|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/19/2007
Posts: 281
Location: Northcote
|
Toothless Tiger wrote:
Signing an extention contract does not mean a player cannot or will not be traded, if all parties agree.
I agree with you on Dowler, if another club needs a dud then it's could turn out as good deal for the Hawks... which is what Pelchen will be looking at doing.
Dowler had a couple of big games for Box Hill this year, but yes the Hawks dont need him and I'd say he will be moved on for sure. Thorp is going nowhere... As Boyle will most likely be move on Thorp will become our next tall option and will get some chances next year for sure.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/10/2008
Posts: 4,575
Location: Emirates Stadium c/o Highbury House (Tasmania)
|
Toothless Tiger wrote:
Signing an extention contract does not mean a player cannot or will not be traded, if all parties agree.
I agree with you on Dowler, if another club needs a dud then it's could turn out as good deal for the Hawks... which is what Pelchen will be looking at doing.
i think it actually does mean he is exempt. not sure, i think they changed it a few yearas back to say you cant be traded in the same year as you sign a new contract (after blake caracella to brisbane i think). could be wrong, but i'm sure its something like that
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/3/2007
Posts: 1,475
Location: Hobart
|
emirates wrote:
i think it actually does mean he is exempt.
not sure, i think they changed it a few yearas back to say you cant be traded in the same year as you sign a new contract (after blake caracella to brisbane i think).
could be wrong, but i'm sure its something like that
So Collingwood would never have been able to trade Didak at the end of the year anyway as he signed an extension not long before he took to the roads with H Shaw
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 1,385
Location: Chance was there and not taken so now get over it
|
emirates wrote:
i think it actually does mean he is exempt.
not sure, i think they changed it a few yearas back to say you cant be traded in the same year as you sign a new contract (after blake caracella to brisbane i think).
could be wrong, but i'm sure its something like that
Nope am even more sure now that he can be. Just had a quick look through the AFLPA CBA and couldn't see anything there that would indicate it can't happen. Players need to agree to trades is about all.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/29/2008
Posts: 119
Location: melbourne
|
hugues de payens wrote:
Nope am even more sure now that he can be. Just had a quick look through the AFLPA CBA and couldn't see anything there that would indicate it can't happen. Players need to agree to trades is about all.
i am pretty sure the players dont even have to agree, all that the club has to make sure is that the player isnt losing money...and that even comes to relocating and that the new club can pay out his existing contract...could be wrong but thats what i thought was the deal.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/29/2008
Posts: 119
Location: melbourne
|
podgy15 wrote:
I think that Dowler has played 3 games and kicked 3 goals and Thorp just the one game where he kicked a goal. Both players are under 20 and 19 years of age respectively. I think that they are perfect trade potential because they are only young and have a lot to offer. Hawthorn dont really need them. The board are looking for current players that have plenty of experiance and they are not looking for youngsters at this stage.
What would people give for these players? Possible players in the Ryan O'keefe category...???
yehh sure ryan o'keefe for dowler or thorpe...may even chuck goodes and kirk in as well...if that doesnt please you, what about roosy as well and the swans may even forfeit against the hawks just to sweeten the deal...that sounds fair for thorpe or dowler.
|
|
|
Guest |
