Trade Radio Discussion

[beelzebub 23,384]

The club must know that any penalties incurred from players will be minimal, otherwise it goes against all rationale that we sign him to a 4 year deal. Needless to say if we sign him and there's a penalty > 3 months (in season), there goes all faith and goodwill the club has built up, MFCSS will run rampant and the future will be dead again

how would the club KNOW..indeed anyone KNOW ? CAS hasnt offered up any yet. THe afl are playing a fools game...still, they'd be expert at that !!

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

how would the club KNOW..indeed anyone KNOW ? CAS hasnt offered up any yet. THe afl are playing a fools game...still, they'd be expert at that !!

Just trying to make sense of 4 years at 400k to a WADA boy. Nobody knows.

[beelzebub 23,384]

Just trying to make sense of 4 years at 400k to a WADA boy. Nobody knows.

Im not sure its possible at all to make sense of the 4 years...

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Im not sure its possible at all to make sense of the 4 years...

Just wake me up when we win a flag. This is all too confusing!

[beelzebub 23,384]

Just wake me up when we win a flag. This is all too confusing!

No probs Jesse Van Winkle !!

[deanox 10,023]

The two Collingwood players (scums name's escape me) who recently were banned for performance enhancing drugs were suspended with pay, and I can't see Milkman agreeing to a contract that would see him lose money- if staying with drugs inc would not have affected his salary

Weren't they suspended with pay while awaiting the outcome of the verdict?

[DistrACTION Jackson 9,551]

Just wake me up when we win a flag. This is all too confusing!

I don't think it is for supporters with little to zero knowledge on the WADA investigation to worry about.

Everyone writing about their concerns on the issue I ask you one question, do you really think the club hasn't looked into this in detail? Both from a legal stand point and a football one. All I'm worried about is the player we are receiving and I feel it is a good move, a speculative pick for a player who has already played some good football with room to also improve.

[Akum 2,660]

If it's such a simple deal (Melksham for 25), why is it taking so long?

[beelzebub 23,384]

If it's such a simple deal (Melksham for 25), why is it taking so long?

the converse must logically be the cause. Its not so simple.

[daisycutter 29,795]

Given when the offence happened ( alleged...lol ) and that this is an appeal the maximum still applicable is a 2 year ban....just saying

yes, yes. i know the 4 years is not an option in this case

i just posed that as a future hypothetical where retaining contract payment would be a complete farce

[H_T 3,049]

If it's such a simple deal (Melksham for 25), why is it taking so long?

Waiting on a pick the other way? Maybe the Carlisle deal holding up proceedings.

[Bay Riffin 1,481]

we should make them wait if we are asking for a pick in return. its not like life won't go on without Melksham. don't see why we should be screwed over by Essendon.

[Demon Jack 6,931]

If it's such a simple deal (Melksham for 25), why is it taking so long?

Because Essendon

[Sir Why You Little 37,239]

Has anything happened yet??

I am so glad Geelong got all their wishes, now they can have another tilt at a dynasty.

Marvellous....

[Jaded No More 68,974]

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

98% of this trade period is a poor attempt at some AFL theatre. YAWN. Get on with it will youse.

[old55 23,794]

Frankly I don't get the Carlisle stand off

What's so hard about:

• 5 for Carlisle and Essendon's 2nd rounder
• Essendon's 2nd rounder to Collingwood for Freeman

That's Carlisle and Freeman for 5, surely that's fair all around?

[Jaded No More 68,974]

Frankly I don't get the Carlisle stand off

What's so hard about:

• 5 for Carlisle and Essendon's 2nd rounder
• Essendon's 2nd rounder to Collingwood for Freeman

That's Carlisle and Freeman for 5, surely that's fair all around?

You forget one critical issue here

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Has anything happened yet??

I am so glad Geelong got all their wishes, now they can have another tilt at a dynasty.

Marvellous....

Just wait until Ford close down and they lose all their jobs.

That'll learn them!

[Sir Why You Little 37,239]

Just wait until Ford close down and they lose all their jobs.

That'll learn them!

aah yes.

"Don't forget the motor city"

[monoccular 17,607]

One part of me says there must be an "out" clause in any contract with any Essendon player transferring to a new club and the AFL has sanctioned that - no payment and no inclusion in the salary cap. Therefore the only cost is the draft pick. Otherwise if the AFL took a "buyer beware" approach there wouldn't be a club that would trade in an Essendon player.

However there is nothing announced by the AFL and for sake of corporate governance the AFL could not possibly keep any future contract concession arrangements secret ?

Therefore I am totally bewildered like you.

Our club is professionally run, so I sincerely believe that there is a way that they / we will not pay Milkshake for any time he may be suspended. It would be farcical, possibly terminal for the supporter base for us to be paying in effect for the EssUndone suspension.

On the WADA issue, I'm presuming the AFL have told clubs of a policy to ameliorate the risk of trading with EFC. I don't think they have any corporate governance reason to make it public, though perhaps it is surprising there have been no leaks.

Still there will be some risk, and whether it is ameliorated by that, clauses in contracts or whatever, or the likely length of a ban, I think we have to trust that the club has its head around all that better than us - we are not privy to the facts.

Cannot be a policy if it hasn't leaked from the sieve AFL

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I'm so sick of all the speculation, journalists and managers that I just want this to be over so that we know who is actually going where.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Clint Bizkit

[Little Richard 6,265]

I can't do this for two weeks.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,944]

On the WADA issue, I'm presuming the AFL have told clubs of a policy to ameliorate the risk of trading with EFC. I don't think they have any corporate governance reason to make it public, though perhaps it is surprising there have been no leaks.

Still there will be some risk, and whether it is ameliorated by that, clauses in contracts or whatever, or the likely length of a ban, I think we have to trust that the club has its head around all that better than us - we are not privy to the facts.

It's never stopped Demonland before.

[hells bells 2,023]

I can't do this for two weeks.

Today cost me a lot in data for absolutely nothing. Need to try and tune out...