On 10/10/2012 at 23:12, cfe said:

This morning I thought of another couple of potential problems with this system:

1. It creates further incentives for tanking, something that we can all agree is not needed.

If you're a team that's on the slide, and you know that your star player is going to head off in search of success at the end of the year, you have an incentive to fall as far as possible in order that you are awarded the highest possible compensation pick after your natural first round selection. The incentive to tank is almost doubled.

You also almost have an incentive to encourage that player to leave in FA. You don't want to keep them because you don't want to pay big money to a player while you're languishing at the bottom of the ladder - you'd rather they move on because then you get the benefit of the high draft pick. This is not good for the game.

What poor souless team would tank with the possible happenstance that their star player might leave?

And tanking doesn't exist, but let's not go down that trodden path...

  On 10/10/2012 at 23:12, cfe said:

2. It produces completely different results for the same player depending on their team. Buddy leaving top of the ladder hawthorn would be worth pick 19. Buddy leaving bottom rung Melbourne would be worth pick 3. That is a gigantic gap in terms of the quality of the pick awarded.

A bad team losing a player of the same qualiety as a good team should get a better pick.

The AFL is socialised game designed to let every team have their day in the sun. Bad teams losing good players should be compensated with a trade, or comp picks (should that player meet a set criteria).

Again, it is a half-arsed effort from the AFL and there are a few things I would change but compensation would remain.

Re compo. If indeed the Sainters get 13 for Goddard then it's a major f-up . Way too high, in the context of our drafting.

I'd suggest mid 2nd round and let that be the litmus. The AFL made its own rod and am happy for them to correct it after we've spent our picks (lol)

And yet no one actually knows what will be given as its effectively arbitrary in nature as there's no public issuance of the criteria/compensation formula or guidelines.

The major problem as I se it is how it can and will steer some trades etc because some trading,where 1st round picks are involved can get very cute and precious. Going into this period we KNEW where all the early picks stood. Now from about half way in (1st) round they might change. This can dramatically change the field. Wouldn't be nearly as invasive in the 2nd round.

Am surprised anyone at AFL house can walk given all the feet being shot !!

  On 10/10/2012 at 23:29, belzebub59 said:

Re compo. If indeed the Sainters get 13 for Goddard then it's a major f-up . Way too high, in the context of our drafting.

I'd suggest mid 2nd round and let that be the litmus. The AFL made its own rod and am happy for them to correct it after we've spent our picks (lol)

And yet no one actually knows what will be given as its effectively arbitrary in nature as there's no public issuance of the criteria/compensation formula or guidelines.

The major problem as I se it is how it can and will steer some trades etc because some trading,where 1st round picks are involved can get very cute and precious. Going into this period we KNEW where all the early picks stood. Now from about half way in (1st) round they might change. This can dramatically change the field. Wouldn't be nearly as invasive in the 2nd round.

Am surprised anyone at AFL house can walk given all the feet being shot !!

No way is a second round pick adequate for Goddard.

  On 10/10/2012 at 23:36, rpfc said:

No way is a second round pick adequate for Goddard.

Keep in mind, what is the actual element you're compensating for ? Then put it into context of the draft and all other benefits/inferred loss a club incurs.

FA compo is for much older players who have earnt the right to self determination as to employer. In many ways the currency of that is just something everyone needs to get used to. It's not something that clubs ought to be restituted for on a orange for orange value, more like a devalued assett.

Well probably just disagree rpfc

  On 10/10/2012 at 22:33, picket fence said:

And in yet another fantastic piece of player management our 2011 Best and Fairest just walks away!!

I don't beleive all the bultish about not doing hard yards not conforming et al

IMO We have lost out again big time!

Just watch Beamer Rip it up with the Lions.

Good luck Beamer, a true Demon gone! Pity

A true Demon!

Get real. He sooked and gave all the work to Jones.

The club allowed him to walk. Says it all. I wonder what the players told McLardy last year.

Bye.

Another triumph for FA. This is a unique occasion when the average IQs of both clubs involved in the Moloney move north have increased.

I hope the AFL don't take our blatant refusal to match any offer into their formula for our compo pick...

So if the compo pick is supposed to be representative of the nett loss due to players leaving a club, does that mean if we lost Bate, Rivers, Maloney and someone else, then subtract Brynes does that mean we get a 1st draft pick for the nett loss, and would such a pick be after our initial pick 3, after all the saints are calling for their compo pick to be immediately after their first round pick?

Thanks for your years of service Brent.

Now pick up your dummy and P.O.

Disgusted with what I saw of him this year

i'm with PF

whatever way you look at it - this is a stuff-up by the club

if Beamer himself didn't buy in/spat the dummy whatever, it is up to the club management to work it out, that's their job. You don't just let a situation transpire where your BnF winner is out the door for nothing 12 months later.

I admit he did not have a good year on-field - there is obviously a reason for that and the club should have identified it and killed it instead of losing an experienced leader that we badly need.

  On 10/10/2012 at 14:41, SloonieMcFloonieloone said:

I don't think Beamer's going to write a book laddy-boy

No sense of humour eh?

