AFL involved in Port Adelaide/Essendon Draft Rort

[deanox 8,988]

North and Saints did this with Dal Santo last year BUT he wasn't officially contracted. He met triggers to extend the contract but both parties opted NOT to extend the contract. No contract was voided.

As a result, this scenario is completely different.

This is not acceptable. It is draft tampering.

[Outside fifty 967]

Fifty-5 this has little to if anything to with the MFC.This is all about the integrity and transparency of the competition, or in this case a lack of. It amazes me that the AFL can't see the slippery slope that they are perched on.

[rpfc 27,692]

We are happy to own our failures, Ash35.

Frankly, Little, Hird, and your club has been running from your failures ever since the day after your Self-Report Extravaganza.

Contracts being voided is not new, what is new is a club doing it to better its draft position, and then doing a secondary Veale deal to get top dollar for him.

If you want to agree to void a contract you should be able to and Ryder becomes a DFA and can sign wherever he wants and Essendon will get nothing.

But that isn't what you want is it?

Do a trade they will do - stop asking for things outside of what you should reasonably expect and do a deal that you can swallow.

Stop looking for the easy way out of the two year long disaster you are in - as a Melbourne supporter I can tell you there isn't an easy way out - it is a mirage.

I feel for you, I do, but I am giving you more than other clubs, fans, and the AFL has given us these last few years - some good advice.

[Nasher 33,246]

You do realise that most AFL supporters outside the bubble that is Demonland think that pick 3 for Frawley is a joke.

Why reward Melbourne for incompetence at the draft, developing players, and just in general being a poor on-field club is what they are saying.

Pick 19 for Franklin they are saying,pick 15 or whatever for Ablett they are saying.

I'll just go away now and prepare for the abuse I cop for this post.

It's not rewarding us for being poor, it's helping us because we've been poor. Anyone who uses the "Franklin for 19" is just being silly. I and most other Melbourne supporters would take the flag and pick 19 any day. Hawthorn are welcome to finish near-last every year if they'd like a higher pick.

As for your last line - I'd prefer you stayed and be the good contributor to the forum that you used to be.

[rjay 24,191]

I don't have an issue with Patty and EFC voiding his contract, making him a FA and EFC receiving 1st round compensation. If he were out of contract he'd qualify for FA anyway.

My issue is the idea of topping up FA compo with a trade. It should either be FA or trade, otherwise the other 17 teams in the comp slide a pick to contribute to another team's trade.

I think you are right here 'chookrat', and there is a precedent with the Delsanto Free Agency deal last year. So instead of getting a trade for pick 17 they end up with pick 21. All good there.

It's about pick 17 though and Essendon would have to come up with a really good player worth 17 to get the deal passed. I don't think they will do it, with their history they will put up a fringe player.

There's still a lot of water to go under the bridge yet.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

Couldn't we do the same for MC?

No MC wouldn't qualify as a FA

[rpfc 27,692]

It's not rewarding us for being poor, it's helping us because we've been poor. Anyone who uses the "Franklin for 19" is just being silly. I and most other Melbourne supporters would take the flag and pick 19 any day. Hawthorn are welcome to finish near-last every year if they'd like a higher pick.

As for your last line - I'd prefer you stayed and be the good contributor to the forum that you used to be.

Yes, and as I said in another thread, the Hawks won the flag after losing Franklin!

Just a Free Agency wasn't meant to equalise, Compensation wasn't meant to be fair.

[Whispering_Jack 28,118]

You don't think Ryder is worth 17 and 36?

Can I ask what you think he is worth?

People seem to think because of this drug saga, we don't deserve to be treated fairly at the trade table.

It's not how it works.

You do realise that most AFL supporters outside the bubble that is Demonland think that pick 3 for Frawley is a joke.

Why reward Melbourne for incompetence at the draft, developing players, and just in general being a poor on-field club is what they are saying.

Pick 19 for Franklin they are saying,pick 15 or whatever for Ablett they are saying.

I know how the FA compensation works, so I understand why you ended up with pick 3.

Essendon had governance issues. Paddy Ryder wants to leave because of it.

Melbourne has had a very poorly run football department for many years, James Frawley wanted to leave because of it.

Essendon has been punished by the AFL for our governance issues.

