There are a number of problems here.
1. When you’re under contract, you should not be publicly asking for a trade.
This is a terrible practice that needs to stop. If you are unhappy where you are, get something done behind closed doors. You’re under contract. That means the club owes something to you, and you owe something to the club. Be professional about it.
2. Let’s make a contract mean what it is supposed to.
If a player is contracted, he can’t leave without the club’s approval. End of story. Why is this a question? If a contracted player wants out, the team he wants to get to needs to figure out a trade that’s acceptable to the player’s current club. There should never be a limbo state in which a player can be both under contract and free to go to another club.
3. If a player is not under contract, no one owes anything to his current club when he leaves.
If a club doesn’t want to offer a contract to a player, they risk losing the player. There shouldn’t be any sort of compensation. Did the club buy list-preservation insurance? No? Guess what… it’s called a contract. If you want to keep players, give them contracts. And stop crying when non-contract players leave.
4. Give clubs longer initial rights to drafted players.
I’m not sure what the term for this is, but it means draftees can’t just leave after two years. The fact is rebuilding through the draft doesn’t work if good players simply sign short contracts, then jump ship. So give the first club 6 years of first-right-of-refusal. Nobody else can get the kid without an acceptable trade for the first 6 years. After that, see #2 and #3 above, except for #5 below.
5. If a club doesn’t want a player in the first 6 years, he can enter the rookie draft.
I actually think this is already the case, but obviously if a club won’t offer a kid a contract, they should not also be able to block his freedom to play somewhere else. So if there’s no contract by the end of the trade period, he walks.
Yes, I know, what if a club gives a young player a super small contract just to keep other clubs from getting him? First, is that a recipe for success? It’s not going to end well. Also, I’m sure the AFL could also come up with a formula for draft position and commensurate compensation for young players. Say, if a player is a No. 1 pick, he has to be paid at a certain level by his first club. Then there’s no easy way to abuse the 6-year restriction on movement by simply offering pathetically low contracts.
6. Get rid of father-son rules.
Yes, I realize this cuts deep for some of you. And it is a nod to nostalgia, for which I am usually a huge sucker. But the way it works, it’s ruining the system. If a player wants to play where his father played (which was probably in the days before the draft), then his beloved club needs to be willing to trade for him. First get drafted, then get traded. Otherwise, play your best where you are, and you’ll get to your dad’s club soon enough.
Bottom line, compensation picks have to go.

I just want to say how much I love the headline on this article!

Nah, probably just because he’s a Freo fan.

Nice first article, Jimmy.
You have to start somewhere, and making strong statements is the way to go.

Of course, I completely disagree with you about short quarters and unlimited interchanges. Endurance is a part of the game.
Some players, like Bradly Hill, shine at the end of the game when everyone else is gasping for breath. Let’s not take that away from them.

The AFL actually made a lot of other leagues look silly this year. They handled COVID better than anyone else, with the possible exception of MLB. But baseball didn’t start until the end of July, which was pretty unnecessary, IMHO. After the madness this springs, I was really worried AFL would cancel, but they kept their heads and made it work. Good on them!

Nick Riewoldt actually mentioned the move out of Moorabin as a big reason the team slid down so horribly after 2010. The history and culture were lost.

There are some cultural and rules differences in pro sports in the US and Australia, and these differences change how free agency plays out in both sports.
– Player salaries are not considered private in the US, so every player tries to get the biggest, most obnoxious deal possible. They always want to out-do the last record-breaking deal. Baseball is one of the worst, but all of them are pretty bad. (So, please, never switch to public salaries in AFL!) This reality alone really hurts the clubs that can’t pay the huge money.
– Players in the US tend to simply go and stay where the money is. It doesn’t seem to make any difference which team a player loved as a kid or where they have to live to make the big money (being “homesick” is not a thing in the US). It’s rare for a really good player to knock back a bigger offer in order to stay at his favorite club (which I think is sad; I wish love of the team were a bigger deal in US sports).
– US players have almost no say in where they get traded. When a team wants to get rid of a guy, he’s gone. Not much he can do, even if it means moving across the country in the middle of the season (another reason I really hate mid-season trading).
– Generally, a player in the US doesn’t talk publicly about which club he wants to get traded to. It might happen in private, but not often in the open.
– In the US, there is no such thing as compensation from the league for losing a free agent (this is one of the most idiotic aspects of free agency in the AFL, but that’s a different discussion).
So all these things together, among others, make free agency in the US work differently from in the AFL. I really think the AFL have a chance to right the ship and find a balance between players’ rights and competitive parity. I’d start by fostering the “one-club” mindset (something long gone in America) and keeping player salaries private.
I don’t know what else, but there’s hope.

