#45 Conor McKenna - four more years!


I hope he stays but if he leaves and we get a first round pick for him, I would be ok with that.


Do you play golf?


You’re right Seb is much better, but also has much more development. When you target a young upcoming player you are doing it based on potential, and as such you have to pay overs for that potential (well in general, unless you have leverage). I’m not saying he is worth Ross, but if some club wants him they should be made to pay more than just what he is worth on current output.


There was a story on the news earlier about Cox from Collingwood. Basically they said that because he’s here on a working visa he cannot simply change clubs as this is the same as changing employer & would void his visa. I wondered if Conor is in the same boat?


I assume both Cox and Conor would be currently sponsored by their respective clubs. Though IIRC following that two year period, they should be able to get residency, i.e. becomming free to move if they please.


Hasn’t that recently been changed to four years?

(Do we believe the original story, anyway?)


In my experience, you can do two years without being sponsored on the working holiday visa, after that if you want to apply for residency, you must find a place of employment to sponsor you for two years. This would then be the four years you mention. Although I think if you find a suitable sponsor prior to your working holiday visa finishing, you can technically do it in less than four, but I’m not 100% on this.


Wouldn’t they be sponsored by the AFL though, not the individual clubs?


The AFL own the club licenses.


That’s probably true, but also probably makes no difference. I’ve changed employer over here in the states twice, and as long as the new employer is willing to sponsor you, it’s really a non-issue.
I assume that it works along pretty similar lines in Australia. And that any AFL club that was interested in recruiting either or them, would be prepared to sponsor them too.


Yeah thats how it works. They cant swap employers on the same visa but they can get a new sponsorship.


Not according to the story on 7 news. I must admit I wasn’t really paying attention at 1st (on the the background) but then I thought of Conor & thought I needed to listen to it. They were saying that Cox’s visa was conditional on him playing for Collingwood & so changing clubs may cause problems.


Good bargaining power. Re-sign or we’ll have you deported.


That only works if he doesn’t want to go home.


I wouldn’t. Nowhere near it.

Aren’t all contracts through the AFL? So I wouldn’t think it would be a problem.


only when it suits the AFL


woah woah woah, last time someone threatened/ hurt conor he charged across the field to deck them.


According to the story his contract is with Collingwood & so his visa is conditional on him continuing with the same employer.


As has been said before by a few posters its a nothing story and should be in the failure of journalism thread.
Some journos looked at his visa and the conditions attached and thought “hey thats a story” but then decided to ignore the fact that he can easily get a new sponsorship if he was traded to a new club.


So we should get mason cox and deny sponsoring him to send him back to america for anzac day a couple years ago?