No-one should let Martin get to the Blues.

[mjp]

I'm not sure what everyone else thinks, but to me Carlton have acted close to unethically this trade period with regards Martin.

I kinda/sorta get the Papley breakdown - this just seems like a simple value 'thing' and Sydney were not apt to deal. Martin - offering a future 2nd and 3rd to a club already swimming in picks...it was never ever going to do it. And because of that it seems to me that the plan all along was to let him fall to the PSD and pick him then 'for free'.

That's not right. The PA should be up in arms (and they probably will be if he doesn't get to the Blues) and the AFL integrity unit should be equally upset. The other 17 clubs need to make an example of this...he should not get to Carlton under any circumstances.

Clubs have an obligation during the trade period to act 'fairly' towards one another. I am certain someone is going to throw the Doddoro card at me, but over the past couple of years Essendon have at least been making trades...he might be hard to deal with but at least he still plays 'in the spirit' of the game.

[Happy Days]

Didn't they offer 9 for Martin and 15? That's a pretty fair deal to me if true and Carlton can't really be blamed for Gold Coast saying no.

[bulldogtragic]

Didn't they offer 9 for Martin and 15? That's a pretty fair deal to me if true and Carlton can't really be blamed for Gold Coast saying no.

GCS were the ones who made that fair offer to Carlton (a six pick downgrade, plus a future 2nd/3rd). Carlton said no.

[comrade]

Martin was out of contract so GC playing hard ball doesn’t seem in the spirit of trade period. Carlton also screwed up by wooing Martin without having all their ducks in a row.

Mistakes were made by 2 crappy clubs.

[mjp]

Martin was out of contract so GC playing hard ball doesn’t seem in the spirit of trade period.

Saying NO to a Future 2nd and a Future 3rd in a draft where everyone knows is 'compromised' is ridiculous. He is NOT a free agent. He is a Gold Coast player. Gold Coast had to stand firm here...

[The Adelaide Connection]

Did I read correctly that Martin can only nominate for the PSD if he nominated for the National draft and gets overlooked?

I also don’t think that anyone who goes in any draft shouldn’t be able to put a price on their heads. I think they should be signed to a 1 year deal at a maximum of whatever their last year of pay was (and then they are able to renegotiate after the year). This would stop the shenanigans that Carlton are seemingly trying to pull off.

[ratsmac]

TBH if we could pull off such a shenanigan especially at the expense one of the expansion clubs, I would be rapt.

Where I find it unfair is GGS being gifted these priority picks so they didn't have to accept any offers that were unders. Without their free picks they would be more inclined to make sure a deal got done from their end.

[bulldogtragic]

Saying NO to a Future 2nd and a Future 3rd in a draft where everyone knows is 'compromised' is ridiculous. He is NOT a free agent. He is a Gold Coast player. Gold Coast had to stand firm here...

Absolutely. I understand SOS saying wait and see with Papley. But that possible trade fell over with 30-40 minutes left. Then shortly after GCS dropped their demand for a 2020 first rounder and dropped their asking price significantly to a 6 pick downgrade and then 2020 2nd or 3rd. GCS actually backed down to try to get Martin to Carlton, so for them everything is negotiable to a point, but they're not giving him away. SOS refused for an unknown reason and has burnt Martin and should not get him for free.

Take us with players who publicly called out a destination, or even St Kilda. We added pick 51 to 32 to get Bruce, and added a future exchange of picks to get Keath. That's what you do for players who have called a new club out as home. You pay a smidge more if necessary at the end to do the right thing by the players. I think you owe that to them. Even a future second, say pick 25 (higher after NGAs & FSs) and a six pick downgrade is a bargain for Jack Martin.

I feel sorry for him. His life and career I'd upside down right now. Eddie Betts was doing media as if Martin was as good as locked in. Every single afl player should take note, you can't trust anything SOS & Carlton tell you. Beware.

[GVGjr]

I'm not sure what everyone else thinks, but to me Carlton have acted close to unethically this trade period with regards Martin.

I kinda/sorta get the Papley breakdown - this just seems like a simple value 'thing' and Sydney were not apt to deal. Martin - offering a future 2nd and 3rd to a club already swimming in picks...it was never ever going to do it. And because of that it seems to me that the plan all along was to let him fall to the PSD and pick him then 'for free'.

That's not right. The PA should be up in arms (and they probably will be if he doesn't get to the Blues) and the AFL integrity unit should be equally upset. The other 17 clubs need to make an example of this...he should not get to Carlton under any circumstances.

Clubs have an obligation during the trade period to act 'fairly' towards one another. I am certain someone is going to throw the Doddoro card at me, but over the past couple of years Essendon have at least been making trades...he might be hard to deal with but at least he still plays 'in the spirit' of the game.

100% agree, GCS were reasonable with their requests and Carlton planned this early to get him on the cheap

I hope the Suns advise Martin that they will draft him but they won't

[hujsh]

100% agree, GCS were reasonable with their requests and Carlton planned this early to get him on the cheap

I hope the Suns advise Martin that they will draft him but they won't
This is maybe the first time I've thought a pre-season trade period would be interesting. GC could draft Martin again and return to the trade table early next year with a bit more leverage to make Carlton play fair.

