Jump to content

La Dee-vina Comedia

Life Member
  • Content Count

    8,665
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

La Dee-vina Comedia last won the day on July 16 2019

La Dee-vina Comedia had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

8,806 Excellent

About La Dee-vina Comedia

  • Rank
    Red and Blue

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You're a hard marker. You don't think Petracca is a top ten player based on Brownlow and Coaches' Association votes?
  2. Even if we'd drafted Neale we would probably have stuffed up his development and eventually traded him for someone else who was equally disappointing.
  3. I think the reason why all clubs are required to pay 97% (or whatever the figure is) of the salary cap is so that players who are drafted to a poor team have the same reward opportunity as players drafted to a good team. In other words, why should a player who has no choice as to which team he plays for get paid less because he plays for the bottom team on the ladder than a player who just happens to be lucky enough to have been drafted to a top four team?
  4. I've been in favour of this idea for some time. The longer a player stays at a club, the more the club gets to discount that player's salary from cap calculations.
  5. I'm not sure I agree. Players are still free to move if they can find a club that wants them. The club that wants them has a penalty imposed. The concept of the player getting to the club of their choice without requiring a trade to be done still survives.
  6. If you want to go down this path, it would be hard to justify a player from any Victorian team winning the medal in future. All the interstate clubs travel much more than all the Victorian teams in a "normal" season.
  7. Another way to "penalise" clubs who receive free agents would be to add a loading to the free agent's salary for cap calculation purposes. For example, a free agent's salary might be included in the club's cap at 125% of its true value.
  8. I don't understand why the AFLPA would want this. How does it help the players, given around 60-70% of them would be in the 12-14 teams that won't be regularly finishing in the top 4? I understand why free agency exists for the players. I understand the concept of the team which loses the free agent receiving some sort of compensation. What I don't understand is why the clubs who benefit from receiving a free agent aren't required to give up something in return, such as an automatic drop down the draft order. For example, and using Cameron to Geelong as an example, why shouldn't Geelong's
  9. Quite right, Old dee. Lang was indeed Premier of NSW. In my defence, all NSW politicians think they're more important than any Federal parliamentarian. Many even think they're above the law.
  10. Too obtuse for me. Who was this "best young player from Kybybolite" whose career we stuffed up?
  11. I think you are right to be sceptical. If I recall correctly, the self-interest of clubs and individuals was a major stumbling block when Crawford did his review and, further back, when the Commission model was first mooted. As Paul Keating once said, ‘In the race of life, always back self-interest — at least you know it's trying’. (While Keating did say this, he was repeating what had been said about 50 years earlier by one of his heroes, Prime Minister, Jack Lang)
  12. We also have to remember that David Koch has a conflict of interest given his major employer is a broadcast "partner" of the AFL. That doesn't mean his views as stated are wrong, but his conflicts (and, similarly those of Eddie McGuire, who is employed by both Nine and Foxtel) need to be appreciated.
  13. That dual role should be looked at by this proposed review. If it is indeed unique to our game, there must be reasons why other codes aren't following it. That's not to say the current arrangement is wrong, but the Commission should at least look to see whether the governance model is optimal.
  14. If our clubs each got $260 million every year, they'd have NFI what to do with it.
  15. I heard Andrew Pridham interviewed over the weeked. His proposal is much more than the number of teams in the competition. He wants everything looked at - governance, structure, rules, revenue streams, etc. And I think he's right. The last comprehensive review of this type was done 27 years ago by David Crawford. A lot has changed since, and not just in the AFL. There are different technologies (streaming, social media); there's more competition for people's time (does game time need to be shortened? for example); the big cities have grown at the expense of rural areas (what impact has th
×
×
  • Create New...