation is based primarily on the new contract offer to the player". There is no higher band meaning that the question of an upwards revision is moot. An increase of 11% and subsequent re-application of the rules would see us getting... First Band compensation.

Thanks Radar - this is exactly what I have been asking for!!!

So, to all those who are saying otherwise, we have received maximum compensation for this c u next tuesday, therefore, we aren't entitled to any further compensation, regardless of what else is unearthed.

Stripping GWS of draft picks may be an option, but that doesn't mean we automatically get them.

We've got what we are going to get, we will get nothing more.

[Radar Detector 1,347]

We've got what we are going to get, we will get nothing more.

Exactly. See link for the AFL's description of the compensation rules: http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=96815

[Sir Why You Little 37,130]

There were multiple criteria for compensation. Ablett did not score well on all criteria, neither did Thomas.

Serious question: If the size of the contract has grown by 11%, and is a key determinate for compensation, why wouldn't it be re-visited (beyond the nefarious)?

Not chasing the ambulance here. Am as 'over it' as I think I'll ever be, but there are accepted or professed rules of action or conduct that must be (re-)applied.

Correct. The information has changed. This has NOTHING to do with G Ablett and his scenario. Please keep them totally seperate.

[daisycutter 29,738]

Trident, is it written in black and white somewhere that, should all criteria be met, there is an absolute maximum compensation? If so, then maybe we have something to argue. But if the rules state that maximum compensation with what we got with him, then you are wasting your breath, regardless of if you think we were hard done by.

I'm not saying I have seen such document, I'm asking if anyone has.

Its securely locked up in Adrian Anderson's head

[Radar Detector 1,347]

Correct. The information has changed. This has NOTHING to do with G Ablett and his scenario. Please keep them totally seperate.

WYL, my original point wasn't the comparison with Ablett so much as the fact that we have already received the maximum comp. We can run around screaming we should get more but we won't. It's done.

[rpfc 28,779]

The only hope we have is if the AFL Investigations Manager Ken Wood thinks they breached the contact rules by offering his dad a job outside of the October window.

I don't know how that would fly though(he is in the TPP which complicates things).

I hope Dale Holmes continues to enjoy his holiday; try and get some more info on this...

[Sir Why You Little 37,130]

WYL, my original point wasn't the comparison with Ablett so much as the fact that we have already received the maximum comp. We can run around screaming we should get more but we won't. It's done.

I don't expect anymore compensation either, but that doesn't mean it is right. New information has surfaced. My comment about Ablett was not so much directed at you, but the whole thread.

[beelzebub 23,383]

Would I expect any more compensation? Probably not.

Might be remiss of us not to apply some torch to the subject though, if only to keep up appearances, stir the pot,,,,

Likely outcome... No change.

[Sir Why You Little 37,130]

Would I expect any more compensation? Probably not.

Might be remiss of us not to apply some torch to the subject though, if only to keep up appearances, stir the pot,,,,

Likely outcome... No change.

Considering the amount of people who went in to defend T$ during 2011 when he was lying to all. Then i would hope the club stirs the pot at least a little as a voice of discontent.

[Trisul 664]

So due diligence is irrelevant because the result is the same?

I never argued (in this thread) that we deserve more, rather that (for the integrity of the process) it requires a re-examination.

Btw, for all the butbutbutAblett'ers, the AFL stated that both:

"The player’s age and the new contract offer to a player from the expansion club would be the key criteria used to determine the compensation for his original club;"

Edited November 16, 2011 by Trident

[beelzebub 23,383]

its a funny situation in a way though.. We really , despite, Eddies inuendos , are looking fairly good in all of this. yes some still nurture a hatred for our game 'management" but who wouldnt have. . We look like the hard done by dudded guys. There is s fine line between just a touch of 'outrage' and bringing focus back to us in a light not wanted.

In reality we just give few a little nudge of the elbows here and there and continue on our way. Am just so glad that fiasco masquerading as a family is nothing more to do with us.

[pitmaster 3,578]

The only hope we have is if the AFL Investigations Manager Ken Wood thinks they breached the contact rules by offering his dad a job outside of the October window.

...

The timing of the letter (november) suggests that all will be found to be above board ie: T$ was approached as permitted in October 2010 and committed after the add-on of a job for the old man was included. The November letter stands as confirmation to one element of a deal decided in October - presumably after moneybags came back from China.

In turn it looks like he played possum with us in 2011 taking his match payments and doing buggerall on field.

[Macca 17,034]

We , as a club do not get the same as Geelong at all - on the surface it looks the same but it isn't .

They got 9 years out of their player incl 192 games , a Brownlow , 2 flags , 4 All Australians and 2 B&F's - then received 2 compo picks .

We on the other hand got virtually nothing out of our player - then received 2 compo picks .