[divvydan]

I would just remove the PSD altogether. Players like Martin can nominate for the National Draft with a nominated salary, so I don't see the need to have the PSD anymore, especially since it can be used as a trade or get nothing and we get them for no draft cost sort of thing. Doesn't get rid of the problem completely but at least lowers the incentive to sabotage a potential trade.

[GVGjr]

I would just remove the PSD altogether. Players like Martin can nominate for the National Draft with a nominated salary, so I don't see the need to have the PSD anymore, especially since it can be used as a trade or get nothing and we get them for no draft cost sort of thing. Doesn't get rid of the problem completely but at least lowers the incentive to sabotage a potential trade.

They can keep the PSD but just for the players that nominated for the draft and were overlooked
You shouldn't be able to bypass the National draft

[bornadog]

I thought Melbourne were also thing about drafting him. That would make it more interesting.

[GVGjr]

I thought Melbourne were also thing about drafting him. That would make it more interesting.

No, they say they won't look at him unless he has a change of heart

[westdog54]

GC have a chance to fly the flag on behalf of clubs here when it comes to list management and trading.

I think they should call out Jack's name on PSD morning, whether he's prepared to play for them or not.

It would set a horrendous precedent to see a club deliberately sabotage a trade with a player with the intent of simply picking them up in the PSD.

If Jack Martin is determined to dictate terms of where he goes, he can do so in 10 years as a free agent.

Failing that, he can go and get a clearance to play in a state league in 2020 if he doesn't want to play for the Suns.

[Rocco Jones]

There is a caveat to the Jack Martin situation. He will become a free agent next year. It means that if the Suns still have him and he leaves, they will get compo. Free agency compo is the most on the fly rule/protocol/whatever in world sport but that's largely another convo, thing is the Suns will get a decent return here, better than Carlton offered. They could in effect buy say pick 20 for $600k.

[GVGjr]

Am I right in assuming that given the PSD isn't until November 28th does this mean Martin can't train with any club including Carlton prior to that draft?

[Twodogs]

Am I right in assuming that given the PSD isn't until November 28th does this mean Martin can't train with any club including Carlton prior to that draft?

Correct, unless he gets special permission from the AFL to train with Carlton.

[Rocco Jones]

Correct, unless he gets special permission from the AFL to train with Carlton.

Yep. It's intention to select and if someone wants him before Blues pick, that's cooked.

[Rocco Jones]

Excellent OP from mjp by the way. The real issue imo is that AFL trade culture involves a player only being willing to go to one club. There is no bidding war in terms of trade value (bidding war is done before so with personal terms for the player). It means trade value has too large an ethical element on club's parts imo. Especially difficult when the situation isn't very amicable, as often the case of course.

[chef]

Is it time to follow the NBA and allow clubs to trade players where ever they want?

Time to take the power back.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Is it time to follow the NBA and allow clubs to trade players where ever they want?

Time to take the power back.

Yes, yes it is. The power balance is completely out of whack.
Trouble is, it will be hard to get the AFLPA to agree to it. Any agreement to change would probably require the AFL to further lessen FA qualification period.

[DOG GOD]

Is it time to follow the NBA and allow clubs to trade players where ever they want?

Time to take the power back.

Yes, and I particularly think it should happen in the stances of beams and Kelly. Beams wanted back to Melbourne...fair enough, but he shouldn’t be able to say Collingwood. If he’s that desperate to get back to melb then it’s whoever has the best deal for Brisbane.

Kelly wanted back to Perth, so let WC and Freo sort out the best deal with Geelong.

[Rocco Jones]

Is it time to follow the NBA and allow clubs to trade players where ever they want?

Time to take the power back.

In the NBA you have terms put into the contract, which I like. I think going totally towards that isn't great (not really built into our system anyway with trade periods) but can definitely take things out of it.

The most obvious one is a no trade clause, meaning a club has to consult player on where he is traded. That means a player loses a bit of leverage in terms of payment but has more control over future.

[Doc26]

Would seem very wrong for Martin to walk straight to Carlton in these circumstances. Effectively it’s like bypassing restricted free-agency with the impacted club (GCS) unable to receive any compensation for the loss. Unless GCS do have their mind set on picking up a player with their first pick in the PSD, I would like to see them select Jack, rather than seeing Silvagni win by screwing everyone over.

[GVGjr]

Had the Suns been unreasonable or even vindictive about trading Martin then they deserve what they get but Carlton has clearly used this as a way of getting him on the cheap. He will probably get there but it isn't right.

If the PSD was pushed back to the middle of December or even just prior to the Xmas break then it's a long wait for clubs to get the player to their club and I think it would most likely make them more willing to deal with the other club. It doesn't sound like much but I suspect that extra few weeks in the wilderness without access to the club or their Doctors etc could be telling

Really the player should not be able to bypass the National Draft

[Hotdog60]

How about we get Melbourne's pick 8 for our 13 and 53 and take Martin before the Blues.

[GVGjr]

How about we get Melbourne's pick 8 for our 13 and 53 and take Martin before the Blues.

The Blues have pick 3 in the PSD, that's where they will get him

[westdog54]

Correct, unless he gets special permission from the AFL to train with Carlton.

Which you would think GC would strenuously object to.

[bulldogtragic]

Which you would think GC would strenuously inject to.

That's Essendon WD.