The harshest penalties ever given to a club by the AFL.

It was deserved.

If people have issues with this current Ryder scenario, that's ok.

But don't pull out the whole "I hate Essendon, those scumbags deserve nothing for Ryder", because those people aren't looking at it properly.

If you want to be angry at anyone, be angry at the AFL for allowing it.

But I can assure you, they are doing whatever they can to make sure this case does not end up in court or any grievance tribunal.

I didn't return here to get caught up in debates about trades, Essendon drugs scandals and alike.

I know 95% of people on here hate my club, and you all must be loving the turmoil we are going through at the moment.

I can't defend what my club did.

Football has not been enjoyable for 2 years now.

Happy for people to hate us.

Call us drug cheats if you want.

But no one blames Melbourne for getting pick 3 for Frawley.

So why blame Essendon if we can get pick 21 extra for Ryder?

I'll just go away now and prepare for the abuse I cop for this post.

No abuse necessary Ash (in fact you've taken an admirable approach to what Dank, Hird, Little etc have put you and your fellow supporters through).

Given the circumstances which have to factor in that he is going to get a holiday at the behest of ASADA/AFL/WADA/CAS, Ryder is probably worth the trade Port Adelaide offered Essendon i.e. pick 17.

The thing that's causing the annoyance is that the two clubs and the AFL have colluded together to enable the deal to go ahead and give Essendon a massive bonus in what can only be described as draft tampering.

It would also set a poor precedent for other clubs to follow with further rorting in the future with the same or similar schemes which would, in the end, make the system totally unworkable.

[Ash35 425]

I don't want people to think I was bagging out Melbourne in my response.

I was quoting how a lot of the football public view Melbourne.

I think most of you know I have a soft spot for the Dees.

You are right rpfc, there is no easy way out.

I mentioned in another post that I am preparing for a stretch similar to Carltons after their salary cap breaches in the early 2000's.

It's hard atm, everyone wants to see Essendon suffer, and suffer, and then suffer some more.

James Hird has disappointed me.

In fact that is an understatement.

A lot of people have done a lot of things wrong, and no one from Essendon, the AFL or anywhere want to own up to it.

It's very frustrating.

Still, I have no control over it.

I'm just a supporter who is enjoying the sport I loved less and less by the week.

Having said all of that, this current Ryder/FA voiding contract issue, I agree with a lot of what is said here.

It's dangerous. The whole breaching duty of care clause is dangerous.

Where does it stop.

What is Jack Trengrove says he was mismanaged by the Melbourne doctors with his injury, which in his mind is a breach of duty of care, and wants to walk away from the club for nothing.

I really think it's a can of worms the AFL don't want opened.

So while people are going nuts over Essendon getting pick 21, keeping this case out of the grievance tribunal might be doing every club a favour.

[old55 21,873]

The scheme demonstrates an alarming decline in the level of integrity we are seeing from the AFL.

No, I'd say pretty consistent level of integrity for a long time.

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

Richard Nixon said "If the President does it, it's not illegal". If the AFL does it, it's not draft-tampering.

[Redleg 38,538]

No, I'd say pretty consistent level of integrity for a long time.

Agree.

[Earl Hood 5,874]

I agree that the pick 3 for Frawley was way over the top in terms of his worth but only when you consider it in isolation. We applied for special assistance for the second year in a row. Last year, one of the reasons we were knocked back was because of pressure from most of the other AFL clubs on the AFL Commission relating to the fact that we had been fined in relation to the "tanking" enquiry. We applied again. There was further unrest from the clubs and we were knocked back despite our record of 10 wins in three seasons which I believe would have been sufficient had the applicant not been tainted with the tanking brush as we were. So, for the fourth or fifth time we were punished by the AFL over the tanking issue.We deserved the Frawley compo at 3 and even better.

Along comes Essendon and without applying for special assistance, the AFL seems to be putting its imprimatur on a deal that, if nothing else, stinks of special assistance by stealth. It's nothing like the Dal Santo deal of last year because the proposal suggests that Port Adelaide gives Essendon its first round pick in addition to the compensation pick. That is what I call draft tampering and the AFL is being anything but transparent if it approves of such non-sense.

The scheme demonstrates an alarming decline in the level of integrity we are seeing from the AFL.

