You can't have club sponsors and board members paying players

What is visy said they would hire every player on our list we could double the amount we pay everyone

I dont have a problem with the AFL stopping it but it is the timing of the whole thing. Being told only recently the club suddenly has to find room for this extra money is not fair. If the agreement had been ticked off then it should be allowed to run to the end.

They won't They don't become a big business by doing stuff like that with a whole list. The thing is a player must be allowed to earn a dollar outside of football. As much as you want an "even" competition the individual's right here is paramount. Restrict that too much and it will end up in court and the AFL will lose.

The Footy Show sages will be crying in their beer that they can't have an off season special to get all over this

_________________
Bawditawaba

Its disappointing that it will reach these levels.

Whilst yes, not Judd's fault he's 250k out of pocket, a team player wouldn't let it affect the team/club/chances of a flag. Bit embarrassing really that it raises these questions about his character, perhaps unfairly..

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

I remember back in the 80's walking into Dunlop and seeing half the Hawthorn playing group having desks with their names. Ofcourse there was no-one seating in them at the time.

True. But only Amcor dobs.

_________________
Click here to follow TalkingCarlton on twitter
TalkingCarlton Posting Rules

Adelaide cheats
Carlton gets whacked

_________________
Bawditawaba

I don't see this at all.

_________________
dane's trolling again

This, in a nutshell. No issue with them saying they got the original approval wrong, but you can't tell a club that overnight it has to fit $250k into it's salary cap.

_________________
"I had to eat"

Companies often look at the money they pay players as a form of sponsorship.

It's a difference in name only.

_________________
I hope Essendon* folds.

If I can't sponsor/pay Juddy or anyone else at Carlton if I am a member, what is to stop me accepting Judd's payment from VISY, and then as a "non member" inviting him to attend a barbecue at my place and pay him an "appearance fee" of whatever Visy is due to pay him plus the cost of a membership. He is such a generous and grateful bloke that he turns around and hand delivers a gift membership to me.

Could the AFL touch this arrangement?

And if they can because of the membership deal maybe I don't become a Carlton member but the club invites me to each home game as one its guests and I get a signed team photo with the boys or some other bullshit recognition of my personal sponsorship of Juddy, as a non-club aligned, non-Carlton member.

There must be scores of other possible arrangements where it would be nigh impossible for the AFL to ever make a connection without calling on the Australian Tax Dept for assistance, in which case we could just set up an off-shore bank account with a debit card attached to it for Juddy and his wife.

The AFL are fools to think that they can stop these kinds of deals. All they will do is encourage non-aligned third parties to get involved, including bookies, betting agencies, night club owners, etc. Just ask Eddie!

Thoughts?

_________________
A Blues Supporter - not a Blues Bagger.

Start of pre-season, and we've got the captain preparing a legal case at the AFL grievance tribunals over $250k owed to him, rather than committing 100% to training.

From a PR perspective, we look distracted, the captain only grows a reputation developed by his leaving West Coast in the first place as being motivated by money only. Quotes from his management and also ones falsely attributed to him directly about "this not being over yet" don't fill me with the greatest of hope that our captain's number one priority is winning a flag this year, rather than his bank balance. To be honest, it's very reminiscent of Kouta and Dave Allison all over again.

It's surprising that there's no token statement made to the media about "foregoing compensation for the benefit of the team if need be"...even if it isn't the case. Can you imagine the stories that will fly at the end of this season, when we need to trade Warnock or Garlett to cover this black hole in the cap? The effect it could have on team morale that Judd, who arguably has no real say on us as a premiership contender any more, could potentially force a senior player out, and affect the capability of us upgrading our list next off-season, because salary cap space is too tight?