[westdog54]

It's not too late for Carlton to put this right. They still have a chance to show a semblance of good faith.

Picks can be swapped right up until the moment they're called out on draft night.

Carlton agree to send pick 9 and 57 to GC for pick 15. Do a swap of later picks as well if either club sees fit, so long as the trade is well and truly in GCs favour.

As soon as the ink is dry on the trade agreement, GC announce that they are delisting Martin.

Carlton get their man and stay in the first round. GC end up with 3 picks inside the top 10.

[westdog54]

That's Essendon WD.

Fixed

[bulldogtragic]

It's not too late for Carlton to put this right. They still have a chance to show a semblance of good faith.

Picks can be swapped right up until the moment they're called out on draft night.

Carlton agree to send pick 9 and 57 to GC for pick 15. Do a swap of later picks as well if either club sees fit, so long as the trade is well and truly in GCs favour.

As soon as the ink is dry on the trade agreement, GC announce that they are delisting Martin.

Carlton get their man and stay in the first round. GC end up with 3 picks inside the top 10.

I've been banging on about that as a strategy, but us as the option. If GCS relent to Carlton now the message it sends is a really poor one. But if they did it with another club, not Martin's preferred club, they're getting something over nothing and telling Carlton and anyone else willing to try it (negotiating in bad faith) that they won't put up with that bullshit. This is where the AFEL is meant to manipulate to process to assist GCS.

Since we were his number two option, GCS and Dogs and Martin & his manager could thrash something out if they all wanted to. I can't fathom that Martin would still want to go there after the trade period, with no Papley and just one year of Eddie Betts. Surely?

[Hotdog60]

The Blues have pick 3 in the PSD, that's where they will get him

oops, my bad, Shows how much I know about this stuff. :o

[westdog54]

I've been banging on about that as a strategy, but us as the option. If GCS relent to Carlton now the message it sends is a really poor one. But if they did it with another club, not Martin's preferred club, they're getting something over nothing and telling Carlton and anyone else willing to try it (negotiating in bad faith) that they won't put up with that bullshit. This is where the AFEL is meant to manipulate to process to assist GCS.

Since we were his number two option, GCS and Dogs and Martin & his manager could thrash something out if they all wanted to. I can't fathom that Martin would still want to go there after the trade period, with no Papley and just one year of Eddie Betts. Surely?

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2019/10/17/martin-still-wants-blues-move-despite-demons-interest/

His manager has publicly said he still wants Carlton and has no intention of returning to the Gold Coast.

[bulldogtragic]

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2019/10/17/martin-still-wants-blues-move-despite-demons-interest/

His manager has publicly said he still wants Carlton and has no intention of returning to the Gold Coast.

Ew. It’s going to get messy. For all the handouts and positive news at GCS recently, this will be a big headline up there. Surely Gil gets involved.

[jeemak]

Is this the Victorian bias in the football media at play?

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/frustrated-rivals-raise-totally-irrational-gold-coast-move-with-afl-bosses-c-510147

The gist of it is that Victorian clubs are peeved that Gold Coast has so many lucrative draft picks in play and it's created a disincentive for them to trade.

Seriously.

It's a Tom Browne article and comes from channel seven, so take it with a grain of salt. To me it seems like a big club media beat up to change a message that is actually pretty shit. Carlton didn't deal fairly and backed their chances to get Martin on the cheap at the expense of a club on its knees, the protection of this behaviour and the cheerleading for Esserden this trade period has shown how cooked the AFEL media landscape is.

The fact this *!*!*!*!ing club gets the season opener sickens me no end, but for them not to be called out for their underhanded dealing in this situation and instead be supported in the media really shits me.

[AshMac]

Very good thread - fascinating viewpoints in this forum! really enjoyable reading.

There’s no doubt the blues have gamed the system - if it works out, good luck to them, that’s SOS’s job. Just like Sydney w the pick swaps and Blakey last year, can only change the rules in retrospect.

It’s unethical(ish) mostly to the player - and I’m sure there is a side channel w Martin to calm any anxiety - but if the dogs manufactured a way to pick up a star cheap at the giants expense we’d be licking our lips!

[westdog54]

Is this the Victorian bias in the football media at play?

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/frustrated-rivals-raise-totally-irrational-gold-coast-move-with-afl-bosses-c-510147

The gist of it is that Victorian clubs are peeved that Gold Coast has so many lucrative draft picks in play and it's created a disincentive for them to trade.

Seriously.

It's a Tom Browne article and comes from channel seven, so take it with a grain of salt. To me it seems like a big club media beat up to change a message that is actually pretty shit. Carlton didn't deal fairly and backed their chances to get Martin on the cheap at the expense of a club on its knees, the protection of this behaviour and the cheerleading for Esserden this trade period has shown how cooked the AFEL media landscape is.

The fact this *!*!*!*!ing club gets the season opener sickens me no end, but for them not to be called out for their underhanded dealing in this situation and instead be supported in the media really shits me.

The idea that a club should be content to trade away a player whose services they want to retain in exchange for picks they will never use is laughable in the extreme.

The draft concessions are totally irrelevant to this discussion.

[Bulldog4life]

Very good thread - fascinating viewpoints in this forum! really enjoyable reading.

