Chris

Hopefully the stick can get bigger and he gets a ban under the new rules as this is a new violation of the code, bring on 4 years and watch the apologists howl!

Here is what the rule says about working for the banned players. 22.1 Prohibition Against Participation During Ineligibility (a) No Player or other Person who has been declared Ineligible may, during the period of Ineligibility, participate in any capacity in an AFL Competition or activity (other than authorised Anti-Doping education or rehabilitation programs) authorised by the AFL, Affiliated State or Territory Body or AFL Clubs, any Signatory or Signatory’s member organisation or a club or other member organisation of a Signatory’s member organisation, or in competitions authorised or organised by any professional league or any international or national level event organisation or any elite or national-level sporting activity funded by a government agency. I think the AFL will be stuck on the word competition. Prismall is working in a welfare role (lets hope is he has a tertiary qualification to do so or a few on here will get very upset) and they don't see this as direct involvement with how they play, i.e. not coaching. All comes down to what is an activity.

Article in the Hun saying Prismall is still employed by the dogs and has AFL approval to do so. Under the WADA code his employment fits in a grey area. The AFL have said they are in talks with ASADA about if it is allowed. Just another example of AFL land thumbing their nose at the whole code, apparently with AFL approval! Is anyone else really disappointed and embarrased by this whole debacle?

Thanks for the clarification, seems an odd rule given the intent of the cap itself. The club could easily front end contracts, you just do a simple variation with the player to pay them more this year and less next year. Puts cash in the players pockets faster so not many would object. I agree it provides benefit in future years, stupidly the more you are paying the cheat and the more cheats on your team the more the benefit!

Can unused be carried over/ I have never heard that one before. My understanding of the benefit was that it allowed the clubs to front end some contract this year to a greater extent which opened up salary cap space over the next few years depending on how the structure the contracts. The end result is the same where clubs have more money to spend but carrying it over seems illogical and against the whole idea of the cap (this is the AFL though).

O love how it was judged to have had a low impact on the port players head. More like no impact!

Agree if this is the case. The Port player had his arms free and could protect himself though, that is why it is a joke.

They had that incredible run of soft tissue injuries once the juice stopped flowing. The timing of the removal of the program and the start of the injuries is certainly raises suspicions.

Maybe we could ask the other clubs is they know of any special substances that can be used to help heal injuries faster? Surely at least one club out their knows the answer!

One passage of play stuck in my mind where Watts was outnumbers near the boundary and was running to the Port players and as he went to tackle they disposed of the ball. Each time he pulled out of the tackle and bumped so he could run to the next just for the same thing to happen. We ended up with another player there and the ball went out. Watts in this case wouldn't have got a tackle in the stats sheet. He made the right call and put in three efforts to stop the ball rather then one tackle, which if he had laid the one then the ball was gone. I was impressed with his continued attack and second and third efforts.

I watched the first quarter and a half and then had to leave to go to a kids party. My take on the game at that point was that we looked like a team full of cobwebs playing against a team who blew the cobwebs out last week, hence the deficit in scoring. I got back from the party completely by accident to watch what I had missed on the replay. It seemed after half time the players had blown the cobwebs out and were now playing as they had planned. The third quarter was great to watch as Port just didn't have an answer and couldn't come back. They seemed to try to come back int eh last but the lack of rotations would have started to take their toll by then. Overall I think the last half of the second quarter and the third were the ones worth watching as both teams had blown the cobwebs out and neither was more tired than the other due to rotations, from that I am pretty confident about our season as you can clearly see what we are working on, which for the first time in a long time is not defence! I will be very interested to see how we go against the Dogs, especially as their expectation of us will be higher than what Port had for us.

Looking like we are playing a team who have blown the cobwebs out already, which they have as they pkayed last week. Hopefully we do by half time.

I agree that there would need to be a safety net of some description for the appalling management that has been in place at various clubs, including ours. I think we are at a point though where clubs can become healthy, viable, and profitable if given the same opportunities. It wont matter how well we are run or how many games we win, we will never get the exposure to the market of say a Collingwood. That hold us down as it does with many other clubs. That is what I want to stop. Just like in general society I think we should be getting people off welfare through supporting them and giving them the tools to stand on their own feet, teaching them to fish. And just like in society if we can do this then as a whole we are better off. The AFL see things differently. Happy to leave it there, we both know how the other thinks on this issue and both are valid views.

Yes we do differ. My fear is that in 10 years we will still have the same teams getting handouts from the AFL, that is what will happen under the current system. I would love to see a comp in 10 years where every club is making a profit off their own back (with the exception maybe of the two newbies who may take a little longer). I would love for the AFL to turn around to the clubs and give them all the same access to the market, help them put the right processes in place and then say the welfare stops in 5 years, if you can't stand on your own two feet at that point then you are gone. They are in a position now where they can do that without jeopardising the code as a whole.

