Diamond_Jim

They do but what does it say. One of the things about contracts is imagining imponderables and dealing with them. GCS contracted Ablett junior and massively front loaded his five odd year deal. The contract had no clawback provisions when he left early. Then there was the Treloar fiasco. (Admiitedly not the lawyer's fault that time)

Nail on the head By asking the question post trade who takes the risk.

The Saga continues See this post I just made on the Trade Rumors thread A potentially big twist in the Grundy deal... (Collingwood playing the spoiler) This column can reveal that, when the deal goes through, Collingwood will seek clarity from the AFL as to whether the club can remove itself from the deal, and therefore clear the $350,000-a-year space in their future total player payments. A senior club source, who wouldn’t speak publicly due to the confidentiality of player contracts, confirmed the Magpies had discussed internally the status of Grundy’s seven-year Collingwood contract if he were to move clubs again. Collingwood’s position will be that it had a deal with Grundy and Melbourne, but not with Grundy and Sydney. It’s a position that might be difficult to get past the bosses at AFL HQ, given that Andrew Dillon and Laura Kane are both lawyers. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/money-money-money-why-the-grundy-poker-game-is-heating-up-20230926-p5e7s6.html

A potentially big twist in the Grundy deal... (Collingwood playing the spoiler) This column can reveal that, when the deal goes through, Collingwood will seek clarity from the AFL as to whether the club can remove itself from the deal, and therefore clear the $350,000-a-year space in their future total player payments. A senior club source, who wouldn’t speak publicly due to the confidentiality of player contracts, confirmed the Magpies had discussed internally the status of Grundy’s seven-year Collingwood contract if he were to move clubs again. Collingwood’s position will be that it had a deal with Grundy and Melbourne, but not with Grundy and Sydney. It’s a position that might be difficult to get past the bosses at AFL HQ, given that Andrew Dillon and Laura Kane are both lawyers. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/money-money-money-why-the-grundy-poker-game-is-heating-up-20230926-p5e7s6.html

Another year and we don't have to wonder where our post match celebrations will be held. Can Collingwood still use Victoria Park and how about the Lions at Brusnswick Street Oval. Olympic Park does not have the same feel. I see the Pies are trying a fan site at Olympic Park. These have never really worked in the past. A pity.... I wonder what would attract people. I thought our post premiership day at the MCG was well done but I hope the next one is even better

Interesting... My present thoughts on TMac and BBB staying for another year are that I'm ambivalent simply because we have so many others leaving thus freeing up spots. Are we better off with them leaving allowing us to plunder the lower levels of the draft and trying to find a diamond. (In saying this I'm assuming injuries and form will preclude both from senior selection in 2024) Pity you have to give all draftees 2 years as a one year option for lower level choices might actually encourage clubs to give the outliers a chance. Sure we have the mid year rookie draft but not sure that it's the answer as increasingly those players within the elite full time training universe offered by AFL improve at a different rate.

There's a lot of energy on this thread. As someone posted however total trades are around 30 and most are at the Harmes level. Points trading is interesting but with North this year and Tasmania to come the pool is hopelessly compromised. I enjoy the speculation but it would be interesting to hear from managers why players tend to re-sign rather than switch. Especially players at less successful clubs. Post 2021 I thought we might have picked up a player or two as a destination club from GCS or the likes but it doesn't happen. Why is it so, Professor

What did Yze do? Was he the strategist as well as the ingame "coach". If so we need more than a midfield coach.

Ah Naughtons ... the home of the sporting drinkers. I was a Clyde man... great flounder and a pot for lunch I hear Naughtons is quite upmarket these days. O those days of Friday lunchtime bands and the Wizard........ I digress

Surely we'd be asking them to pay 30% or more of his salary as well

May I suggest Tuk Tuk in Lake Toba instead. Home of the Batak people. Former headhunters who drink beer, eat pork and love music

Doing a little searching my guess is that the third verse was an unofficial verse used within the club to "celebrate" the post war Melbourne v Collingwood rivalry. The second verse was only added post 1939 (penned by Bluey Truscott after the 1939 premiership) Certainly worth asking about among the last of the living 1964 players. History is often more about the little things PS Posted just as KIP provided the answer (Not sure that the verse has stood the test of time but I can picture Kiss doing well with it)

What a shambles. Collingwood now blaming Ticketek for giving out any standing room tickets to GFG members. The Pies called for the AFL to increase competing club allocation from 17,000 to 20,000 and on Ticketek to “improve their system” in a statement released on Monday, in which they also said that any priority one member that was given a standing room ticket in the ballot would be upgraded to a seated ticket. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/grand-final-guarantee-collingwood-to-ensure-top-level-members-get-to-the-decider-20230925-p5e7bo.html

Understand,,,, but the issue is are clubs selling expensive GF guarantee memberships that only entitle a holder to standing room. Is it just Collingwood or are other clubs doing it? MFC have never had a GF where the guarantee applies for example

Would you be happy with standing room because that appears to be what some were offered

1987 ... Hawks v Blues 30 plus degrees with a north wind

From the Age "Priority one members paid close to $1000 for a membership that guaranteed them a grand final ticket, but at least 37 of those members missed out when they selected no standing room during the registration process and then were allocated standing room tickets only in the ballot." So they obviously oversold the guarantee in the sense that they included "standing room". No one would think that a guaranteed ticket included the possibility of standing room Stinks to high heaven and I hope the ACCC comes down on them like a ton of bricks https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/how-the-afl-allocates-grand-final-tickets-and-why-so-many-die-hard-fans-miss-out-20230922-p5e6x4.html

Post Tassie entry the North travelling money disappears or at the very least is significantly reduced. Will they sell home games to WA/Qld like we used to or will NT become their 6 games a year destination. Hawks have the same problem but their supporter base is better

Agree I used to like the Alice Springs game for example but securing the 4 points is now more important. For the same reason avoiding games at Kardinia Park and Tasmania are essential. I wonder who will be Gold Coast's Darwin bunny next season. This year it was the Bulldogs who lost in Darwin and lost the following week. Those two losses were crucial as it turned out.

Those two round the neck decisions..... amazing and indefensible Umpiring does decide games

Imagine the conspiracy theories if Lynch came to Melbourne

Do we need the incessant commentary... the game is the entertainment

O to have a forward or three

Also doesn't make any economic sense to give North a leg up. They're a low drawing financially unsuccessful club with one of the weakest balance sheets in the competition. (Take out their leasehold improvement value on Arden Street and they would be in deep trouble. Want to buy some change rooms and a gym.)

Is there anything in it. Would love the drama