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

Todays HUN does have an article on this and it mentions that Judd may end the financial aspect of the deal to avoid any salary cap problems that the AFL has now created for us.
I dont blame him, his manager or Carlton fighting this in court. As Greg Swan pointed out on the statement on the club website it is a private deal between Visy and Judd, Carlton had no involvement in it but we are the ones being punished.
Frank Costa is todays paper defending the Selwood deal with his property development. He brings up the facts about the company receiving value for money for the money they pay. He also mentions it being like the AFL paying $600,000 for Meatloaf based on his name.
This is no different from Visy, Judd has provided value for money for his name and image alone. Everyone knows who Judd's 3rd party deal was with, can anyone tell me who the other 150 players have deals with?
This is bordering on discrimination.

Retrospective legislation!! Imagine if Gillard decided that Negative Gearing on investment properties was evil 'middle class welfare' and decided to reign it in to help the downtrodden and get the budget in surplus. Anybody that had plunged themselves deep in debt on a 25 year mortgage, having made that decision based on the law of the day...bad luck, all deals are off and you will have to find the extra $$ in your budgets somewhere!! Imagine the chaos!

Best case what the AFL should have done was to rule that the Judd deal could not be renewed when it ran out at the end of the season, they shouldnt be allowed to retrospectively amend the rules to change deals that are already legally in place.

_________________
"Who discovered we could get milk from cows, and what did he think he was doing at the time?" Billy Connolly

Fair enough for the afl to change the rules they can and should be able to do it. They should do it in a sensible manner.
A simple letter to all the clubs stating that there is a rule change coming regards to 3rd party payments.
The rule change is ..........
The rules will take effect at the end of the 2013 season to allow clubs to prepare for it. We will contact all players and clubs that have agreements that will no longer be accepted and try and work through any problems.

Not really that hard.

Judd's got every right to challenge it. If it were to potentially cost you a qtr of a million you would too. It's not small $$$$$ and there's a principle. Team only comes into it so far. One way or another it costs the club hence i'm sure the club is fully supportive.

THIS!! You would have to be travelling pretty well if you can write off $250K in the name of senitmentality. I would be kicking and screaming if it was me, nothing to do with my teammates, just expecting to have the contracts that I signed up for honoured!!!

And similarly, because the AFL pulls some rule change out of their poop-chute on a whim, and that knee-jerk costs me a 1/4 mil I should roll over and take it to send a message that I am a good team player?? Seriously?? Judd's actions speak for themselves, he has nothing to prove. If anything, the law of the land says he has a signed contract and he expects it honoured.

_________________
"Who discovered we could get milk from cows, and what did he think he was doing at the time?" Billy Connolly

None of this is Judd or Carlton's doing. The AFL have bought all this to a head for reasons unknown at this time and not the Club. To suggest Judd is not committing 100% and is distracted is pure BS of the highest quality. Judd will still be paid by Visy so it has nothing to do with it whether he gets paid or not. Your take on the issue is just bizarre.

Regards Cazzesman

_________________
Ricky Gervais - “Everyone has the right to hold whatever beliefs they want. And everyone else has the right to find those beliefs f***ing ridiculous.”

Reasons unknown? Of course they're known. Or just a coincidence in timing with Adelaide's salary cap investigation?



Are you suggesting that at no stage, Judd will spend the off-season meeting with his legal team, Carlton's legal team, Visy's representatives? That he won't appear before the Grievance Tribunal?

Any time spent there is time spent away from what he's there for in the first place. Yes, he's the consummate professional and will rock up to rd 1 in great condition, but surely even you can take off your "I must defend the club at every opportunity" glasses and admit it's hardly ideal is it?

At no stage in the past couple of years, have teams or individuals suffered as a result of being distracted by money related issues off field?



Out of contract with the club next year. So either the Visy deal is included in the cap, and the club is 250k worse off from a playing list perspective, or you convince him to take the hit in the hip pocket?

Abstract comparison - but I'm reminded of Carey's court appearances in 1996 over the King st incident after the 95 prelim.

If it does get dragged out into the season - at what point would you expect the club or Judd himself to nip it in the bud, as it's potentially distracting to a good/great season?

It may well be that the AFL back down in a matter of weeks, and nothing happens out of it. It's an unwelcome distraction regardless.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?