TOPIC:

An article in The West today about equalisation measures. It proposes reducing the points cap to 100, saying that no club gets near 120. I would dispute that: Subi were at 116 this year and, famously, exceeded the cap a couple of years back when they were de-listing and re-listing players mid season. It also says Subi will get a points reduction of about 15 on players like Litherland, Powell and others. Apparently Subi will be prevented from recruiting returning AFL players who came from other WAFL clubs. I find that one puzzling, as I think it would be difficult to enforce a rule that singles out Subi. As much as I think Subi's dominance needs to be curtailed, any equalisation measures would have to apply to every club. As I have said before, a points and transfer fee loading would based on relative ladder positions would be a better way forward.

For my part, I am sceptical about the points reduction. Yes, it would make it difficult for Subi to recruit next year. But it would also make it difficult for Perth, and very likely other clubs, to recruit. We would be able to pick up only one ex AFL/experienced State league player, which would fall well short of what we need if we are to push up the ladder. Curtailing Subi's unprecedented dominance is all well and good but it would make it very difficult for other clubs to improve. Again, a points/transfer loading would provide a disincentive for top teams to recruit from lower teams while not preventing lower teams from improving their lists.

Prohibiting Subi from recruiting ex AFL players throws up all sorts of restraint of trade issues I would have thought given players are semi professional and get paid for their services.

There is nothing stopping them signing up with 7 or 8 other clubs BC so there are plenty of options and opportunities for ex AFL players, just Subi will not be an option in the name of fairness to a competition where one club has an unfair advantage. Sorry mate but that’s a well known fact.

DD...I think it's probably a good move by the WAFC but the fact remains that when a player is prohibited from going to a club...any club for that matter...due to an arbitrary rule imposed by the regulator that doesn't apply to every other club then legal issues come into play given these guys are paid for their services. I'm not a lawyer but imho reckon there'll be more to come out of it going forward.

it would be interesting if the player has to declare all the payments he is getting offered in his so-called "restraint of trade"..

Ted Nugent wrote: An article in The West today about equalisation measures. It proposes reducing the points cap to 100, saying that no club gets near 120. I would dispute that: Subi were at 116 this year and, famously, exceeded the cap a couple of years back when they were de-listing and re-listing players mid season. It also says Subi will get a points reduction of about 15 on players like Litherland, Powell and others. Apparently Subi will be prevented from recruiting returning AFL players who came from other WAFL clubs. I find that one puzzling, as I think it would be difficult to enforce a rule that singles out Subi. As much as I think Subi's dominance needs to be curtailed, any equalisation measures would have to apply to every club. As I have said before, a points and transfer fee loading would based on relative ladder positions would be a better way forward.

For my part, I am sceptical about the points reduction. Yes, it would make it difficult for Subi to recruit next year. But it would also make it difficult for Perth, and very likely other clubs, to recruit. We would be able to pick up only one ex AFL/experienced State league player, which would fall well short of what we need if we are to push up the ladder. Curtailing Subi's unprecedented dominance is all well and good but it would make it very difficult for other clubs to improve. Again, a points/transfer loading would provide a disincentive for top teams to recruit from lower teams while not preventing lower teams from improving their lists.

I agree TN...that's a sensible solution in my opinion. The loading could reflect where the destination and source clubs finished on the ladder the previous season. It wouldn't restrain players from going to top teams but it would make it harder to get over the line.

Agree, BC. While Subi will remain strong for a few years yet, what happens if they drop back to a mid level team and someone else has a few years at the top? Does the restriction stay with Subi or go to whoever is the top team? It would be a strange to have a system where whoever won the flag was unable to recruit returning AFL players the following season. With the points loading, I would add that in my view, it needs to be based on ladder positions across at least 3-5 seasons, not just season by season. 2016 might illustrate the point. SD had an unexpected surge up the ladder, finishing above both WP and C. It would have been unfair, on the back of one reasonable season, to have made it difficult for SD to recruit from WP or C, even though aside from 2016, they were far stronger teams.

good for the most part
still needs more

does this rule apply to ex Subiaco players?
let us try it, if the mighty Lions are weakened over time, one can always get rid of the rule.