Collingwood star Dale Thomas says AFL footballers are willing to play hard ball to get what they want from the league’s massive new broadcast deal.
The AFL players association wants a fixed 27 per cent of AFL revenue – boosted enormously by the new $1.253 billion five-year deal – locked in for players.
That would cover salary increases, as well as schemes they want introduced, such as providing income streams for players post-career, and better compensation for those forced out by injury.
“We want to be able to deliver a package of benefits and rewards and programs that will serve a player as they come into the game, during their careers, but also for years after they leave the game,” AFLPA chief executive Matt Finnis told AAP.
While Finnis is confident agreement will be reached, the bid for a fixed proportion of revenue to go to players has so far been a sticking point.
Thomas said the players would not be backing down.
Asked about the possibility of unprecedented strike action, the Magpies star said: “That would be a drastic measure.”
But he did not rule it out.
“The players and the players association have decided that if we have to play hard ball, we will,” Thomas told Nova FM radio.
“We won’t be bullied around, I think in the past we’ve been bullied around.”
Finnis was confident it would not come to a stand-off.
“There’s been all sorts of commentary from time to time,” he said of Thomas’s comments.
“The playing group as a whole seek a professional and business-like relationship with the AFL.
“We won’t always agree and negotiations may be willing, but we are confident we can reach an amicable outcome.”
Along with a pay rise, Finnis said the association wanted an income scheme to bridge the gap between the end of players’ careers and the age they could access superannuation.
They also want a greater proportional pay increase for rookie-listed players, whose current base salary is $35,400, about half the minimum for a player on the primary list.
“From the moment they walk in the door of a football club, they’re not treated any differently from a No.1 draft pick, they have the same responsibilities and we think that should be recognised,” Finnis said.
Demetriou dismissed the idea of players getting a fixed proportion of revenue, such as 27 per cent, when announcing the broadcast deal, saying that might even result in players short-changing themselves.
“If that means there’s going to be an offer for 30 per cent, we’re obviously open to it,” Finnis said.
But Demetriou is confident of striking a deal that will please players.
“We will, as historically we’ve always done, look after our players,” he told Sydney’s Sky Sports Radio.
“I’ve got great admiration for what our players and our clubs are doing at the moment.
“They’re so professional, what we’re seeing on the park at the moment is first-class and they deserve to be beneficiaries.”
But he said significant amounts of the rights money also had to be used to nurture the game at its lowest levels, particularly in expansion states NSW and Queensland.
He said school and community football organisations, ovals, facilities and talent identification in those states would be boosted.
“That’s where the bulk of the development money will be going, I can assure you,” he said.
“And also it actually helps us fund our expansion.
“We’re investing $220 million into our expansion and this basically covers that and allows us some spare.”
GrantS
Guest
"They will come to a middle ground agreement, which will benefit all, the players understand that in growing the game they will benefit." Of course they will! And anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about or is trying to sensationalize a business discussion. As pointed out by several people, AFL players appear to be paid a lot less than players in other sports of similar popularity and therefore should be paid more. No arguments from me ! The players make the game and should be paid as much as possible, within reason. We have a great game! Let's keep it that way or strive to make it better.
GrantS
Guest
Ian I'll ignore your condescending opening as it's obvious you have very few negotiating skills. The AFL are well aware ,probably more so than you or I, of what avenues are available to the players if they do not receive a fair share of the "spoils". I would think a fair bit of their budget is spent on lawyers. Every fair minded person wants the players to be looked after but you think that is not clear to the AFL. Go back to reading your comics!
Liam Quinn
Roar Pro
Another reason that they're talking hardball would be due to the fact that AFL players would be well aware, that the NFL is currently in a lockout over their CBA, with the NBA not far behind. Collective Bargaining Agreements have become a massive issue in sport as a whole, players are starting to realise that as the teams and leagues are making more and more money, the players are missing out. If the players dont sign the new agreement, then there's no AFL, they have a massive amount of power in the negotiations.
Midfielder
Guest
What players.... as i see it players over say 24 this is their last chance for a massive pay rise... its five years to the next media deal... so do I at say 26 take a pay cut for the benefit of 16 to 24 years olds today.... The history to date is the AFL players union get by a fair way the lowest % of total revenue of other codes .... the AFL players union by and large has worked hand in hand with AFL Head Office .... nothing indicates much is about to change ... however I wonder if I was an agent trying to get the best for my client and thereby myself ... I would be stirring the pot behind the scenes.. My gut feel is there will be little change ..... but it is a space to watch to see if there are changes in the wind....
