I find this notion some people have that AFL players are some kind of property or in a state of vassalage to the emotions of the collective 'punters' really unpleasant.

It smells of the kind of pressure people put on their spouses to never leave or complain, or on their children to be obedient to the point of choosing the career their parents approve of. 

Just really unwholesome.

I wanted to see Hawthorn defence Chip, Frost and OMac. 
Howe and Dunney to round out our team of ex Dee defenders with Stef Martin dropping back

I really don't give a flying fig what the man does. He is an EX player.

On 11/27/2020 at 9:11 PM, Half forward flank said:

Are you in one of the States where weed is legal?

no need for abuse 

Edited November 29, 20205 yr by Ohio USA - David

13 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

I find this notion some people have that AFL players are some kind of property or in a state of vassalage to the emotions of the collective 'punters' really unpleasant.

It smells of the kind of pressure people put on their spouses to never leave or complain, or on their children to be obedient to the point of choosing the career their parents approve of. 

Just really unwholesome.

Under Contract they are the property of the Club.. That's a fact... 

On 11/27/2020 at 9:49 PM, demonstone said:

You must really dislike May, Lever, Hibberd and Langdon, then.  It works both ways, you realise.

Agree but in this instance I am talking about a guy who "retired" and then signs with St Kilda. Read what he said on the St Kilda Web site to their members.. He is two faced and its all about the money not the BS he said to their members.

14 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

I find this notion some people have that AFL players are some kind of property or in a state of vassalage to the emotions of the collective 'punters' really unpleasant.

It smells of the kind of pressure people put on their spouses to never leave or complain, or on their children to be obedient to the point of choosing the career their parents approve of. 

Just really unwholesome.

Facts are they are the property of the footy Club when under contract. That is a given.. 

Edited November 29, 20205 yr by Ohio USA - David

3 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

Under Contract they are the property of the Club.. That's a fact... 

Property of the Club. Pretty sure their families ,wives and girlfriends might argue that. slavery has been abolished for a while now. 

19 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

I find this notion some people have that AFL players are some kind of property or in a state of vassalage to the emotions of the collective 'punters' really unpleasant.

It smells of the kind of pressure people put on their spouses to never leave or complain, or on their children to be obedient to the point of choosing the career their parents approve of. 

Just really unwholesome.

AFL is a dichotomy. On the one hand, for supporters, it's all about loyalty. It is impossible for a true supporter of any club to switch alliegances. On the other hand, for the clubs themselves and their players, it's a business. And that's OK. Supporters just have to appreciate that "club loyalty" is the domain of the supporters, not those who work in the industry. As supporters, all we should expect is that when the player is playing for us, he (or she in the AFLW) is loyal and gives his/her all. 

Edited November 29, 20205 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia

6 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

Facts are they are the property of the footy Club when under contract. That is a given.. 

actually, no

they are a contracted employee

The contracting of football players. Under current AFL Regulations, a player is owned by the club who holds their registration.

 

End of story.. 

23 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

frankly I think you are taking the pi.. Football Clubs do not give out contracts for the life of a players career. Players and Club typically commit for three years. That is the extent of each parties loyalty to each other. I think you are confused with amateur, social footy or underage stuff played with your mates. AFL mateship is mostly BS. 

Read what I wrote please. I never said that players are committed for life at a Club. In fact they are only committed to the Club 100% while under Contract and Contracts do not typically run for three years as you say. Some and many are year by year and some are even longer @ four or five years.

Facts matter 

2 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

Read what I wrote please. I never said that players are committed for life at a Club. In fact they are only committed to the Club 100% while under Contract and Contracts do not typically run for three years as you say. Some and many are year by year and some are even longer @ four or five years.

Facts matter 

lets assume it is four or even five years for a contract, regarless of the fact that is not AFL average. Do you agree a player is not the property of the Club when the contract finishes.

On 11/29/2020 at 8:14 AM, Ohio USA - David said:

Frawley on the other hand left Melbourne at the end of his contract and chose to retire from Hawthorn

 

2 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

I never said that players are committed for life at a Club. In fact they are only committed to the Club 100% while under Contract

The other day you were banging on about "loyalty to the club", yet here you are saying that a player is only committed to a club 100% while they are under contract.  As Frawley was not, as you stated, under contract at Melbourne, and had retired from Hawthorn (ergo, not under contract), he is free to do whatever he pleases without any consideration of club loyalty. 

I doubt very much that Frawley approached St Kilda, offering his services.  It is far more likely that St Kilda offered him a contract based on the fact that he was a defender who still, in their opinion, had something to offer... plus they probably saw some good marketing value in the Frawley connection to the club.  Frawley would have given it his consideration before accepting and was probably encouraged to say the things he did to St Kilda supporters, again, as a marketing exercise (after all, if contracted, he is the club's property, is he not?).

I certainly hope that you were/are a volunteer worker and that you never changed jobs, as taking a position for money is, in your opinion, BS!

12 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

lets assume it is four or even five years for a contract, regardless of the fact that is not AFL average. Do you agree a player is not the property of the Club when the contract finishes.

Read what I said and stop "reading" into my comments your desired end result..

