If the AFL decide to take a player you get from say your best loss, or in our case Byrnes from Rivers, they dilute the pick you get. As you get 1 pick for each loss that is open to manipulation once again.

If Byrnes is taken from Moloney or say Bate you may end up with a 3rd round pick and still get a much better pick for Rivers, which would be the desired result. You could end up with a couple of ordinary picks instead of 1 good one and an ordinary one.

Why haven't they announced the formula for this?

If the AFL decide to take a player you get from say your best loss, or in our case Byrnes from Rivers, they dilute the pick you get. As you get 1 pick for each loss that is open to manipulation once again.

If Byrnes is taken from Moloney or say Bate you may end up with a 3rd round pick and still get a much better pick for Rivers, which would be the desired result. You could end up with a couple of ordinary picks instead of 1 good one and an ordinary one.

Why haven't they announced the formula for this?

I don't know why, they have been secretive among the clubs. But there is five bands of compensation and the yardstick for a first round pick will be Brendon Goddard for the Saints.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/149722/default.aspx - Compo claims, AFL.

I'd really prefer to see next year the system changed so that compensation is handed out only for the loss of very good players. I'll take it, but I don't think we deserve any compo this year for losing players we've left uncontracted for the sole reason that we felt they were surplus and we'd be happy to let them go in return for compensation. The Saints losing Goddard is a good example where a team should definitely be compensated, but when we start wondering what we'll get for Lynden Dunn, there is something wrong with the system.

I dont understand why you dont just get compensation for the player you lose. Wouldnt that work out fairly?

example

Melbourne lose Moloney and get second rd pick.

Geelong get 3rd rd pick for Byrnes.

Scrap it, it's a mess and open to arbitrary vagueness. In other words it's bogus. .

It's already showing to be counter productive to trades as no one knows where anything fall until its just about too late.

Another case of theory not being practical.

Definitely seems like the AFL have little idea how this is going to play out, so are keeping their cards close to their chest, and pretty much just making it up as they go.

Scrap it, it's a mess and open to arbitrary vagueness. In other words it's bogus. .

It's already showing to be counter productive to trades as no one knows where anything fall until its just about too late.

Another case of theory not being practical.

I can argue that it isn't the compo that is the problem but the execution.

The 'net' worth idea is the flaw, and is the reason why clubs are hesitant to sign up FAs. It is why Bate hasn't been signed, why Port renegged on Russell (IMO), and why the Saints haven't gone after any FA.

They need to do these things next year:

1. Have a salary threshold that a player has to be paid for his old club to get compensation (this will remove more than half of the FAs and any picks given for a player like Byrnes wouldn't be given from next year).

2. Hand out picks for ALL FAs that leave - scrap the 'net' worth idea. (This will mean more 'disruption' ONLY if there are more Goddards lost by clubs, perhaps a Chaplin may reach the threshold)

In reality, why is there ANY compensation ? Theyre employees. Theyve made a move. Does Myer get compensated when a worker goes to DJ's etc.

They are not the new kids on the block.. I think the whole concept is convoluted and flawed in its roots.

In reality, why is there ANY compensation ? Theyre employees. Theyve made a move. Does Myer get compensated when a worker goes to DJ's etc.

They are not the new kids on the block.. I think the whole concept is convoluted and flawed in its roots.

Not sure that the comparison quite works. Myer can go out and get anyone they want to replace a lost employee, and pay whatever they like to make sure there's no loss of skills etc. All the other 'employees' in this case are tied up in contracts, the clubs are tied up with salary caps and so on.

But I agree that the AFL has let this thing run round and round itself and nobody knows or can have any confidence in what the outcome is going to look like. I'd be a bit happier if they even had a theory about what they were doing, but it looks a lot like off the cuff policy making. Not that we've ever seen that from the AFL before.

Thats the thing Dr.. Nobody knows, its about as solid as quicksand. And yet its all interwoven. Compo bids might well affect other picks and disturb a value set that had been arrived at in all fairness by two negotiating clubs.

what needed to have happened if they wished a system of picks was that the FA dealings were ended in the first two weeks of the trade month. At this point the AFL dishes out its lollies and everyone knows where they are. Doesnt mean other deals couldnt have transpired as some are independent of this fiasco, but many arent.

People who design these protocols etc always seem to think everything is always cut and dried, that ducks always line up in rows etc. It very seldom happens that way as the human beast is one to always ( ALWAYS ) find some form of edge over another.

