AFL crackdown on Judd third-party deal

[LostDoggy]

http://www.skynews.com.au/sport/article.aspx?id=816973

The AFL has confirmed a third-party deal involving Carlton superstar Chris Judd - believed to be worth $250,000 a year - can no longer be paid outside the club's salary cap.

In a move sure to put even more pressure on the Blues' already tight salary cap, Judd's contentious deal with Visy must now be included as part of the club's total player payments or the Additional Services Agreement.

The deal, which was payment for Judd's services as ambassador for Visy, had played a crucial role in the midfielder's move to the club from West Coast in 2008, and had one more year to run as part of the original six-year contract.

But the AFL's general manager of football operations Adrian Anderson said the payments would no longer be permitted outside the salary cap following a revision of the rules regarding third-party deals last month.

'A previous arrangement between Chris Judd and Visy had been approved by the AFL as an employment agreement in 2008,' Anderson said in a statement.

'Since that time and with the advent of free agency, the AFL has tightened the criteria for the approval of such third party arrangements.

'The consequence of this decision means that any future payments made under arrangements between Chris Judd and Visy need to be included in Carlton's ASA limit or TPP.'

Anderson said the AFL would continue to scrutinise related-party deals for players across the game.

[KT31]

How it wasn't included in their salry cap initially is farcical.

[LongWait]

So Carlton's next move will be for Rebecca to land a contract as an ambassador for some company with ties to Carlton.

The only way the rampant cheating stops is if the penalties for the individuals and for the clubs involved are enormous and potential breaches are rigorously investigated and enforced.

From memory, serial cheats, or those with serious infractions include Sydney, Carlton, Essendon, Adelaide, Melbourne, West Coast, Brisbane, Geelong. There may be more.

I guess this latest move is a step in the right direction but history suggests we have a long way to go before we have a competition where player payments are above board and transparent.

[Happy Days]

This is still, and will always continue to be bullshit.

Adelaide are going to get the book thrown at them but Carlton just get it (rightfully) included in their cap for the same thing, just because they did it a few years earlier?

And this isn't saying Adelaide got off light.

[Remi Moses]

The AFL opened up Pandora's Box when they allowed the Judd deal through.
I think in hindsight they thought Carlton were punished to severely in the first place.

[Go_Dogs]

This is still, and will always continue to be bullshit.

Adelaide are going to get the book thrown at them but Carlton just get it (rightfully) included in their cap for the same thing, just because they did it a few years earlier?

And this isn't saying Adelaide got off light.

The difference being the Judd deal was AFL approved, the Tippett deal was intended to be kept under the table.

Good to see the AFL have finally come to their senses and deals like the Judd one have to now be included in the cap. Hopefully it causes them a few problems :D

[azabob]

The difference being the Judd deal was AFL approved, the Tippett deal was intended to be kept under the table.

Good to see the AFL have finally come to their senses and deals like the Judd one have to now be included in the cap. Hopefully it causes them a few problems :D

Overall I don't think this is good news.

Judd, Selwood, Dangerfield, Van Berlo, will all stand their grounds on this one and it could get messy. You cannot blame them either, their deals were okay at the time, now the AFL is changing its mind?

It has been reported that Judd has refused to take this lying down. Carlton have asked him to re-negoitate / extend his contract past 2013 so they are able to get some salary cap relief by so far he has refused to.

[LostDoggy]

Overall I don't think this is good news.

Judd, Selwood, Dangerfield, Van Berlo, will all stand their grounds on this one and it could get messy. You cannot blame them either, their deals were okay at the time, now the AFL is changing its mind?

It has been reported that Judd has refused to take this lying down. Carlton have asked him to re-negoitate / extend his contract past 2013 so they are able to get some salary cap relief by so far he has refused to.

There is a easy solution for Carlton if they want to keep Judd in the list with the same salary. All they need to do is take someone off the list and reduce their salary exposure.

[MrMahatma]

There is a easy solution for Carlton if they want to keep Judd in the list with the same salary. All they need to do is take someone off the list and reduce their salary exposure.
It is a joke though. Surely the AFL have to say "no more 3rd party deals once current contracts expire" rather than just pulling the rug from under players now. It's rubbish

[EasternWest]

Have we got any players with these sorts of deals? I guess now they are the story du jour, we'll hear if we do?