In other words the Cats got tremendous value and we got diddly squat .

Most no.1 draft picks have ended up as stars of the game - esp in the last 11 years

Last 11 years - Reiwoldt , Hodge , Goddard , Cooney , Deledio , Murphy , Gibbs , Kreuzer , Watts , $cully , Swallow - not many duds there .

Of course we all hope that Jack becomes a star and T$ doesn't but decisions should never be clouded by the "good riddance" factor .

Unlike the Cats we should have got "like for like" - plus an extra pick for the 2 years of waste .

Here's a question - would you trade our 2 compo picks for GW$' 1st pick in this years draft ? It's a no-brainer for me . .

[Sir Why You Little 37,130]

We , as a club do not get the same as Geelong at all - on the surface it looks the same but it isn't .

They got 9 years out of their player incl 192 games , a Brownlow , 2 flags , 4 All Australians and 2 B&F's - then received 2 compo picks .

We on the other hand got virtually nothing out of our player - then received 2 compo picks .

In other words the Cats got tremendous value and we got diddly squat .

Most no.1 draft picks have ended up as stars of the game - esp in the last 11 years

Last 11 years - Reiwoldt , Hodge , Goddard , Cooney , Deledio , Murphy , Gibbs , Kreuzer , Watts , $cully , Swallow - not many duds there .

Of course we all hope that Jack becomes a star and T$ doesn't but decisions should never be clouded by the "good riddance" factor .

Unlike the Cats we should have got "like for like" - plus an extra pick for the 2 years of waste .

Here's a question - would you trade our 2 compo picks for GW$' 1st pick in this years draft ? It's a no-brainer for me . .

spot on Nuggets, absolutely.

[Chook 15,022]

If you put it that way, Nuggets, then you have to add the 9 years of $500 000 to $1000000 dollars (per year) that we won't have to pay Scully that Geelong did have to pay Ablett. Rough figures I know, but the money saved has to be counted as a bonus in some way, right?

[Macca 17,034]

If you put it that way, Nuggets, then you have to add the 9 years of $500 000 to $1000000 dollars (per year) that we won't have to pay Scully that Geelong did have to pay Ablett. Rough figures I know, but the money saved has to be counted as a bonus in some way, right?

Happy to pay that sort of coin for a star - you need stars to win flags - you don't win flags without them .

Swan , Thomas , Pendlebury and probably Cloke would be on top money at Pieland and rightly so .

If Trengove , Watts etc turn into stars we will have to pay them big money - that's the market .

[Chook 15,022]

Happy to pay that sort of coin for a star - you need stars to win flags - you don't win flags without them .

Swan , Thomas , Pendlebury and probably Cloke would be on top money at Pieland and rightly so .

If Trengove , Watts etc turn into stars we will have to pay them big money - that's the market .

Of course, but all I'm saying is we got the same compensation as a club who payed a leaving star that much money, but we didn't have to pay the money at all. I'm not arguing that I wouldn't have payed Ablett what he got at Geelong, knowing what he produced. Rather, I'm arguing that we got the same compensation as a champion's former club did, without having to suffer any blow to the hip-pocket. Obviously I would have rathered Scully had stayed if I could be sure he'd achieve the same as Ablett has, but since that's unlikely to happen with even the greatest players, I don't think we really came out any worse than Geelong.

Edited November 16, 2011 by Chook

[Macca 17,034]

Of course, but all I'm saying is we got the same compensations as a guy whose club payed him that much money, but we didn't have to pay the money. I'm not arguing that I wouldn't have payed Ablett what he got at Geelong, knowing what he produced. Rather, I'm arguing that we got the same compensation as a champion's former club did, without having to suffer any blow to the hip-pocket. Obviously I would have rathered Scully had stayed if I could be sure he'd achieve the same as Ablett has, but since that's unlikely to happen with even the greatest players, I don't think we really came out any worse than Geelong.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree - cheers !

[Guest Jackie]

I think it is a bit unfair to compare Ablett with Scully with regards to compensation. Look at the record and the character of the guys. Ablett played a blinder of a season in 2010 knowing full well he was going to leave. And also 2nd in the Brownlow. Scully in the same situation was the complete opposite. How does one compare losing a true giant of the game with a pretender and who may turn out to be a complete phony? I think all considering we have done very well.

Edited November 16, 2011 by Jackie

[Roost It 1,434]

There's 2 things I'm looking forward to over the next copuple of years.

1. The look on Sheedy's, Allan's and father Shitbag when young Tom's knee buckles in a Trengove tackle.

2. The look on there faces when we take one of their young stars for ourselves.

I know the family of a young kid touted as a high first round pick in this years draft. He's already talking about which club he'd like to play for when his time at GWS is up

Edited November 16, 2011 by Roost It