There’s no doubt the blues have gamed the system - if it works out, good luck to them, that’s SOS’s job. Just like Sydney w the pick swaps and Blakey last year, can only change the rules in retrospect.

It’s unethical(ish) mostly to the player - and I’m sure there is a side channel w Martin to calm any anxiety - but if the dogs manufactured a way to pick up a star cheap at the giants expense we’d be licking our lips!

Agree. At any club's expense.

[mjp]

It’s unethical(ish) mostly to the player - and I’m sure there is a side channel w Martin to calm any anxiety - but if the dogs manufactured a way to pick up a star cheap at the giants expense we’d be licking our lips!

I don't think we would.

I remember 'The Veale Deal' and I for one didn't like it at the time and I don't like it in retrospect. And we got hit by the Karma bus.

We should play hard but fair. Carlton need to remember it was only 5-minutes ago they were begging for draft concessions...yet now they are trying to abuse the draft and trading system? Be very, very careful.

[hujsh]

I don't think we would.

I remember 'The Veale Deal' and I for one didn't like it at the time and I don't like it in retrospect. And we got hit by the Karma bus.

We should play hard but fair. Carlton need to remember it was only 5-minutes ago they were begging for draft concessions...yet now they are trying to abuse the draft and trading system? Be very, very careful.

And now apparently are upset that someone else has some and believe it's a disincentive to trade with them :rolleyes:

[GVGjr]

I don't think we would.

I remember 'The Veale Deal' and I for one didn't like it at the time and I don't like it in retrospect. And we got hit by the Karma bus.

We should play hard but fair. Carlton need to remember it was only 5-minutes ago they were begging for draft concessions...yet now they are trying to abuse the draft and trading system? Be very, very careful.

As it is, we let players dictate where they will go. The Veale deal said stuff you to the player and an amicable deal was achieved between the two clubs.
I actually think we are pandering to the players way too much

[BornInDroopSt'54]

I don't think we would.

I remember 'The Veale Deal' and I for one didn't like it at the time and I don't like it in retrospect. And we got hit by the Karma bus.

We should play hard but fair. Carlton need to remember it was only 5-minutes ago they were begging for draft concessions...yet now they are trying to abuse the draft and trading system? Be very, very careful.

That's the point isn't it. We wouldn't do it. But Carlton historically have rorted the system out of greed since living memory.

[westdog54]

As it is, we let players dictate where they will go. The Veale deal said stuff you to the player and an amicable deal was achieved between the two clubs.
I actually think we are pandering to the players way too much

Ironically, Jade Rawlings would have been a free agent had that scenario played out in the modern day.

It was a horrendous way to treat a player that had given 8 years service and it bit both clubs in the arse at the end of the day.

[GVGjr]

Ironically, Jade Rawlings would have been a free agent had that scenario played out in the modern day.

It was a horrendous way to treat a player that had given 8 years service and it bit both clubs in the arse at the end of the day.

But at the same time we are debating if the players have too much control of which club they will play for

Rawlings got over it quickly, he was picked to play for Australia and worked on drills with our assistant Bond just a few days later, so I'm not sure how hard is really bit either club other than their reputation

[westdog54]

But at the same time we are debating if the players have too much control of which club they will play for

Rawlings got over it quickly, he was picked to play for Australia and worked on drills with our assistant Bond just a few days later, so I'm not sure how hard is really bit either club other than their reputation

We burned pick 6 for the sake of a bloke that played 29 games and kicked 32.34 over two season before trading him away for a minor pick upgrade.

Rawlings was already earmarked to play for Australia, in fact he did so before the PSD. Had he been badly injured he would have left in limbo.

If he 'got over it quickly' it's because he was a professional about it. More than can be said for either us or Hawthorn.

[GVGjr]

I don't get the point, that is what we were prepared to trade for him. We got it wrong but that's the chance you take

[westdog54]

The point is that we gamed the system and acted in bad faith, much like Carlton are doing this year, only when we did it we screwed over a player who had no interest in playing for us until we gave him no option but to do so.

Were North being unreasonable with their trade demands? Maybe. But we didn't just sit back and wait for the deal to fall through. We actively intervened and made sure it did.

It was a list management version of Trevor Chappell's underarm delivery. It was borderline draft-tampering. It was wrong in principle then and it still is now.

[AshMac]

I don't think we would.

I remember 'The Veale Deal' and I for one didn't like it at the time and I don't like it in retrospect. And we got hit by the Karma bus.

We should play hard but fair. Carlton need to remember it was only 5-minutes ago they were begging for draft concessions...yet now they are trying to abuse the draft and trading system? Be very, very careful.

The notion of finding loopholes in a system are as old as rules themselves. It is the job of clubs to find ways to exploit them, then the system changes to realign parity.

If we found a way to do it I’d be more than comfortable. As long as the welfare of the humans involved isn’t compromised then rules are made to be broken.

Karma is a completely different story,

[bulldogtragic]

I've been thinking how the AFEL could remedy this at the next commission meeting...

Allow for PSD & rookie draft pick trading together with national draft pick trading. Then let GCS trade PSD pick 1 for whatever they can, to any club that can accomodate Martin's salary.

