Players seek secret mid-season deals

[rpfc 28,779]

There is a concerted push from AFL players to allow free agents to sign a contract with another club during a season to provide them with greater security.

In recent discussions between the AFL Players Association and the AFL, the players have proposed that free agents should be allowed to sign a confidential contract with another club during the season.

If accepted, it would mean players in a position similar to former Hawthorn star Lance Franklin - who was really pledged to Sydney long before the 2013 season ended - would be able to sign that deal in secret, without any concern that an injury would lead to the offer being taken off the table, or revised.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-players-push-for-secret-midseason-contracts-with-rival-clubs-20140729-zy9oe.html#ixzz38vDeudsK

The above is utterly ridiculous to the fabric of contract based employment in an equalised sport.

The NRL allows this but announces it publically, so the AFLPA's solution is just as stupid but without the ethical detergent of telling the truth...

Some of you would say "this happens anyway, rp, the deals are done way in advance!" and while you are correct that the 'deals' may be done - the contract is not. To have a player sign a contract months before his previous one is to expire leads us down the road of European football where a player is allowed to sign with anyone up to 6 months before their contract is up.

The AFLPA say it is because of 'security' but why should they have the security of TWO current contracts. Fulfil your contract and sign another in the month it expires.

Also, clubs should not have the added liability of having these deals set in concrete 8 months before the player is theirs - why should the risk go entirely to the club in this instance?

The AFL has to step in to protect the security of the game.

No contracts ratified until October 1. No players re-signed by clubs during the season. Players have the security of their contract. They don't need the security of their next one while they are yet to fulfil their last one.

[biggestred 5,140]

Some of you would say "this happens anyway, rp, the deals are done way in advance!" and while you are correct that the 'deals' may be done - the contract is not. To have a player sign a contract months before his previous one is to expire leads us down the road of European football where a player is allowed to sign with anyone up to 6 months before their contract is up.

this rarely happens though - most clubs will sell a player in January if their contract ends in june (obviously at a much reduced price, but thats better than getting nothing)

if we had a mid season transfer period clubs would do the same.

[DeeSpencer 26,082]

If you are worried about doing a knee and seeing your value drop then sign on with your current club!!!

The players wanted free agency. Now they want contracts ahead of time. Come on.

Also which clubs will do it? Wont most of them be smart enough to just wait until the end of the year. Or are the clubs paranoid enough to get in with early signings?

IF you want to be a free agent then finish the contract and become a free agent. That's my advice.

[nutbean 8,838]

The above is utterly ridiculous to the fabric of contract based employment in an equalised sport.

The NRL allows this but announces it publically, so the AFLPA's solution is just as stupid but without the ethical detergent of telling the truth...

Some of you would say "this happens anyway, rp, the deals are done way in advance!" and while you are correct that the 'deals' may be done - the contract is not. To have a player sign a contract months before his previous one is to expire leads us down the road of European football where a player is allowed to sign with anyone up to 6 months before their contract is up.

The AFLPA say it is because of 'security' but why should they have the security of TWO current contracts. Fulfil your contract and sign another in the month it expires.

Also, clubs should not have the added liability of having these deals set in concrete 8 months before the player is theirs - why should the risk go entirely to the club in this instance?

The AFL has to step in to protect the security of the game.

No contracts ratified until October 1. No players re-signed by clubs during the season. Players have the security of their contract. They don't need the security of their next one while they are yet to fulfil their last one.

And besides free agency - how would it work.

Salem says my contract is up at the end of the year and I'm off to the Swans - I've signed a contract with them. MFC says - no problem - we want three top ten draft picks or he can go into PSD and take his chances that he gets through to the Swans.With a draft picks/National draft/PSD model pre-announcing a signed contract can't work except in unrestricted free agency.

[rpfc 28,779]

this rarely happens though - most clubs will sell a player in January if their contract ends in june (obviously at a much reduced price, but thats better than getting nothing)

if we had a mid season transfer period clubs would do the same.

Except for the fact that in the AFL players can veto trades...

And most of the big clubs sell their player in January but if they have already signed a contract elsewhere - they are off on a Bosman - the club gets nothing or incredibly little if the club that signed that player is nice enough to throw them something to take the player a few months earlier...

[biggestred 5,140]

Except for the fact that in the AFL players can veto trades...

And most of the big clubs sell their player in January but if they have already signed a contract elsewhere - they are off on a Bosman - the club gets nothing or incredibly little if the club that signed that player is nice enough to throw them something to take the player a few months earlier...

soccer players can veto trades as well. its just incredibly rare that we hear about it. (play football manager, manage AFC wimbledon and try and sign Wayne Rooney and see what happens!)

theres no problem with this working in afl except that in soccer the richest clubs stay at the top - and we are trying not to let that happen in afl because we want an equal competition (which is why the afl currently gives compensation for a player that leaves)

[Beats 190]

The above is utterly ridiculous to the fabric of contract based employment in an equalised sport.

The NRL allows this but announces it publically, so the AFLPA's solution is just as stupid but without the ethical detergent of telling the truth...

Some of you would say "this happens anyway, rp, the deals are done way in advance!" and while you are correct that the 'deals' may be done - the contract is not. To have a player sign a contract months before his previous one is to expire leads us down the road of European football where a player is allowed to sign with anyone up to 6 months before their contract is up.