What will the "independent" AFL Commissioners make of all this I wonder?

[Lucifers Hero 37,524]

It seems under this deal Port must give pick 17 to Ess, OTHERWISE Port would get Ryder for FREE! But FA rules say the receiving Club does get FA player for free!

Does this mean AFL is going to rewrite FA rules so that receiving club 'pays' for the FA ie gives up a pick - something I and others on DL have been arguing for some time!

To maintain the integrity of FA (if that is the basis of the Ryder 'rort/deal') then the AFL should stick to FA rules: ie Ryder is an FA; Ess get level 1 compo pick, Port gets Ryder for free.

If AFL wants to make Port 'pay' then pick 17 should be returned to the draft and that pick voided!!!!!!!

As I said in an earlier post this is just a scam to get Ess back into the 1st round of the draft and give them an extra late 1st round pick. ie they get a pp without even asking for one!!

Edited October 9, 2014 by Lucifer's Hero

[Dee tention 611]

MELB trade Picks 3 & 23 to PA for Wines, O'Shea & 37

PA trade Picks 17 & 23 to ESS for Ryder

[Lucifers Hero 37,524]

Why is the AFL community mute on this, this morning! Nothing extra today in newspaper websites or news reels and I'm not hearing any 'Eddie gone nuts' quotes. Clubs can't just let this go unchallenged, even if they do want to keep it out of court! Someone must speak up for goodness sake! The silence is deafening!

[Ash35 425]

No abuse necessary Ash (in fact you've taken an admirable approach to what Dank, Hird, Little etc have put you and your fellow supporters through).

Given the circumstances which have to factor in that he is going to get a holiday at the behest of ASADA/AFL/WADA/CAS, Ryder is probably worth the trade Port Adelaide offered Essendon i.e. pick 17.

The thing that's causing the annoyance is that the two clubs and the AFL have colluded together to enable the deal to go ahead and give Essendon a massive bonus in what can only be described as draft tampering.

It would also set a poor precedent for other clubs to follow with further rorting in the future with the same or similar schemes which would, in the end, make the system totally unworkable.

Obviously I'm looking at it from the Essendon point of view.

While I understand people here being upset that Essendon might gain pick 21 extra, the real winners are Port Adelaide.

They get Ryder locked away, with no hassles or tribunal hearings, for pick 17.

O'Rourke went to Hawthorn this morning for what was essentially pick 19.

As good as the kid may or may not turn out to be, right now, Ryder is far and away a more valuable player to Port Adelaide and their premiership chances than O'Rourke is to Hawthorn.

So to get him for pick 17, what a win for them.

Lucifer's Hero, why exactly do you think the AFL want to "scam" Essendon into the first round of the draft?

I think you'll find, as I said earlier, their main goal is to keep this case out of any court or tribunal hearing.

Doesn't make what they are doing right, but since when has the AFL not done anything that suits their agenda.

[beelzebub 22,724]

The last time I looked Essendon were supposed to be getting penalised. Part of that was NO first round pick. Here we see it being possibly gifted back and alls good !! Wtf

[Lucifers Hero 37,524]

Obviously I'm looking at it from the Essendon point of view.

While I understand people here being upset that Essendon might gain pick 21 extra, the real winners are Port Adelaide.

They get Ryder locked away, with no hassles or tribunal hearings, for pick 17.

O'Rourke went to Hawthorn this morning for what was essentially pick 19.

As good as the kid may or may not turn out to be, right now, Ryder is far and away a more valuable player to Port Adelaide and their premiership chances than O'Rourke is to Hawthorn.

So to get him for pick 17, what a win for them.

Lucifer's Hero, why exactly do you think the AFL want to "scam" Essendon into the first round of the draft?

I think you'll find, as I said earlier, their main goal is to keep this case out of any court or tribunal hearing.

Doesn't make what they are doing right, but since when has the AFL not done anything that suits their agenda.

Ess should get fair reward for Ryder but it should come from Port not the 'general draft'. And you are right that Port is a major beneficiary and that a major driver for the AFL is to keep it out of the courts.

The 'challenge' at this point would be the issue would go before AFL 'trade grievance tribunal' or whatever it is called, not to the courts in the judicial system. The AFL could hear the grievance and order Port to trade for what Ryder is worth - find picks or give players. This would keep it out of the courts, so I would prefer the AFL grievance process run its course before 'bending' FA rules.

