Players do not get a say in where they are drafted, why should they get a say in where they are traded?

Players want more freedoms without the negatives that come with this ultra-professional environment.

If you want to be able to stop a trade, negotiate a No Trade Clause into your contract, otherwise you should have no say in where you are traded to - just like in other draft and salary cap regulated leagues - NBA, NFL, NHL, and the MLB.

The best teams are not going to get any worse if players are able to dictate where they play.

Got my vote, where do I sign?

I 100% agree with this. If the players want free agency then they should also accept that clubs can trade them freely as well. They can't have it all their own way and the last few trade periods have been a joke (e.g. players leaving Brisbane).

i think the horse has bolted on this one. It seems no club will trade a player to a club to which they don't want to go. Hasn't happened in years and unlikely to happen again. I don't mind that too much; its just that they all want 'success' and seem prepared to trade off some $ to get it.

Its the 'strong-get-stronger' and 'weak-get-weaker' that is the natural outcome of this that I have a problem with. To be made worse with FA and players being traded out a year before FA...unless of course the AFL does away with comp picks for FA. This may only hurt low clubs further. Vicous circle.

Pandora's box!

i think the horse has bolted on this one. It seems no club will trade a player to a club to which they don't want to go. Hasn't happened in years and unlikely to happen again. I don't mind that too much; its just that they all want 'success' and seem prepared to trade off some $ to get it.

Its the 'strong-get-stronger' and 'weak-get-weaker' that is the natural outcome of this that I have a problem with. To be made worse with FA and players being traded out a year before FA...unless of course the AFL does away with comp picks for FA. This may only hurt low clubs further. Vicous circle.

Pandora's box!

The reason they don't is that a player has to agree to a trade before it is done.

Is Dom is absolutely correct. A player cannot be traded against their will.

The reason they don't is that a player has to agree to a trade before it is done.

That was exactly my point!! Therefore, a contract with No Trade Clause won't ever be written...

Read the OP, not just the title.

I'm not up with all the different leagues and their rules, but there is a glaring difference between the AFL & NBA free agent rules. When an AFL player is traded, their free agency clock is reset. ie they have to be with the new club for 8 years to be eligible for free agency again. In the NBA the clock doesn't reset. So in that regard I can understand why an AFL player would want a say in where they get traded.

I'm not sure that there is a perfect solution to all this. There's always going to be loopholes for players to get where they want to go.

The players are at fault for this free agency system not working. That and these silly "compensation picks."

In an "ideal" world (arguable of course), players would be 100% motivated by money, and would never sacrifice a cent for success at a lower paying club. All clubs would have the resources to pay 100% of the salary cap, and players would switch from team to team based on who is willing to pay them the most money.

This would create an equal competition. Unfortunately, when players are willing to go to Sydney and Geelong and Hawthorn even though they might get a little less money (or in Sydney's case because they have a larger salary cap), then the system begins to favour the stronger clubs.

The end result is a "feeder" competition where the best talent from the worst teams consistently gets funnelled to the top of the ladder, which stays relatively static. This is where we're headed, if we're not there already.

The AFL is slowly turning into a penniless EPL.

It will eventually wither and die,