All the best beamer, loved your work pre 2012.

You seemed to always dominate when we won, some great memories against Essendon!

  On 11/10/2012 at 09:52, Curry & Beer said:

i'm with PF

whatever way you look at it - this is a stuff-up by the club

if Beamer himself didn't buy in/spat the dummy whatever, it is up to the club management to work it out, that's their job. You don't just let a situation transpire where your BnF winner is out the door for nothing 12 months later.

I admit he did not have a good year on-field - there is obviously a reason for that and the club should have identified it and killed it instead of losing an experienced leader that we badly need.

The club management's job is to stay out of FD matters as much as possible, we don't have to look too far back to see the problems caused if they don't.

Brent is apparently a good bloke from all reports but to me he has always been a selfish footballer and it will be hard for him to change that on ground behaviour

at this time of his career. A good time for him to move on.

  On 11/10/2012 at 09:52, Curry & Beer said:

if Beamer himself didn't buy in/spat the dummy whatever, it is up to the club management to work it out, that's their job. You don't just let a situation transpire where your BnF winner is out the door for nothing 12 months later.

No, before that, it's the club's job to decide whether or not it's worth the effort to work it out, and before that determine whether it's even possible to work it out.

  On 11/10/2012 at 09:52, Curry & Beer said:

i'm with PF

whatever way you look at it - this is a stuff-up by the club

if Beamer himself didn't buy in/spat the dummy whatever, it is up to the club management to work it out, that's their job. You don't just let a situation transpire where your BnF winner is out the door for nothing 12 months later.

I admit he did not have a good year on-field - there is obviously a reason for that and the club should have identified it and killed it instead of losing an experienced leader that we badly need.

ppppfffftttttt the player needs to claim some of the baggage pal.

All the best for the future Brent otherwise!

All players are to a degree selfish if not an ego then would struggle to play at this elite level.

I'll say this there are two sides to every story and Beamer can feel miffed at his treatment!!

Ah for the favoured few who can do no wrong!

Beamer Best and Fairest Winner MFC 19 odd Brownlow votes in a sensational year.

I year later he is gone, questions need to be asked!!

I cannot believe those on this site who judge without intricate knowledge!

I heard he bleeds Maroon and Blue

Brent was a great servant of our club. True Red and Blue. He'll wear other colours, but he'll always be a Demon.

Good luck in the future Beamer.

C&B - we have enough projects to worry about a 28 year old who should be running his own business.

Fine career at the Dees but it didn't end well. I still maintain the LG changes were warranted and I believe validated by what happened this year.

We move on and we will buy him a beer at the G in 5 years time.

  On 11/10/2012 at 10:59, Demon_spurs said:

I heard he bleeds Maroon and Blue

Still haven't got the jumper right..

Wait...

That's cruelly funny

  On 11/10/2012 at 10:52, Nasher said:

No, before that, it's the club's job to decide whether or not it's worth the effort to work it out, and before that determine whether it's even possible to work it out.

It's really about horses led and drinking !

  On 11/10/2012 at 09:52, Curry & Beer said:

i'm with PF

whatever way you look at it - this is a stuff-up by the club

if Beamer himself didn't buy in/spat the dummy whatever, it is up to the club management to work it out, that's their job. You don't just let a situation transpire where your BnF winner is out the door for nothing 12 months later.

I admit he did not have a good year on-field - there is obviously a reason for that and the club should have identified it and killed it instead of losing an experienced leader that we badly need.

Completely disagree with this. There was an onus of responsibility on Beamer to accept the direction the club was going in, and he couldn't get past himself to do that. Initially I thought Neeld pulling him from the leadership group altogether was an interesting move, but it would've been done with good reason and Beamer's petulant reaction to it pretty much justified the action.

His on field performance in 2012 was disgusting and unforgiveable. We don't need self professed "leaders" like that around the club. We have some genuine ones coming through the ranks. Glad to see the back of him.

  On 10/10/2012 at 16:53, Darkhorse72 said:

If he stayed at Geelong he could have

bah ya beat me to it , lol

I don't think any of us can really comment on this, it is all speculation and assumption. I find it fairly hard to believe that a lifelong clubman coming off a fantastic year could be so heavily affected by not being made captain. Surely at the very least, if in his position, you would still be motivated to perform in order to secure a good contract elsewhere. I can't help thinking there are other issues involved, perhaps personal issues outside the club, or in his relationship with Neeld.. is it possible he ha been carrying something? This is the guy who said, to paraphrase 'if you're not behind the direction the club is going then you can go elsewhere'.. doesn't anyone else find it strange his attitude could completely reverse with the appointment of a new coach? Surely the club recognises there are 2 things we are sorely lacking in leadership/experience and general hardness, which Beamer has in spades.Something is amiss, is all I'm saying.

  On 11/10/2012 at 12:14, Curry & Beer said:

''if you're not behind the direction the club is going then you can go elsewhere'

Who doesn't see this as ironic?

He didn't see the club change tac

In the end HE wasnt going in the right direction !