To your specific question: As Ess have had 2 years of 1st round draft bans the AFL can see Ess losing players from either short-term bans or players leaving/refusing to go there and it seems to me it is giving them a 'helping' hand. Perhaps 'scam' is a bit strong but any 'deal' outside the established rules/processes without proper consultation with stakeholders, should not go unchallenged.

You have put your points fairly and with a noticeably sad heart for the predicament your club finds itself. I feel for you guys and your players and hope the club sorts itself our sooner rather than later. Cheers.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Lucifer's Hero

[rpfc 27,692]

Ash35 - the reason why you can't get value for Ryder is the uncertainty at your club - players don't want to go to play under a coach that is to be fired soon, or not to be fired soon, depending on which Essendon Board Member decides on the day what to do.

Port, apparently, can't get players to agree to go to Essendon. This is why you are not looking at value here.

Pick 17 is not a good deal for Essendon, but that is mooted by the fact he might be missing for a year, and that the AFL allow players to nix trades between clubs - something unheard of in the NBA, NFL, and MLB (outside of it being written into a contract).

This isn't going to make you feel any better but the uncertainty at the club that has continued due to those in charge at the club is what is keeping you from getting value in this deal.

Get the notices, fire Hird, hire a decent coach, hope Ryder only has a 6 month ban, and trade him for more value.

I understand some of these things cannot be done in a week but coming from a fan that loves a good bloodletting - rip the effing band aid off and move on.

It will help every aspect of your club's dealings.

[Ash35 425]

I've been wanting a "ripping of the band aid" for a while now.

Hird needs to go, and I was bemused he wasn't sacked last week/Monday.

I understand how uninviting our club looks right now for prospective players.

Mind you, Gold Coast don't have a coach, yet have been able to lure Nick Malceski, so I don't think the coaching situation is the main reason players are staying away.

Yes, there is uncertainty, and looming penalties are an issue.

My information is that any penalties, and that's IF any penalties are given, there is no way the full 2 year ban will be given without a positive test.

It will more likely be 6-12 months.

Whether served in-season or off-season is also up for debate.

So even if we write off 2015 for any type of success for the Essendon FC, from 2016 things are back to "normal".

There are teams in the AFL that face the same fate.

St Kilda for example are no chance of playing finals in 2015.

Yet a Tim Membrey for example wants to go there.

It's very frustrating as a supporter that this saga is costing us the chance to recruit players.

This is a very unique situation.

It hasn't happened before in the AFL.

It's quite easy for any one affiliated with one of the other 17 clubs to say "C'mon Essendon, hurry up and take your punishment, lets get on with it".

But I firmly believe that Essendon believe they haven't given the players performance enhancing drugs.

So why would they "take their medicine" and roll over.

They, like everyone else who thinks they're innocent, are fighting tooth and nail.

Yes it's annoying for the rest of the football public.

It's annoying for me that this saga has dragged on and no real sign of it's conclusion.

And I think at times James Hird has put his own self interests ahead of the clubs.

But there is no manual for this, it's never happened before.

Hopefully it never happens again.

[Ash35 425]

The last time I looked Essendon were supposed to be getting penalised. Part of that was NO first round pick. Here we see it being possibly gifted back and alls good !! Wtf

Yes, we had our first and second picks stripped last year and this year.

We were given a pick at the end of the first round this year.

Lost 4 picks, and got 1 pick back.

But the parameters of the penalty allows us to trade back into the first or second round of the draft, or receive compensation in either round.

ie Crameri for Bulldogs pick 26 last year.

Part of the punishment is that each team get their picks as per their ladder position.

We didn't.

So if we did receive a compo pick for Ryder, it will pick 21, not pick 13.

[beelzebub 22,724]

Ash...you do understand your club committed some major wrongs ?

Its done them and seemingly wished to be treated almost in the 3rd person wrt to it all.

Its plainly incongruous for this to be tackled in this manner.

[Jack Jack 415]

AFL have apparently stopped the Ryder free agent move.

Some explanation on trade radio coming up.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Reported on Hun that this will not happen.

As expected rival clubs complained.