I reproduce below an interesting post by Rumpole on the FAT thread:-

THE FAT CHRONICLES - ROLLING ALONG by The Oracle

Here is the excerpt for Melbourne from the AFL website's State of Play for week two:-

MELBOURNE: North Melbourne's Cameron Pedersen is still in the club's sights but the trade is unlikely to be done until later in the trade period. The Demons are still waiting on Dawes and the answer is likely to come this weekend. Whatever the outcome, the club has given Dawes its best shot. Melbourne's interest in Farren Ray is genuine but the negotiations with the Saints are not going to be simple. Negotiations for a new contract for unrestricted free agent Lynden Dunn are progressing well. Finally, with Moloney and Shannon Byrnes likely to cancel each other out in relation to compensation picks, the decision of Rivers to leave or not may determine what the Demons have to offer to attract players in the final week of the trade period.

I'm having some trouble understanding the proposition that Moloney and Byrnes cancel each other out for the purposes of determining compensation under free agency.

Shannon Byrnes was born 7 April, 1984 and is 175 cm 77 kg and has played 108 senior games. For the past two seasons, he's spent most of his time in the Cats' VFL team. He managed only 5 senior games in 2011 (47 disposals) while he played only 4 in 2012 (40).

Brent Moloney had a stellar season in 2011 winning the club best and fairest and polling 19 Brownlow medal votes. He was born 28 January, 1984 and is 182 cm 88 kg. He has played 145 senior games (22 with the Cats). He featured in all 22 games in 2011 (509 disposals) and in 2012 he played 15 senior games (256), a fair result seeing that he was considered well down on form. He played only 4 games in the VFL but three were at the end of the year when it was clear that he most likely wouldn't stay on at the club. Remember, his manager made it clear earlier in the season that Moloney would pursue his free agency options at the end of the year.

By what measure does the author of this piece come to the conclusion that their value is at par?

Melbourne must not accept such a result. It would be a complete injustice. [/ii]

In response to that post WJ queried what were the criteria adopted in determining the compensation and whether it was primarily based on the player's contract.

FA comp is based on age and salary (incl. length of contract). It doesn't involve any other information like games played or b+f finishes.

As for compensation, Anderson says in the document: ''We confirm that the compensation formula will produce a points rating for players based on two factors: 1) new contract of the free agent and 2) age of the free agent.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/saints-in-the-dark-over-goddard-plans-20120926-26lli.html

The system may improve over time but age and future salary keep it simple and seem like a reasonable place for FA to start. You can't rank players on past best and fairest finishes in any way as the teams they play for are of different standards.

The more criteria you apply to the ranking system the more shades of grey you create and the more discrepancies you'll end up with.

as long as theres not 50 shades...all is well

In 2-3 years the Compo picks will be wiped in my opinion.

You lose a player...You replace that player.

The compo picks are in place because of the GW$ & GC draft imbalance at this point in time.

Why haven't they announced the formula for this?

Probably because they don't want the clubs to manipulate it.

Probably because they don't want the clubs to manipulate it.

that or if I was truly cynical theyll wait til they see the fall out then adjust to suit...A bit of retro adjustment etc. its all so dodgy for mine.

In 2-3 years the Compo picks will be wiped in my opinion.

You lose a player...You replace that player.

The compo picks are in place because of the GW$ & GC draft imbalance at this point in time.

GC and GWS are outside of the FA process and will be for more than half a decade.

The compensation should stay - St Kilda lost Goddard and they should get compensated for that.

It has been a half arsed effort by the AFL but comp picks should remain.

Agree with compo for unrestricted but not for restricted. If the club has a choice it should not be compensated

GC and GWS are outside of the FA process and will be for more than half a decade.

The compensation should stay - St Kilda lost Goddard and they should get compensated for that.

It has been a half arsed effort by the AFL but comp picks should remain.

how many picks do GW$ & GC get in the draft at the moment?

The compensation picks are a token way to balance this out with the other clubs.

Why should St. Kilda get compensation for Goddard? They have Salary space to draft someone else.

What other code on Earth has compensation picks with FA.

They won't last. 3 years tops.

It has been a half arsed effort by the AFL ....

How do you know?

How do you know?

Because it is already being manipulated by clubs and in terms of compensation - even the clubs have little idea of what is going to be thrown down on Friday.

When an instituion doesn't give you the specifics of a plan they are implementing or intending to implement it is because they are making them up as we sit here.

They didn't think this through and it shows.

I think the proposed formula based on contract sum leads to potential inequality of compensation.

Say a player like Lake went to Hawthorn as a FA for less money, but the chance to win a flag, the dogs could get minimal compo.

Whereas if Dawes was a FA & went there, but being a bottom 4 team, the doggies had to pay top dollar to entice a capable player from a contender, meaning Collingwood would get over-the-odds compo.

The way it is set up, it works to preserve the balance of power.

Yep JM its flawed in concept