12 hours ago, hardtack said:

 

The other day you were banging on about "loyalty to the club", yet here you are saying that a player is only committed to a club 100% while they are under contract.  As Frawley was not, as you stated, under contract at Melbourne, and had retired from Hawthorn (ergo, not under contract), he is free to do whatever he pleases without any consideration of club loyalty. 

I doubt very much that Frawley approached St Kilda, offering his services.  It is far more likely that St Kilda offered him a contract based on the fact that he was a defender who still, in their opinion, had something to offer... plus they probably saw some good marketing value in the Frawley connection to the club.  Frawley would have given it his consideration before accepting and was probably encouraged to say the things he did to St Kilda supporters, again, as a marketing exercise (after all, if contracted, he is the club's property, is he not?).

I certainly hope that you were/are a volunteer worker and that you never changed jobs, as taking a position for money is, in your opinion, BS!

Are you insane ? Personally your comments above are a rambling piece of nothing and it amazes me that people like you comment in the way you do. My advice is read what I said and do not misrepresent me because I just state facts about a guy who presumably retired. They are my views and I will stick by them. 

5 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

Are you insane ? Personally your comments above are a rambling piece of nothing and it amazes me that people like you comment in the way you do. My advice is read what I said and do not misrepresent me because I just state facts about a guy who presumably retired. They are my views and I will stick by them. 

Sorry David but it’s been a long time since I’ve seen such wrong-headed comments.

Nothing wrong with fighting your corner but your comments and the position you’ve adopted is frankly ridiculous. Players are property! Getting paid is some sort of immoral crime! Plus getting abusive doesn’t strengthen your argument. And you keep telling us to read what you’ve written. We have and there’s no hidden meaning or ambiguity there. 

My advice is let this lie because your credibility as a poster is taking a real beating on this one. The best Generals know there are times when it is best to retreat.

51 minutes ago, Better days ahead said:

Sorry David but it’s been a long time since I’ve seen such wrong-headed comments.

Nothing wrong with fighting your corner but your comments and the position you’ve adopted is frankly ridiculous. Players are property! Getting paid is some sort of immoral crime! Plus getting abusive doesn’t strengthen your argument. And you keep telling us to read what you’ve written. We have and there’s no hidden meaning or ambiguity there. 

My advice is let this lie because your credibility as a poster is taking a real beating on this one. The best Generals know there are times when it is best to retreat.

My advice is to appreciate that every one has a right to state what they believe so I suggest you leave it at that and stop trying to lecture people around your line of thinking. 

22 hours ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

actually, no

they are a contracted employee

Contracted employees are in fact "owned" by the Club ... and so the employee carries out everything included in the Contract for the Employer - The Club... end of conversation.

You are entitled to your opinion but allow me to have mine and stop lecturing me your views...

6 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

Are you insane ? Personally your comments above are a rambling piece of nothing and it amazes me that people like you comment in the way you do. My advice is read what I said and do not misrepresent me because I just state facts about a guy who presumably retired. They are my views and I will stick by them. 

I read, and even quoted, what you said... other than my throw away line regarding your own employment/income, I’d love you to quote anything I said that actually did misrepresent you.

40 minutes ago, Ohio USA - David said:

Contracted employees are in fact "owned" by the Club ... and so the employee carries out everything included in the Contract for the Employer - The Club... end of conversation.

You are entitled to your opinion but allow me to have mine and stop lecturing me your views...

who was lecturing?

yr entitled to yr opinion, and the rest of us are allowed to disagree with it

the players are not OWNED...this isn't georgia in the 1700s

2 hours ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

who was lecturing?

yr entitled to yr opinion, and the rest of us are allowed to disagree with it

the players are not OWNED...this isn't georgia in the 1700s

Oh grow up. You know what I mean..  To spell it out in baby English... A Contracted player is a player whose 100% loyalty is to the Club ... As his 100% loyalty is to the Club therefore the Club own the terms of the contract for that player for the term of the contract 

A contract is an agreement between 2(or more) parties - one party does not "own" the other. Once that contract period ends, each party is free to do whatever they please. Frawley has left 2 clubs now after finishing contracts. He has done nothing wrong - nor should he be criticized for making the very same career choices that all of us do. To argue differently is just utterly ridiculous and simply portrays a disgruntled fan who cannot distinguish the difference between career advancement (for the player) and blind team loyalty (from the supporter).

Frawley left the MFC 6 years ago - get over it!

45 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

A contract is an agreement between 2(or more) parties - one party does not "own" the other. Once that contract period ends, each party is free to do whatever they please. Frawley has left 2 clubs now after finishing contracts. He has done nothing wrong - nor should he be criticized for making the very same career choices that all of us do. To argue differently is just utterly ridiculous and simply portrays a disgruntled fan who cannot distinguish the difference between career advancement (for the player) and blind team loyalty (from the supporter).

Frawley left the MFC 6 years ago - get over it!

Assuming David is a paid up member, perhaps he feels that he also "owns" a share in the players?  I can understand then why he might feel so disgruntled, as the cost of that membership equates to roughly one less cup of coffee per week!

On 11/26/2020 at 6:14 PM, Wrecker45 said:

That was a pivotal moment in our history and it should never be let go.

Mate you need to get a life. Get some perspective.