It's really not a big issue to allow this and no reason that it couldn't be in play from the next commission meeting and so in play for this year's PSD amd rookie drafts. It would be less than a handful of moves, but this year it would ensure GCS get something for Martin and bring in the likes of Dogs, Saints, North, Port, Freo etc. to package up national draft picks and PSD picks to trade into PSD Pick 1 (Jack Martin).

Get onto it Gil.

[AshMac]

I've been thinking how the AFEL could remedy this at the next commission meeting...

Allow for PSD & rookie draft pick trading together with national draft pick trading. Then let GCS trade PSD pick 1 for whatever they can, to any club that can accomodate Martin's salary.

It's really not a big issue to allow this and no reason that it couldn't be in play from the next commission meeting and so in play for this year's PSD amd rookie drafts. It would be less than a handful of moves, but this year it would ensure GCS get something for Martin and bring in the likes of Dogs, Saints, North, Port, Freo etc. to package up national draft picks and PSD picks to trade into PSD Pick 1 (Jack Martin).

Get onto it Gil.

How do you remedy what the player wants?

I’m not a fan of player dictating terms at all, but a bloke on the list that doesn’t want to be there - particularly in a juicy contract - is doing more harm than good.

[bulldogtragic]

How do you remedy what the player wants?

I’m not a fan of player dictating terms at all, but a bloke on the list that doesn’t want to be there - particularly in a juicy contract - is doing more harm than good.

He can wait a year and take up free agency. Every other player gets traded or waits for free agency. He’s not immune from things if he goes into the PSD and GC trade the pick 1 to whomever. GCS would get something at least.

[Bulldog Joe]

He can wait a year and take up free agency. Every other player gets traded or waits for free agency. He’s not immune from things if he goes into the PSD and GC trade the pick 1 to whomever. GCS would get something at least.

I really think Gold Coast should redraft him if he refuses to sign a 1 year extension.

The 1 year extension allows him to leave next year under free agency and he can choose his team with adequate compensation (significantly better than Carlton's trade offer).

Carlton still don't pay but at least they are required to wait an extra year.

[bulldogtragic]

I really think Gold Coast should redraft him if he refuses to sign a 1 year extension.

The 1 year extension allows him to leave next year under free agency and he can choose his team with adequate compensation (significantly better than Carlton's trade offer).

Carlton still don't pay but at least they are required to wait an extra year.

For Plan C, yep. GCS get a second rounder next year, it costs Carlton nothing. If you believe Tony Cochrane (I don't) they will take him in the PSD even if high terms are imposed.

I read Mick Gleeson's (The Age) article from about 5 days ago. He also mentions the trading of draft picks from now until the draft and creative ways to avoid the drafting mess.

With the first delisted free agency period not open until November 1, there's plenty of time for AFEL mediators to work on a hypothesised trading of national draft picks in exchange for delisting status by GCS. The question is whether Carlton would risk a PSD, or just take him next year as a free agent for nothing, or part with something of value to get it done in the next week or so?

It's a shame Martin won't consider any other clubs for the same type of outcome. I'm not sure what he owes SOS & Carlton. But a stroke of the pen allowing Rookie Draft & Pre Season Draft picks would flip this all on its head. Why shouldn't clubs be able to trade across draft if they want?

As an aside, I'm not sure how SOS has a god like standing in some parts of the media.

[westdog54]

I've been thinking how the AFEL could remedy this at the next commission meeting...

Allow for PSD & rookie draft pick trading together with national draft pick trading. Then let GCS trade PSD pick 1 for whatever they can, to any club that can accomodate Martin's salary.

It's really not a big issue to allow this and no reason that it couldn't be in play from the next commission meeting and so in play for this year's PSD amd rookie drafts. It would be less than a handful of moves, but this year it would ensure GCS get something for Martin and bring in the likes of Dogs, Saints, North, Port, Freo etc. to package up national draft picks and PSD picks to trade into PSD Pick 1 (Jack Martin).

Get onto it Gil.

Like it as a principle, hate it in the middle of an off-season.

History has shown us that the AFL generally *!*!*!*!s up when they try and make policy on the run.

I still think GC should re draft him. They can then give their blessing for him to play at the VFL/NEAFL team of his choosing and pay his salary while he waits to become a free agent.

[Dry Rot]

Dumb question - is the PSD draft order the same as the main draft ie just reverse ladder position?

If so, then the Dees could nab Martin if they wanted to, before Carlton.

[bulldogtragic]

Dumb question - is the PSD draft order the same as the main draft ie just reverse ladder position?

If so, then the Dees could nab Martin if they wanted to, before Carlton.

It's the same order. So Melbourne could get him if they can afford him.

[bulldogtragic]

Like it as a principle, hate it in the middle of an off-season.

History has shown us that the AFL generally *!*!*!*!s up when they try and make policy on the run.

I still think GC should re draft him. They can then give their blessing for him to play at the VFL/NEAFL team of his choosing and pay his salary while he waits to become a free agent.

Certainly a good option, and they get a juicy second rounder next as free agency compo for the pain and suffering. I'd actually feel a hell of a lot more for Martin if his manager had just shut up. At the trade deadline he was a victim of Carlton trying to extort the Suns and my 100% of sympathy was to him. But seeing as his manager has repeatedly come out saying Martin will be going to Carlton, not denying Martin could inflate his asking price to scare GCS and Melbourne off in the PSD, gives the appearance at least of him being an accessory after the fact. I'd be thinking of getting a new manager.

