Good point.
Well if he was an Essendon staff member and was running around telling everybody we might be investigated for PED then Iām not surprised we were investigated for PED use. Jesus H Christ.
I wouldn't begrudge any of the 12 wanting to leave. I hope they all stay, especially Hurls, Hooker and Heppell.But if any do leave, the AFL better not let players walk as delisted free agents and bend the club over even further.
Ahmā¦ That bit is already stated.
Has it been stated by the AFL officially or just "sources sayā rubbish by the media?
Pretty sure it was stated by the AFLPA
"There remains open the possibility of players being allowed to break contracts and go to other clubs if itās viewed Essendon breached their obligations based on the CAS findings and club admission over workplace charges laid by Worksafe Victoria.
The AFL-AFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains a clause that reads: āEach club must immediately delist a player who has terminated his standard playing contract for causeā."
Iād say not 100%, but I wouldnāt like our chances if we chose to block a player from leaving
Can someone help explain something. Wouldnāt they only be allowed to break the contract if they were still on the same contract when the supplements was happening.
If a player re-signed in 2015 for example. Essendon technically hasnāt breached that contract so why would they be allowed to break new contracts that havenāt been broke?
That is a very good question. Would any of the 12 have signed their correct contract before the scandal broke in early 2013?
Anyway, itās probably irrelevant. I would imagine if any of the 12 want to leave the club wonāt stand in their way, which will hopefully make it more likely that a trade is organised rather than them invoking a clause like that.
You'd wonder about him getting his info from someone at the club if he knew about an investigation in 2012. Not even Evans knew about that till 2013. Must know someone higher up in the AFL.No, he knows a guy who was a trainee in the sports science department or whatever itās called at EFC. So he had some insight into what was being used. I donāt know about the āinvestigationā side of it, but didnāt the CAS documents mention something about September 2012?
Ok. I thought you said he knew we would be investigated. Anyway, I donāt want to sound like a nit picking idiot. As far as the CAS date of 2012 I seem to recall that confusing absolutely everyone because it suggested that we self reported then which just isnāt the case.
He didnāt āknowā, he āthoughtā we would be investigated.
Lose both Hooker and Hurley and Essendon will be guaranteed cellar dwellers for at least the next 5 years.
rubbish. Weāll have a very good midfield in no time. Look what Worsfold did at West Coast with a strong midfield and stuff all else.
Plus itās easier to get calls through Free agency these days.
I'd like to keep the lot, thanks.I donāt want a hooker with the lot!
I want Hooker, Heppell, Colyer, Hurley, Belly, Stants, Hibbo and Watson.
Pears and Myers have hung their hats in the shade and are about as done as a fat cops jelly doughnut tray. Hocking is probably the most if he is/ if he isnāt player so toss a coin and be done with it. Howlett, have no idea.
Most notably is which newly listed players would you like to keep at seasons end and cut any of the players mentioned above, I would be happy to leave out Stants and Belly and welcome back the 6.
We donāt want the team to look like a Carlton team did 2 years ago with too many players on the list looking like hacks in a mudsh*tslide, whereby their supporters cheer their team to win the spoon.
I thought having 20 something year olds with near a full year under their belt of AFL, had been in the system for a while, footy would be far beneficial for us then going to another rag tag draft and picking up another bunch of 18yr old runts that need 3 years development for the team to go anywhere.aka. Melbourne.
And I know we donāt have priority over our new listees, but we can make them an offer at the end of year or list them as rookies/ draft nominees in November.
Thoughts
I stand by my beliefs that the only ones we must keep are hurley (shit article) and heppell, that doesnāt mean i donāt want those players you mention, id love the 12 to stay, but reality is we have got some absolute ripper kids coming through and guys like stanton watson hocking arenāt getting younger.
The reason why hurley and heppell are the only two i believe we MUST keep, is because of the shape of the list, throw heppell in with zerret and parish, thats a damaging 10 year midfield, and throw hurley next to francis down back with joe and this years top forward from the draft we are in a really strong position for many years to comeā¦ lose heppell and hurley and we are set back a long way in our list.