The whole handling of the EFC case was embarrassing to anyone who has an interest in these things and in reality if we had a more independent AFL media they would be calling for heads.

Two issues, rewarding successful teams is great in theory but it does not happen in practice, it all comes down to the teams with the biggest TV audience regardless of how the club is managed or where they sit on the ladder. Your view of getting as much money in as possible is shared by the AFL. This is very short sighted. This was the approach taken in the 90's and early 00's for all the right reasons, the AFL was struggling and needed the boost. We are past that point and the code has the warning signs of struggling again due to the inequity of the comp. This initial boost to AFL funding was on the back of the big clubs and using their pull to generate the income, it worked and we should all be thankful for that. It also came at a cost of pushing the smaller clubs further down, it was a price that had to be paid at the time. Now the code is stable and making money it is time to re-balance the equation. We have paid back the big clubs for the last few years at least, they are now huge. The little clubs are now getting paid back for suffering for the cause by way of cash. A better approach for the long term security of the code is to now provide those small clubs with the opportunities the little ones didn't get before and allow them to build and stand on their own two feet. The current system doesn't do that no matter how well run the club is, the TV execs will not allow it. It is time the AFl told the TV execs that this is how our code will be, we understand that means we get less money now but we think that by doing this we will have a healthier code int eh long term (and therefore more long term security). What is they say about teaching a man to fish?

I think the two are linked by I don't blame the AFL for our mis-management, my issue is with their mentality of hand outs in stead of hand ups.

The whole win games and you get a good fixture and get on the telly is a fallacy.

Good decisions help but so does luck at the recruiting table, and much of it is luck. If you look at Hawthorn and Geelong as the two most successful clubs recently one's success was based on some outstanding father son picks up and a couple of good drafts, the others is based on a couple if good drafts, a few priority picks in good drafts and then some very good trading, which itself was easier due to the draft success. The management of both clubs has also been very good, it is easier to be a better manager with better tools and greater opportunities though. Our management has been very very poor until PJ came along and we havent had any luck at the draft, we also sucked at developibg players which compounded the issues.

A couple of things. The AFL thumbing their nose at WADA is not an opinion, it is exactly what they are doing. Not being part of WADA would remove any chance of credibility for the code with regards to PED use and they have very little now as it is. Take that from someone who is interested in it. Secondly you saay the comp is even and each club has a reletively opportunity. That is bull. If you look at the commercial aspects of the draw and when certain teams can make money the disparity in opportunity is right there to be seen. That is why the big clubs give money to the little ones, not due to management but due to opportunity, PJ said just that at last years AGM. I agree when you said the AFL is socialist, although i only agree that it should be, not that it is. The way it should be run is both as a capitalist competetive business (as a code competing against the others) but it should be absolutely even between the teams in terms of opportunity (as far as possible anyway). The NFL are closer on this where every team gets the same number of high profile games no matter where on the ladder, this gives the commercial opportunity and it is up to the team to make the most of it. TV stations wont like it so you would get less money in the short term, in the long term you get a healthier comp with viable teams and that brings more money. The AFL are far too short sighted in this regard. You can also get around what we had with the blow outs with Carlton by players like with like. Dont put the wooden spoon team against the premier in prime time, put games like us V stkilda. Skills may be down but a close game is usually a good game. That brings in veiwers and therfore more money. You say thanks for the socialist aagenda of the AFL as it has helped our club by giving us money, wouldnt you prefer we got the opportunity to make money so we didnt need the handout?

You mean Petrenlivan?

My thoughts exactly. Are the AFL actually testing the waters for leaving the WADA code through their compliant media buddies. The day they walk from the code is the day I do the same.

Neither am I. If you think of something let me know as the only power i can see any of us have is bums on seats, eyes on telly, and memberships.

Nail meet head. The best thing the AFL could possibly have done for the integrity and brand of the AFL is to have turned around at the start and said that ASADA has a process to follow, we will let them follow that process and we will accept what ever findings come down. Then when the players were found guilty they should also have taken the hard line and stopped trying to find ways around the code.

I have said it before but my membership does not get renewed until Dill comes out and categorically says the AFL support the WADA code and any talk of the AFL leaving the WADA code is ridiculous and not worth the paper it is written on. I realise this hurts the club and not really the AFL but I can't bring myself to financially support a league that is effectively allowing people to condone PED use. I think the chance of the AFl walking from the WADA code is very slim but that is not due to the integrity of the WADA code, it is due to the dollars attached from the government. If there weren't any dollars attached Dill would have walked from the WADA code a few years back. I certainly don't have any real excitement about the season that is about to start which is one we should all be hugely excited about. The thought of all and sundry going on and on about the replacement EFC players and how the club has been through such a hard time etc etc makes me sick. Certainly will not be watching or having anything to do with any EFC game for the year, even when we are playing them.