[westdog54]

It's the same order. So Melbourne could get him if they can afford him.

An option Melbourne have more or less ruled out.


Certainly a good option, and they get a juicy second rounder next as free agency compo for the pain and suffering. I'd actually feel a hell of a lot more for Martin if his manager had just shut up. At the trade deadline he was a victim of Carlton trying to extort the Suns and my 100% of sympathy was to him. But seeing as his manager has repeatedly come out saying Martin will be going to Carlton, not denying Martin could inflate his asking price to scare GCS and Melbourne off in the PSD, gives the appearance at least of him being an accessory after the fact. I'd be thinking of getting a new manager.

Agree to an extent. I can't help but feel, though, that Martin has been led astray by his manager to an extent.

I wonder if, assuming GC hold the line here and call Carlton's bluff, whether there will begin to be a tendency away from players nominating clubs for trade destinations.

[mjp]

How do you remedy what the player wants?

I’m not a fan of player dictating terms at all, but a bloke on the list that doesn’t want to be there - particularly in a juicy contract - is doing more harm than good.

I don't understand what Martin 'wants' has to do with this. He is NOT a Free Agent. The players have mechanisms through which they can achieve autonomy with regards the club that they play at...it's called FREE AGENCY. They fought long and hard for that through the CBA.

Until they become Free Agents, the players 'belong' to the club who contracted them. If he wants to go to Carlton, then he (and by extension, his manager) should have been very clear in telling Carlton what GC required as trade collateral. It is my understand that they were. Carlton have ignored that and effectively refused to negotiate with GC on a fair exchange - instead using their low standing on the ladder and the 'hammer' that is "Gold Coast wont redraft you - don't worry about it kid" to continue to promise to get the deal over the line.

This is BS behaviour. If there was a "Club's Association" then they would be up in arms...as it turns out, there is (it's called the AFL Commission) but I'm not sure they're all that interested these days...

[bulldogtragic]

An option Melbourne have more or less ruled out.



Agree to an extent. I can't help but feel, though, that Martin has been led astray by his manager to an extent.

I wonder if, assuming GC hold the line here and call Carlton's bluff, whether there will begin to be a tendency away from players nominating clubs for trade destinations.

Interesting thought. They should do something to foster competition in trading, I've not given it a ton of thought. But maybe something like a player who chooses to 'nominate' then needs to nominate at least two clubs and the club that owns the player contract is free to work a deal with both for the best outcome. Then the list managers need to double their efforts too.

If took Jack Martin and the club he nominated and the runner up, us. Craig Cameron has meetings with Sam Power and SOS during the trade period. Martin gets traded to Victoria on good money and a long term deal. GCS get something decent in return. The club that aggressively and honestly sought to deal with GCS gets Jack Martin.

The flip side is, are you going to leave your future in SOS' hands into the future? As opposed to Josh Bruce who said he always completely trusted Sam Power to trade him in even going to the last day. Power landing two bigger deals at the end. Clubs who have the ability to close deals become a safer bet to nominate for players. At a minimum this episode should focus the players minds about which clubs they can trust to honour their public nomination and which they can't.

Changing pick trading rules to include the rookie draft and PSD could hopefully circumvent it in future. Then giving clubs the power to deal with two clubs (not a huge compromise but on first thought maybe there's something to it?) might assist in increasing player values but also in incentivising more transparent trading behaviour (like a auction between two buyers).

Nominating hasn't been a huge issue by and large between two clubs and a players manager, until Carlton ruined it with a bigger name trade. But it's bound to have an effect. If nothing happens, it highlights our club and Sam Power can be trusted with your nomination to come play in finals and win flags.

[westdog54]

Interesting thought. They should do something to foster competition in trading, I've not given it a ton of thought. But maybe something like a player who chooses to 'nominate' then needs to nominate at least two clubs and the club that owns the player contract is free to work a deal with both for the best outcome. Then the list managers need to double their efforts too.

If took Jack Martin and the club he nominated and the runner up, us. Craig Cameron has meetings with Sam Power and SOS during the trade period. Martin gets traded to Victoria on good money and a long term deal. GCS get something decent in return. The club that aggressively and honestly sought to deal with GCS gets Jack Martin.

The flip side is, are you going to leave your future in SOS' hands into the future? As opposed to Josh Bruce who said he always completely trusted Sam Power to trade him in even going to the last day. Power landing two bigger deals at the end. Clubs who have the ability to close deals become a safer bet to nominate for players. At a minimum this episode should focus the players minds about which clubs they can trust to honour their public nomination and which they can't.

Changing pick trading rules to include the rookie draft and PSD could hopefully circumvent it in future. Then giving clubs the power to deal with two clubs (not a huge compromise but on first thought maybe there's something to it?) might assist in increasing player values but also in incentivising more transparent trading behaviour (like a auction between two buyers).

Nominating hasn't been a huge issue by and large between two clubs and a players manager, until Carlton ruined it with a bigger name trade. But it's bound to have an effect. If nothing happens, it highlights our club and Sam Power can be trusted with your nomination to come play in finals and win flags.

The problem is that the whole 'nominating' thing is entirely informal and has no standing from a contractual basis whatsoever.