The AFLPA say it is because of 'security' but why should they have the security of TWO current contracts. Fulfil your contract and sign another in the month it expires.

Also, clubs should not have the added liability of having these deals set in concrete 8 months before the player is theirs - why should the risk go entirely to the club in this instance?

The AFL has to step in to protect the security of the game.

No contracts ratified until October 1. No players re-signed by clubs during the season. Players have the security of their contract. They don't need the security of their next one while they are yet to fulfil their last one.

This will never happen, the AFL will step in to protect the security of the game.

Remember that the AFLPA is essentially a union. It's agenda is to do the best thing for its members, not all parties concerned, it's expected that they will make unreasonable claims to further their cause. Thankfully it recognizes that it's not a power unto itself and (to my better knowledge) does not engage in stunts to coerce other parties to agree with it (CFMEU/ MUA).

[GM11 782]

'Confidential'. That's laughable. The way AFL clubs leak, the news would be out in a week.

[drdrake 3,187]

If people don't believe this happens now they are kidding themselves. It just can't be official until 1/10. Our club will be speaking to player managers as we speak through offers to them to lure players.

[AzzKikA 2,371]

If people don't believe this happens now they are kidding themselves. It just can't be official until 1/10. Our club will be speaking to player managers as we speak through offers to them to lure players.

The issue is not speaking to other players throughout the year but signing them before the season ends.

[drdrake 3,187]

The issue is not speaking to other players throughout the year but signing them before the season ends.

I bet players agree to terms mid-year, it is just making these public

[jnrmac 20,189]

Except for the fact that in the AFL players can veto trades...

Ahh yess........ Ryan Ferguson and Brad Sewell............hmmmmm.......

[ijbfossil 77]

Another nail in the coffin of equalisation.

1964 was along time ago.

[rpfc 28,779]

Another nail in the coffin of equalisation.

1964 was along time ago.

lol

Do you think the game was equal back then?

We were just the ones with our feet on the neck of (most of) the rest of the competition...

[Dockett 32 1,239]

The secrecy suggestion is like two little kids whispering in the school ground. If you want to do it, then for God's let it be in the open.

The worry about injury may also see players not go near a physical contest for half the season ( who knows we may have even seen a bit of it?)

Players having the power of veto makes this type of stuff clearly unfair.

Its good that the issue is getting serious airtime because it definitely needs work.

[Pirlo 813]

These idiots forget the fact that the money they earn is completely disproportionate to what they actually do.

When the fans of what will become a solid and consistent bottom 6 walk away, their precious FA will mean SFA because nobody will be watching.

[rpfc 28,779]

These idiots forget the fact that the money they earn is completely disproportionate to what they actually do.

When the fans of what will become a solid and consistent bottom 6 walk away, their precious FA will mean SFA because nobody will be watching.

What?

[beelzebub 23,383]

If people don't believe this happens now they are kidding themselves. It just can't be official until 1/10. Our club will be speaking to player managers as we speak through offers to them to lure players.

Thing being they can only really talk in most instances. I do believe however that some 'nods' and handshakes sts are definitely done.

[Pates 9,660]

The AFLPA are asking for way too much too soon. The competition is still wrapping their heads around FA as it stands, to add this in would make the AFL head down the path of NRL, NFL, EPL etc.

The clubs and the fans still need to have the belief that they haven't signed on the dotted line with any other club, and that when they go out there they are loyal to that club. To put up the idea of secret deals is even more of disgrace, should be the opposite, if they are committed to another club it should be mandated that it's made public.

[demoniac 1,336]

Essentially the dominant theme of free agency will be great players from weaker clubs moving to better resourced stronger clubs lured not by a more lucrative contract but by opportunity to play for perennial finals teams that consistently challenge for a flag. It will also facilitate greater ease of movement for lesser players but their moves will not impact on their former and new clubs like the moves of the good and great players will.

This is the obvious lesson of the consistent choice in the salary cap era of players from the best teams to accept less than market value to stay at their club because it offers them a greater chance of playing finals and Grand Finals.

Most good and great players will choose to maximise winning over maximising their contract.

Having said that it is hard to reject the players desire for great employment flexibility. But there has to be a balance. The current FA system provides more of that than previous. For mine FA at 6 years would cement the Premer League Table-isation of the AFL ladder and the AFLPA needs to understand the impact that might have on the smaller clubs and on their members who ultimately sustain those clubs and the game itself.

I am ok with FA player's signing before the end of the season with another club to give them greater security but when they've signed their current club needs to be notified and the player needs to accept they might be sent on gardening leave.

[Supermercado 2,802]

Why are we letting everything skew so ridiculously in favour of players?. What else are they going to do, join the NRL? If the best players don't want to play for the hundreds of thousands of dollars they're getting now I'm sure there are plenty of others ready to step up and take their place.

Any extra money or conditions should be going to the bottom ends of lists and to rookies rather than the stars. The AFLPA come out with bollocks like this and sit on their hands while hacks like Folau, Hunt and Scully are paid millions of dollars more than their worth while rookies get reasonable but by no means comfortable money.

The big difference between open, pre-planned mid-season player movement in the AFL compared to the NRL is that they don't have a draft. Teams bounce from one end of the ladder to the other on a yearly basis because they can just buy 'free agents' by the dozen to supplement their junior programs.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Supermercado

[deanox 9,989]

Yep, if the AFLPA want this then they must also start agreeing to player trades against their will.