You have no idea what StK’s “business model” is nor what a good one would be.
Calling for the end of StK is a bunch of rot.

That’s a good point – long odds allow for a small bet to pay off big.
Hadn’t thought of it that way.

Kinda long winded, but you’re right – the AFL don’t seem to care if some stuff continues, so long as they are getting paid to keep allowing it.

To the players and coaches: the classless extracurricular crap needs to stop.
Have some dignity, show some accountability, and be admirable men!

I wrote an article about this last year, that it’s the responsibility of the clubs to change this.
The aim shouldn’t be to get away with as much as possible, and blindly back misbehaving players no matter what.
There should be pressure from teammates and coaches on everyone to play fair and exhibit sportsmanship.
Who cares if the AFL hand down a fine or suspension for striking, the players should be punished by their own clubs.
Until that starts becoming the norm, this sort of thing won’t really go away.

I’m a Sainter, so I would obviously be over the moon if they won.
And, as stated in the article, no one should be amazed at this point if they go on to win it.
However, since they are young and I’ve learned to hedge my hopes, I wouldn’t put money on them yet.
Truth is, you’d be a bit foolish to put money on any club right now.
The field is pretty wide open.

That may be, but Clarkson had the opportunity to backpedal a little and say what you just said.
The point is your are saying the mistake was the umpire’s; that’s very different from taking a cheap shot at an opposition player.

So you are saying we just haven’t given it enough time?
I accept that, but what do you think will change going forward?
For example, maybe the players just have to figure how to take possession and dispose of the ball really quickly, since they haven’t been forced to do that in a long while.
I can see that.
I also agree with you that the “look” of the game should not be our biggest driving factor in making decisions.
I framed things from a viewing perspective b/c that’s the only one I have.

I guess the game I saw last week just seemed bizarre b/c the players were very clearly avoiding the ball, which gave the game a very unnatural feel.
Right now, the players do not seem to know what to do, and the officiating is extremely inconsistent on this front.
That’s no fun for anybody.

Yeah, I knew I was a little late to the party.
Glad you read it and liked it, though.

Boys, don’t argue about who is more likely to blow it in a winnable, season-defining game.
It makes us Saints supporters feel like we’ve lost our identity!

The entire premise of this article garbage.
Cousins never moved to StK, so the move could not have been “failed”.

Clubs consider recruiting lots of players every year.
Most of those discussions come to nothing, just like this one.
Let’s see… someone thought about doing something for a time, then decided not to do it.
Wow, great story.

Are you all aware of the story of my failed move to Tokyo?
Yes, it’s very interesting.
I talked to my wife a couple times about moving to Tokyo.
She didn’t think it was a good idea.
So we didn’t.
Just a complete failure.

I don’t see any way McCartin gets back to AFL level.
He was never in great shape, due partly to diabetes, and now he’s been out of full training for a long time. It’s unlikely he could ever get fit enough.
And if he does return to training, one knock on the head will finish him. Remember, he was not sitting out as a precaution. His injuries were so bad that he was actually unable to go through the normal routines of life. He would sit for hours with headaches and couldn’t watch TV and such because the lights/movement hurt his brain.
Even with the padded head protector, it would probably be foolish for him to risk getting another concussion.
So, honestly, as sad as it may be, I don’t get why he’s still trying or the Saints are still considering him.
If Amed Saad couldn’t come back from a year off, there’s no way McCartin will.

Do you really think anyone involved in football who doesn’t have an underlying medical condition is actually going to die from COVID-19 and that such person would otherwise have been fine?
That’s a ridiculous idea.