A player may have come to hypothetical contract terms with a rival club, however, as MJP has quite rightly pointed out, the player 'belongs' to their current club until either they become a free agent, they are delisted by the club, their contract expires or a trade is agreed upon.

The onus here now is on the clubs to start pushing back against this 'nomination' business.

[bulldogtragic]

The problem is that the whole 'nominating' thing is entirely informal and has no standing from a contractual basis whatsoever.

A player may have come to hypothetical contract terms with a rival club, however, as MJP has quite rightly pointed out, the player 'belongs' to their current club until either they become a free agent, they are delisted by the club, their contract expires or a trade is agreed upon.

The onus here now is on the clubs to start pushing back against this 'nomination' business.

I'm not entirely sure nominating is in and of itself the issue, it's the single club nature of it. Clubs can push back on that by regulating the process prior to free agency. Nominating multiple clubs could address that by allowing the club that has the player to deal with multiple potential trade partners.

I have no problem extending the rookie contract out to three years. Free agency cuts in after 7 years. If you want a trade between years 4-6 then you nominate multiple clubs (insert number of years) for you to seek a trade to. In this case, when Carlton fell over we or North could've picked Martin up.

On the flip side, clubs could be financially penalised for over contracting players and then trading them out the door under contract.

Or all players are immediate free agents post rookie contract, but clubs can trade players out at their discretion. Then players and clubs can do whatever they want.

[bulldogtragic]

Mick Gleeson of The Age today has more explicitly thrashed out the creative option. Being the trading of picks to ensure a delisted free agency status and that the rules don’t prohibit it.

He says Carlton won’t do it though preferring to risk the PSD and GCS threat. Should we at least try? Maybe he stays or gets to Carlton. Maybe he doesn’t and stays at GCS for another year. But he could certainly get to his second choice destination (us) on better money with certainty for next year.

GCS swap 13 for 20. Then GCS trade Picks 13 & 15 for GWS Pick 6.
Dogs get Pick 20 & Martin as a DFA.
Martin gets the previous offer of 5 x $700,000.

Everyone wins if we get Martin and his manager to take our certainty over the risky alternatives. Just be there to maybe catch a bargain as an off ramp for Martin. It’s fair game to ask GCS & Martin again.

[AshMac]

I don't understand what Martin 'wants' has to do with this. He is NOT a Free Agent. The players have mechanisms through which they can achieve autonomy with regards the club that they play at...it's called FREE AGENCY. They fought long and hard for that through the CBA.

Until they become Free Agents, the players 'belong' to the club who contracted them. If he wants to go to Carlton, then he (and by extension, his manager) should have been very clear in telling Carlton what GC required as trade collateral. It is my understand that they were. Carlton have ignored that and effectively refused to negotiate with GC on a fair exchange - instead using their low standing on the ladder and the 'hammer' that is "Gold Coast wont redraft you - don't worry about it kid" to continue to promise to get the deal over the line.

This is BS behaviour. If there was a "Club's Association" then they would be up in arms...as it turns out, there is (it's called the AFL Commission) but I'm not sure they're all that interested these days...

Couldn’t agree more. We’ve arrived at a situation where the players welfare and preference is the main consideration - even if it is at the departing clubs detriment.

It is BS and it is putting a division and inequality between the terms of good players and the mediocre. It’s also negating the value of contracts for clubs - as the player has guaranteed earnings but the club doesn’t have a guaranteed player. At least that’s the situation today.

At the same time, it can’t be denied that no club wants a player on their list that doesn’t want to be there. The possibility of a best 22 sitting on the sidelines or poisoning club culture has to be a serious consideration.

Not sure of the answer - other than some dictatorial policy on who can nominate and when, or a blanket rule that the club has the final say - which will never get through.

[divvydan]

Mick Gleeson of The Age today has more explicitly thrashed out the creative option. Being the trading of picks to ensure a delisted free agency status and that the rules don’t prohibit it.

He says Carlton won’t do it though preferring to risk the PSD and GCS threat. Should we at least try? Maybe he stays or gets to Carlton. Maybe he doesn’t and stays at GCS for another year. But he could certainly get to his second choice destination (us) on better money with certainty for next year.

GCS swap 13 for 20. Then GCS trade Picks 13 & 15 for GWS Pick 6.
Dogs get Pick 20 & Martin as a DFA.
Martin gets the previous offer of 5 x $700,000.

Everyone wins if we get Martin and his manager to take our certainty over the risky alternatives. Just be there to maybe catch a bargain as an off ramp for Martin. It’s fair game to ask GCS & Martin again.

If Martin becomes a DFA, why would he then come to us instead of going where he wants to go which he can now do? Sure we can say "Hey, we did this deal to allow you to leave the GC and know where you're going to go" but there's no reason, other than we think it's what he should do, for him to then come to us instead of Carlton.

[bulldogtragic]

If Martin becomes a DFA, why would he then come to us instead of going where he wants to go which he can now do? Sure we can say "Hey, we did this deal to allow you to leave the GC and know where you're going to go" but there's no reason, other than we think it's what he should do, for him to then come to us instead of Carlton.

Sign off the contracts/status simultaneously. That's the very earliest we would sign over a pick swap for the that reason.