Also we have no control of what will happen with the player, either way i think they deserve to do what ever they feel is necessary
Worsfold didn't have a strong midfield. He had a contender for the best midfield combination ever with Cox, Cousins, Judd, Kerr, Stenglein, Embley, Fletcher and Braun. At a time when the competition was probably at a weak point.Lose both Hooker and Hurley and Essendon will be guaranteed cellar dwellers for at least the next 5 years.rubbish. Weāll have a very good midfield in no time. Look what Worsfold did at West Coast with a strong midfield and stuff all else.
Plus itās easier to get calls through Free agency these days.
And what was ācallsā meant to be written as? Because if it is ātallsā, then Fremantle might beg to differ.
The damage is loss of income from not being able to fulfill their contracts.The inability to fulfill their contract is a personal penalty laid down by WADA. And the WADA system is very clearly about personal responsibility. It is not something you can put onto the club, and it is not something that can be blamed elsewhere. I would argue they should never have been found guilty - but having been done so, they deserved the full ban and don't (IMO) have a legal leg to stand on.The worksafe prosecution shows negligence.
Yes morally I don't think the Club should stand in the way of a player who wants to leave. However it is the mechanism that is the issue.If a contracted player wants to leave then we should be allowed to trade him (and maybe accept unders). We shouldnāt just have to suck it up losing him for nothing.
Ultimately though, whether we like it or not, the club has pleaded guilty to breaching workplace health and safety along with many other things. Add to that the public stress, shame and now 12 months out of their careersā¦ and whilst I would hope that we would pursue a trade first or compo pickā¦ if they player wants to go and play hardball then I would support the club for allowing them to go.
Right now I believe it is a moot point anyway because very unlikely to happen (player wanting to leave and screw the club over completely) but the last thing we need is for this to create even more bad blood if we handle these players poorly in the future. I fully expect it to be a non-issue.
Lose both Hooker and Hurley and Essendon will be guaranteed cellar dwellers for at least the next 5 years.
Dont go reading the article on Hurleyā¦
Heard today (but it's one of these "my cousin works with someone who told him, etc, etc) that Cale Hooker has already told people he will not be returning to EFC and has already bought a house in Perth.I prefer to wait for actual press releases, but hey, āsharing is caringā, so I thought Iād share.
PS: it seems a bit far fetched to think he is so confident of getting to one of the two Perth teams at this stage. If he has bought a house, maybe itās just for investment or if heās planning on returning to WA after his playing career.
Thank you for sharing, and I donāt mean to shut you down but unless youāre hearing info like this from someone very close to the matter Iād take it with a grain of salt. Its already obvious that Cale is going to be the āoneā that is surrounded by constant speculation this year. The papers went early on it and thereās no doubt the weasel and co will be running with it this year. Heās an in demand All Australian key position player that happens to be from interstate. Join the dots.
Fact is the decision broke less than a month ago. I do not believe Cale has already told people he will not be returning to Essendon.
I always take everything with a grain of salt, but the person who told me this also told me in November 2012 that EFC would be investigated for drug use (he said for using testosterone cream, but I assume that was actually AOD-9604). I didnāt say it on here at the time because I thought it was laughable. He is not close to the club, but he knows someone who worked there.
Iām not saying itās true or that I believe it, Iām just saying itās something I heard.
It would be easier to break a contract now that we've pleaded guilty to a WorkSafe charge of providing an unsafe workplace.
I understand that. If a player was still under the original contract during that period i completely understand they can break it. But I was hoping people could share a light on how that could possibly still happen to players who have re-signed still then. If the original contracts had expired and they re-signed a new contract in the years following eg Stanton only signing late last year. We havenāt breached his new contract that he is currently under, I donāt see how it legal for him to break it when we havenāt breached the current contract.
I agree the club wont shouldnāt stand in the way of players wanting to go to other clubs. But i dont think they should be allowed to break them and leave as delisted free agents with us getting no compensation if they have re-signed on the years following the breach.
I wouldn't begrudge any of the 12 wanting to leave. I hope they all stay, especially Hurls, Hooker and Heppell.But if any do leave, the AFL better not let players walk as delisted free agents and bend the club over even further.
