The case for AFL free agency

It's hard in soccer especially where so many people are so clearly in it for themselves......not necessarily as a 'put down', - - - but, a globetrotting career from club to club and country to country is an individuals 'life journey'. In the AFL context - and what people from say a soccer or even RU perspective can lose sight of - - - it's generally much more about shared team success. That's why leadership groups take collective pay cuts to keep the core group together to have another crack at a premiership. This has happened over and over. There may be a new generation though who embark on a 'career' rather than just playing the game for fun plus benefits. Thankfully, we tend to still see guys pull the pin because they've lost the passion/enjoyment. Playing just for money isn't enough. In many cases - playing for money IS the passion killer.

To clear up the 'restraint of trade' issue. AFL clubs are not privately owned. The AFL is the primary owner and license holder of all clubs and the club administrations just administer the money. The clubs can make money through the afl structures or privately but the profits do not flow to any owners and all players are technically employed by the AFL. NRL clubs (and NBA clubs for that matter) are privately owned. Individuals or groups of shareholders take any profits that the clubs make. Here, players are employed by the clubs. In the NRL context, an action in restraint of trade is much easier because the dispute would involve two separate employers. A similar action in the AFL context is no means out of the question, but less likely. Every year there are sad stories in the week after AFL trade week about players that didn't get to where they wanted. And in one sense there's no reason that Jade Rawlings shouldn't have been allowed to go to North, or Ryan O'Keefe couldn't have been able to go to Hawthorn. But we need to remember the final result of free agency. This year two of the biggest trade stories, Brendan Fevola and Luke Ball, wanted to go to Collingwood. Trade weeks traditionally have been heavily littered with stories of players wanting to go to Collingwood. That's what we get with free agency; players going to Collingwood.

The players association for Australian Soccer players were at one stage calling for a salary cap as one of their reforms to the old NSL. Their argument was that overall their members would benefit from a better league and very few would be negatively effected. The idea of a salary cap is also a similar restraint and is in place in a lot of codes.

It is a restraint of trade, but in certain situations there can be legal agreement that overall in the best interests of the players, clubs and Administration it is best served by the draft system - what would replace it, would it be better or worse? Often the cure for these circumstances can sometimes be worse than the symptom. 2009 - 25 player trades - players mostly happy with the outcome, 1 player is not. Over 700 AFL players in the system 96.5% stayed wtih the same club (although some delisted). In 2008 there were only 6 trades. Redb

andrew, I think you have summed that pretty well. St Kilda's actions are not in the best interests as far as fairness for Luke Ball or the game itself. If they are abusing Ball's limited opportuntiies then the AFLPA may need to act on this situation. My issue it that for 95% of the player mvoements that occur the draft and Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) work well, however if there are loop holes for clubs like St Kilda to exploit then that should be looked at by the AFL. Redb

What if your a 17 year old kid and the FFA witht he backing of FIFA prevent you playing football overseas? That's going to be an interesting one that will crop up soon. Sorry to put this on an AFL thread but I feel it's remotley on topic and there is no football discussion about this.

I am having some trouble seeing the parallels in that analogy. What about if you are a model, and the agency in your home town wants to employ you, but the International Modelling Agency says that you and your pimply face have been drafted and your job is to go and live in Mongolia. By the way, modelling is a closed shop, so if you don't go to Mongolia, then you are restrained from your trade...hence the expression 'restraint of trade'. And all the punters in the street say 'well you are lucky to have a modelling job with your pimply face, so stop complaining', or 'he did nothing at Carlton', or other completely irrelevant nonsense.

The last person that I can recall who threatened legal action over the draft was a 16 year old James Cook. He did nothing at Carlton, and just as much at Footscray. Quite clearly, the obvious reaction the next time some pimply kid tries a similar stunt is to say: see you later, go do something else with your life. There is zero obligation for the AFL to employ a pimply kid on his terms. Similarly, I want to be a model, but no one wants to employ me - would I stand a good chance of taking that to court?

Whatever the legalities (I strongly believe that the draft is restraint of trade, and exists only because the 'good of the game' argument has so far disuaded anybody from challenging it), St Kilda's actions in withdrawing the offer to Luke Ball should be questioned. The arguments for the draft being illegal (if challenged) say that not only does it restrict a player's choice of employer, but it also reduces his bargaining power with his existing employer. There is pretty much no doubt that St Kilda's actions represent this reduction in Luke Ball's bargaining power - once it was clear that no deal could be done to get him where he wanted to go - they said "stuff you" and pulled his contract offer. I hope he goes, and not just because I am a Dees fan!

redb timely and pertinent clarification.

The head of the AFLPA Matt Innis was interviewed on SEN this morning, he clarified that the AFL and Players Assoc have a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) which agrees to the draft and trading rules of the AFL. Anything can be challenged in a court of law, whether it succeeds or not is another question. Interestingly, there is a clause which if enacted may challenge certain situatons, it was unclear. Matt Innis did say though that for any player to go to court the first defense would be that they are represented by the AFLPA and have agreed and signed a CBA. Redb

The Brits are used to a feudal system and know their place, if someone ain't covered in excrement, then they must be the king and all must bow before them, Australia is a little more egalitarian, in sports as well as society.

The AFL put the draft into place exactly 22 years ago (the then VFL) - and they did it because they learned from the NFL that it's one key aspect of a financially viable league that actually makes money. Why? If fans see light at the end of the tunnel they will remain with the club - if they don't - they will drop off and that club will go broke. Clubs going broke aren't in anyone's interest. It's a numbers game, and the more people you keep interested in the comp - the better off the comp is overall. It's interesting to note that one of the most financially successsful soccer leagues in the world at the moment is the Bundesliga, and they have a modified form of salary cap.

What does a salary cap have to do with the draft system or free agency? That's one thing you can be sure that the EPL will never have. The AFL chose the draft when they started expanding the competition 10-15 years ago. They couldn't trust just having an even competition to ensure the success of the league. These new expansion clubs and the smaller Melbourne teams have to be artificially propped up to survive by being given the best new young talent.

bever and I bet that average Londoner would take that brick and try and smash you with it - to be blunt, I think the average UK futbol follower who does not follow Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool or Arsenal are basically happy with the status quo - i.e. being competitive against their non-Big 4 opponents. Maybe the Brits are easily satisfied as a people, and thats probably why their country is experiencing economic strife, but futbol wise, it probably works.

In fact, in recent years, the EPL has occasionally mooted the possibility of some sort of salary cap (perhaps not using those words exactly). Why? Because they are starting to work out what the VFL learned decades ago - clubs will risk going bankrupt to climb the table - and it's not a good look if lots of clubs go bankrupt simultaneously. Interestingly, the idea of a finals system has occasionally cropped up as well (which some leagues already use for promotion/relegation purposes). Don't worry folks - Australia's domestic comps have been ahead of the game for decades.

There's no diminution of earnings - that's a key factor that the court will look at.

I would bet london to a brick that plenty of people within british soccer want a salary cap. The problem is that you would need consensus within the major countries/leagues - and that aint gunna happen. I see a salary cap and draft within the AFL as a sign of strength not weakness, it makes for a far more even comp and theoretically gives everyone a fair go - whats more Australian than that, it may be socialism but i like it. Dont know about you but who wants to see the same three or four teams win every year.

If they don't like those conditions then what options do they have? None. That's why it would probably be deemed illegal and restraint of trade if it ever went to court.

Good point Pip. Ben Cousins of course had to work pretty hard to appease the AFL after coming back to finally get on the books of Richmond. In many other sports he would have just went somewhere else but the AFL holds a monopoly type role over the players as they know they have no other choice.