[hujsh]

If Martin becomes a DFA, why would he then come to us instead of going where he wants to go which he can now do? Sure we can say "Hey, we did this deal to allow you to leave the GC and know where you're going to go" but there's no reason, other than we think it's what he should do, for him to then come to us instead of Carlton.

Well the idea would be to get him to agree to it first

[Dancin' Douggy]

I like this scenario.........

Mick Gleeson of The Age today has more explicitly thrashed out the creative option. Being the trading of picks to ensure a delisted free agency status and that the rules don’t prohibit it.

He says Carlton won’t do it though preferring to risk the PSD and GCS threat. Should we at least try? Maybe he stays or gets to Carlton. Maybe he doesn’t and stays at GCS for another year. But he could certainly get to his second choice destination (us) on better money with certainty for next year.

GCS swap 13 for 20. Then GCS trade Picks 13 & 15 for GWS Pick 6.
Dogs get Pick 20 & Martin as a DFA.
Martin gets the previous offer of 5 x $700,000.

Everyone wins if we get Martin and his manager to take our certainty over the risky alternatives. Just be there to maybe catch a bargain as an off ramp for Martin. It’s fair game to ask GCS & Martin again.

[bornadog]

Jack Martin's window of opportunity (https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/martin-s-window-of-opportunity-20191023-p533hc.html)

[AshMac]

Mick Gleeson of The Age today has more explicitly thrashed out the creative option. Being the trading of picks to ensure a delisted free agency status and that the rules don’t prohibit it.

He says Carlton won’t do it though preferring to risk the PSD and GCS threat. Should we at least try? Maybe he stays or gets to Carlton. Maybe he doesn’t and stays at GCS for another year. But he could certainly get to his second choice destination (us) on better money with certainty for next year.

GCS swap 13 for 20. Then GCS trade Picks 13 & 15 for GWS Pick 6.
Dogs get Pick 20 & Martin as a DFA.
Martin gets the previous offer of 5 x $700,000.

Everyone wins if we get Martin and his manager to take our certainty over the risky alternatives. Just be there to maybe catch a bargain as an off ramp for Martin. It’s fair game to ask GCS & Martin again.

Love this scenario, know you’ve been touting something similar BT for a week now. Warming to the idea of him tbh, plus we could snaffle the small forward need and move onto another type of player at best available.

[mjp]

Love this scenario, know you’ve been touting something similar BT for a week now. Warming to the idea of him tbh, plus we could snaffle the small forward need and move onto another type of player at best available.

I love Jack and he is as talented a player as there is. But he doesn't want us. It feels a bit like: "Tonight, marrying the beautiful, blushing bride is 'this guy'" as the best man takes one step to his left after the groom doesn't show up.

He should be at the Gold Coast. Or somewhere else that isn't Carlton and isn't us. We had our shot, we missed...we move along.

[Twodogs]

I love Jack and he is as talented a player as there is. But he doesn't want us. It feels a bit like: "Tonight, marrying the beautiful, blushing bride is 'this guy'" as the best man takes one step to his left after the groom doesn't show up.

He should be at the Gold Coast. Or somewhere else that isn't Carlton and isn't us. We had our shot, we missed...we move along.

No stalking? That's not very fair.


I love a good stalk.

[divvydan]

St Kilda have rolled over to help Martin get to the Blues. Despite offering Jack Newnes a 2 year deal during the season, they've decided to delist him and allow him to move to Carlton as a delisted free agent after no deal was done during the trade period for him. This move allows Carlton to keep their PSD spot open for Martin and still get Newnes free.

[AshMac]

I love Jack and he is as talented a player as there is. But he doesn't want us. It feels a bit like: "Tonight, marrying the beautiful, blushing bride is 'this guy'" as the best man takes one step to his left after the groom doesn't show up.

He should be at the Gold Coast. Or somewhere else that isn't Carlton and isn't us. We had our shot, we missed...we move along.

Yeh I doubt it’ll happen. Would have no issue w the optics of it if it did though

[1eyedog]

I don't like the idea of the cheats pushing top 8 next year and Martin would certainly help that cause.

[westdog54]

St Kilda have rolled over to help Martin get to the Blues. Despite offering Jack Newnes a 2 year deal during the season, they've decided to delist him and allow him to move to Carlton as a delisted free agent after no deal was done during the trade period for him. This move allows Carlton to keep their PSD spot open for Martin and still get Newnes free.

I'm confused. What does picking up Newnes as a DFA have to do with Martin?

PSD spots are contingent on list spots being available.

[hujsh]

I'm confused. What does picking up Newnes as a DFA have to do with Martin?

PSD spots are contingent on list spots being available.

The idea being if he wasn't delisted Carlton would have had to risk someone else picking him up in the PSD between the first and second picks I assume. Doesn't really change that they'd surely pick Martin first anyway.

[Grantysghost]

I have to say I'm not too fussed about these machinations with Martin. Carlton still have to pay his wage. It's all yelling into the wind. Martin wants to play there and the Blues are willing to pay him what he wants. My understanding is that we had cooled significantly on Jack. So trust I guess and good luck to the Blues. Their recent history doesn't fill me with confidence around their decision making.

[Twodogs]

I don't like the idea of the cheats pushing top 8 next year and Martin would certainly help that cause.

You think they are a chance of making the 8 next year?