Ahmā¦ That bit is already stated.
Has it been stated by the AFL officially or just "sources sayā rubbish by the media?
Pretty sure it was stated by the AFLPA
"There remains open the possibility of players being allowed to break contracts and go to other clubs if itās viewed Essendon breached their obligations based on the CAS findings and club admission over workplace charges laid by Worksafe Victoria.
The AFL-AFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains a clause that reads: āEach club must immediately delist a player who has terminated his standard playing contract for causeā."
Iād say not 100%, but I wouldnāt like our chances if we chose to block a player from leaving
Can someone help explain something. Wouldnāt they only be allowed to break the contract if they were still on the same contract when the supplements was happening.
If a player re-signed in 2015 for example. Essendon technically hasnāt breached that contract so why would they be allowed to break new contracts that havenāt been broke?
That is a very good question. Would any of the 12 have signed their correct contract before the scandal broke in early 2013?
Anyway, itās probably irrelevant. I would imagine if any of the 12 want to leave the club wonāt stand in their way, which will hopefully make it more likely that a trade is organised rather than them invoking a clause like that.
Wasnāt it the same with the Ryder situation. The AFL threatened to make up rules on the spot for him to walk for nothing if we didnāt take Portās generous offer of pick 87 or whatever it was.
Would be kind of funny if Port work out in 2016 that they play better as a team with Lobbe as a lone ruckman, a la 2014 than they do with Ryder in the side.
Yes morally I donāt think the Club should stand in the way of a player who wants to leave. However it is the mechanism that is the issue.
If a contracted player wants to leave then we should be allowed to trade him (and maybe accept unders). We shouldnāt just have to suck it up losing him for nothing.
Correct me if I'm wrong (sure someone will) - Ryder resigned his contract after the shiit hit the fan. If that's the case, then throw away the logic book.
Thatās how I recall it. Everyone was sure we would be getting decent compo and then it just became more bizarre as we realised we were just going to get reamed over it regardless of what anyone understood. Something that, amazingly, didnāt feel as normal then as it does now.
Correct me if Iām wrong (sure someone will) - Ryder resigned his contract after the shiit hit the fan.
If thatās the case, then throw away the logic book.
Heard today (but it's one of these "my cousin works with someone who told him, etc, etc) that Cale Hooker has already told people he will not be returning to EFC and has already bought a house in Perth.I prefer to wait for actual press releases, but hey, āsharing is caringā, so I thought Iād share.
PS: it seems a bit far fetched to think he is so confident of getting to one of the two Perth teams at this stage. If he has bought a house, maybe itās just for investment or if heās planning on returning to WA after his playing career.
Thank you for sharing, and I donāt mean to shut you down but unless youāre hearing info like this from someone very close to the matter Iād take it with a grain of salt. Its already obvious that Cale is going to be the āoneā that is surrounded by constant speculation this year. The papers went early on it and thereās no doubt the weasel and co will be running with it this year. Heās an in demand All Australian key position player that happens to be from interstate. Join the dots.
Fact is the decision broke less than a month ago. I do not believe Cale has already told people he will not be returning to Essendon.
Absolutely bullshit
The Workplace āguiltyā plea was the rabbit and absolutely opens the door to cancel a contract for ācauseā, however there would also be strong contract law to contend that any contract signed after the individual became aware of the possible breaches (and that would need to be determined) would still hold effect. Essentially they were aware their employer had possibly breached their contract and yet they entered willingly into another one.
Legally it would be interesting but morally I would think that the club would stand aside if a player really was desperate to use this clause.
Yes it sucks and I hope the AFL would still offer the club some compensate picks but right now we have to keep rolling with the punches until they stop.
I also wonāt believe Hooker is leaving until I see him lined up in an opposition jumperā¦ guy is as loyal as they come and donāt reckon he will be going anywhere. Ditto Heppell and Hurley.
It would be easier to break a contract now that we've pleaded guilty to a WorkSafe charge of providing an unsafe workplace.
But I think the question above from @nickh32 is relevant to that.