Maybe I just read you saying it so many times I assumed it was multiple people.
Direct comments about ensuring the AFL does not become the EPL being made by captains of football clubs, and insinuated by the CEO and Chairman.
Saint wary of EPL-like competition
Last edited by Jono; 24-03-2013 at 07:18 AM.
I note that AD mentioned last night that they may look to cap the number of people allowed in the football department. Might be an avenue worth exploring. Would be hard to police though.
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | Big Bash League tipping champion of the universeCome and Paint Turtle
Yeah was happy that the discussion came up regarding that. That being said, that doesn't prevent some teams being able to fly players to Arizona mid-season whilst others can't etc.
Its a tricky issue isn't it. Personally I am not 100% in favour of capping football department spending or numbers etc. as I think the innovation argument is strong.
At the same time, I cannot provide a solid alternative to ensure the game stays even. Particulalry if the fixture is always going to favour Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond etc. and screw over Bulldogs, Melbourne, North, Port etc.
Last edited by Jono; 25-03-2013 at 07:25 PM.
seems odd noted Big 4 member Richmond are included with the have nots
Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?
With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left
I swear I did not mean to, meant to include Richmond in the first bit and Dogs in the last.
For me there's much bigger question marks around the ability of bigger clubs to use their market share and corporate connections to obtain lucrative 3rd party deals. It's obviously a tough thing to police but that extra 200k per year is going to do far more to entice a star player than better facilities and an extra 30 administrative staff.
Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.
Too many bones, not enough CASH!!
What's with the logic in making clubs pay 100% of the salary cap? Surely there has to be stages in a club's cycle where they can't be paying it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)