[Ghost Dog]

Hun wrote an article detailing fines given out to clubs over the years for breaches.
We have forked out around $100,000 from memory, in fines over the years.
Some of this was for stupid stuff like late submission of documents.

[LostDoggy]

A certain amount of responsibility rests on Judd's shoulders. He signed the contract. He knew it was a grey area but he was happy to take Visy's money. To whine now is a bit rich in my book.

[Sedat]

A certain amount of responsibility rests on Judd's shoulders. He signed the contract. He knew it was a grey area but he was happy to take Visy's money. To whine now is a bit rich in my book.
Judd has every right to fight this. The contract was formally signed off by the AFL and it still has 12 months to run. Would any if us accept this if Judd came to the Dogs in 2007 and was paid 200k outside the cap to be a Smorgon Steel ambassador? Blame the AFL for spectacularly screwing up the management of this issue, not the players or the clubs for submitting these 3rd party deals to the AFL for consideration.

Adelaide is a different story altogether because they never disclosed the Tippett deal(s).

[GVGjr]

I agree with Sedat. Once the deal has been signed off then the contract should have run it's course. Seems strange to change their mind with just 12 months to run unless something else has changed.

Going forward though a lot of these contracts will have a more vigorous process to follow and that can't be a bad thing.

[Ghost Dog]

Judd has every right to fight this. The contract was formally signed off by the AFL and it still has 12 months to run. Would any if us accept this if Judd came to the Dogs in 2007 and was paid 200k outside the cap to be a Smorgon Steel ambassador? Blame the AFL for spectacularly screwing up the management of this issue, not the players or the clubs for submitting these 3rd party deals to the AFL for consideration.

Adelaide is a different story altogether because they never disclosed the Tippett deal(s).

The AFL want to be seen to have done something. Nothing will happen to Selwood, Judd or any of them. Tippet and those that signed him up will get a fair whack I expect. But this whole going over old contracts at other clubs is the AFL preparing for the defence from Adelaide's legal team. They need to find out how these deals were different so they can have something to defend themselves with when Adelaide rightly asks how their deal was so different from Visy.

[The Adelaide Connection]

Wasn't there another farcical element to the Judd deal, something like giving his mum big $$$ for an admin role at the club or something along those lines?

A friend of mine used to work for the Taverner group, who were a group that bought up a lot of pubs mainly in Victoria and SA I believe and sold most to Woolworths/ALH a few years ago. He was telling me that a fairly high up Taverner employee had allegedly told him that when they were looking over the books for the 5 or so pubs they were looking to purchase from Collingwood there were some peculiar irregularities. When they allegedly asked about the huge (100K+) payments to some of the employees that were supposedly working 2 or 3 hours a week, the Collingwood representative said "oh, don't worry about that they are all quitting". The employees were, allegedly of course, wives and girlfriends.

The AFL are going to have to open a can of worms to make sure their process is watertight if they drag the Crows through the ringer. They have three options really:
1, Walk away quietly like nothing happened and play the "misunderstanding" card
2, Make a deal with the Crows that ultimately gives them a tap on the wrist but saves them fighting charges and really stirring up the competition wide muck.
3, Come down hard on the Crows and open Pandoras box.

Personally I hope it is option three, mostly as my gut feel tells me that it is the big clubs with the big connections that would have most to answer for.

[Ghost Dog]

Interesting - thanks for that.
the important thing now is for journalists to act on these tip offs and start naming and shaming the clubs involved.

[azabob]

Interesting - thanks for that.
the important thing now is for journalists to act on these tip offs and start naming and shaming the clubs involved.

How do you think this all started? It started with a very good jurno.

[Ghost Dog]

Plural. Anyway, took their sweet time didn't they?

[soupman]

2, Make a deal with the Crows that ultimately gives them a tap on the wrist but saves them fighting charges and really stirring up the competition wide muck.


Anyone else think that the Crows giving up their first two picks as a gesture of goodwill regarding the Tippett scenario is related to some thing like this? Could be the master plan whereby Adelaide is "punished"and the matter is more easiy resolved.

Really hoping it goes the other way and this gesture of goodwill is all for nothing and the AFL strip them of their first two picks for the next 5 years, meaning Adelaide volunteered to extend their penalty to 6 years.