It’s not a gamble at all.
The situation you described is unrelated to playing the games or not playing the games.
You’re completely missing the reality that no one should be visiting their grandma right now.
Everyone is at risk for catching the virus, whether they play the games or not.
Could catch it at the club or the grocer’s.
You think that if they delayed or cancelled the season, then players could safely visit the elderly?
If playing the games requires a little extra caution outside the clubhouse, that’s fine.
But there is no justification for not playing the games.

What’s the gamble?
AFL-listed players are the healthiest group in the world.
Not one of them is at all likely to suffer any serious symptoms from the virus.
Fever, chills, body aches, fatigue… nothing worse than that.
They’ll have to take a break from playing/training while they’re ill.
And after a week, they’ll be better.
Then, being positively neither vulnerable nor contagious, they can get back to playing, with no more worries about getting sick.

We’re facing the same problems in America, and the fact is none of the cancellations or barring of fans will ensure the virus doesn’t spread.
It might slow it down a bit, which is probably a net positive, but it won’t keep the players or fans from getting infected.
This thing won’t be left behind until nearly everyone has gotten sick and recovered.
And that’s the thing. If every AFL player got infected right now, they’d all be healthy in a few weeks.
Then they’d be done with it.

The truth is StK is on a knife edge – both drastic improvement and horrific failure are reasonable expectations. I guess that’s sort of true at most clubs, but it is especially the case at the Saints. Here’s why I think so.
Why they improve:
1. Quality recruits do live up to expectations. Hill, Howard, Jones, and Ryder all could be very good. They’ve shown results or potential at other clubs. Let’s hope they continue.
2. Mid-career players keep getting better. Wow, this list is long. Membrey, Roberton, Carlisle, Ross, Lonie, Webster, Billings, Dunstan, Steele, Sinclair… have I missed anyone? If these players all stay on the upward trend, that’s a strong group.
3. The young guys make big jumps. There are some quality young players at Moorabin. Will they quickly grow into their potential? Optimistic supporters sure hope so.
If these things happen, it is not dreaming to think they might get 15 wins in 2020.
Why they fail:
1. Old injuries come back. Every club is afraid of injuries, but StK are probably the closest of any club to complete catastrophe on this front. Who would truly be surprised of Hannebery, King, and Roberton never play another game? They may all be/feel totally healthy today, but the nature of their injuries should make everyone nervous. Add to that Carlisle, Geary, Steele, Webster, and Kent have all missed time due to injury. Things could get very ugly, very quickly.
2. The recruits just don’t work out. There are no guarantees, and looking for a third club can be a sign that a player knows he’s starting to wane. Hill and Ryder are not young, and they might start to show signs of age. Howard is not really a proven commodity; he might never develop into anything memorable.
3. The rest of the list stagnates. StK’s list is dominated by decent, but not fantastic players (as it has been for years). If the majority of those players don’t get much better, they will continue to be a large group of mediocre players. Most of them won’t deserve to be de-listed, but few of them will be worth keeping around. That’s difficult for list management.
These three things could completely derail any hope of progress, for years to come.
So it seems to me StK is one of the most hard-to-predict sides in the competition. At the end of 2020, I don’t think most people will be surprised, regardless where the Saints sit on the ladder. Any result will seem fitting.

Well, I was originally going to say “boots”, but I wanted to distinguish between simply raising one’s feet vs. pointing the actual bottom of the boots toward an opponent. So I went with “cleats”.
But yes, I am indeed an American, and if you read my other article and comments, you’ll see I am not trying to hide it.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think it invalidates my opinion on footy; been a devoted fan for over a decade.
I even had a footy blog for a short time (gave it up due to zero readers 😛)!

My article is somewhat idealist dreaming, I know. You’re absolutely right, the cost of sitting a big-money, A-grade player is too high for most clubs to handle. But I guess I just wish the first time a young player started with the shenanigans, his club would kibosh that rubbish right away. In my fantasy world, that would fix things. Alas, it seems unlikely.

Maybe the problem is too many clubs let it go too long, and once a player is a problem, it is too difficult to deal with it. So if they set them straight right away, it might make a difference. Hard to say, though.

Why do you ask?