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
TheWookie, "Adamson vs NSWRL" is what you are looking for, and you'll note the NRL doesnt have a draft. This might help http://www.jcu.edu.au/law/JCU_077624.html
The_Wookie
Roar Guru
been to court, tried and lost....on several occasions back in the day IIRC
Redb
Roar Guru
It's a great thing for the game and the players, win win. The AFL can do both re improving players pay whilst continuing (in fact advancing) the development of the game. One actually feeds into the other. Watch this space.
Redb
Roar Guru
There is no comparison. Your comments about players not being valuable in the AFL ignores the huge economies of scale the overseas comps enjoy. Relative to domestic sports codes, AFL players do well and by the looks of it will do even better in the next CBA.
Sherrin-Burley-Faulkner
Guest
They will come to a middle ground agreement, which will benefit all, the players understand that in growing the game they will benefit. I particuarly like this quote below from AD : But he said significant amounts of the rights money also had to be used to nurture the game at its lowest levels, particularly in expansion states NSW and Queensland. He said school and community football organisations, ovals, facilities and talent identification in those states would be boosted. “That’s where the bulk of the development money will be going, I can assure you,” he said. “And also it actually helps us fund our expansion. “We’re investing $220 million into our expansion and this basically covers that and allows us some spare.”
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
GrantS, You've got a tendency to be walked over in negotiations, havent you ? If the players dont make it clear they will go in hard and take their lumps to win the contested footy, with the leadership group taking a leadership role in this, then the other side will walk over them.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Titus, Without the agreement of the players and their union, the draft and salary cap - the basis of the AFL's parity among teams and therefore it's growth - are illegal conspiracies in restraint of trade. The players, therefore, have some very very powerful legal cards to play, even apart from strike action.
Titus
Guest
The problem is, AFL players have no other options, they cant play anywhere but the AFL, so basically they will take what is given. There only option would be to go on strike, which I guess could be a real option given the disparity between income and player wages. The AFL likes to compare itself to the EPL, NFL and Bundesliga, but apparently the players aren't as valuable as the players in these competitions.
Midfielder
Guest
I don't know much about AFL ... however from outside it does appear that when compared other sports the AFL players get the least % of AFL revenue .... This has allowed the AFL to do other things with the money to expand the code... However if you combine crowds, sponsors, media deals sale of shirts etc... the AFL gets heaps of coin and maybe this time the players want a much greater share than they currently get ... and in line with other codes ... Will be a very interesting space to watch ....
GrantS
Guest
Why is Dale Thomas, or anyone else , talking about playing "hardball" before negotiations have even begun? That's being a bit premature isn't it? I saw the interview with Demetriou, as probably did a lot of you, and I didn't hear any rejection of the players' claims. I think we all agree that the players deserve a large "chunk" of this great windfall that the AFL have won for the TV rights, but please, let's not go off half cocked. There will be plenty of time to play hardball, softball or any other ball after the AFL have presented their package to the AFLPA.
The_Wookie
Roar Guru
yeah i never understood why the VFL decided to stop paying transfer fees. It was keeping a lot of clubs afloat in the SANFL/WAFL in tough times.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
The_Wookie, A fixed proportion of revenue covers all of these things. First of all, rookie pay, expanded player lists and pay for existing players all come out of that 27% bucket. If the 27% bucket is $7.2m a year and its a 60 players list with 10 rookies each of whom get $30k, then theres $6.9m available for the 50 vets. On the other hand, if the 27% bucket is $7.2m a year and its a 70 player list with 10 rookies each of whom get $50k, then theres $6.7m for 60 veterans. As far as the VFL goes, either there is more not-quite-AFL talent around from the increased rookie pay, in which case they have a better quality of player and therefore go better, or there isnt (in any case, a better solution is compensation to clubs when draft picks are taken from them).
The_Wookie
Roar Guru
They've already indicated that they want rookie list pay increased, they want playing lists expanded, and they want superannuation. in addition to what was already going to be the standard salary cap increase for the year. Increased player wages will have to be paid by the AFL, not the clubs, just like last time. What this does is increases the burden on the clubs however, and its going to screw over long shot draft picks because clubs simply wont take players that are injured, but could be god, or are older and missed the draft when younger. These guys are now getting a chance because of the rookie selections and the cost effectiveness thereof. You take away the cost effectiveness of it and you end up with just another draft pick. Expansion of the playing list will have to lead to an AFL reserves competition or the complete takeover of the VFL with n pretence of alliances any more. Superannuation, I can agree with and wish them all the best, and the salary cap will inevitable rise and I have no issues with that.