Gold Coast Under 17's Rule.

[TigerLand]

From someone who is involved in the process of maturing these kids through the Under 18's. I find this absolutely disgusting.

Coast's trap for young players
Stephen Rielly | July 15, 2009

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25783347-5012432,00.html

THE Gold Coast's right to select the best 17-year-old footballers in the country has been augmented by a 23-month hold on even those who decline the invitation to join the AFL's 17th team.

A memo recently sent out by the AFL to explain how the fledgling club's access to a dozen 17-year-olds too young for this year's national draft will operate also detailed how the club will be insulated from the reluctance of any player to join it.

The power to list a player and retain a right to his career for almost two years even if he refuses to join the club was a source of keen discussion at last week's AFL Players Association-sponsored meeting of player agents held in Sydney.

According to the memo, if a player accepts an offer from the Gold Coast, he can sign on and join them immediately or remain in his home state for 12 months, perhaps to finish his schooling, and still receive almost $60,000 for his commitment.

However, a player who does not accept the invitation to be one of the foundation 12 can still be listed as one of the dozen, a hold he may not be free of until the 2011 draft, by which time he will be 19 and 20 before he might play for another club in 2012. The 23-month holding period is to expire in October of 2011.

The Gold Coast can trade such a player at the end of the 2010 season, as he is deemed to be their commodity to sell, but if the player does not want to be a party to the deal, the Coasters can effectively keep him out of the game for another 12 months.

Suspecting that the new club could meet resistance from players who might be nervous about, or not interested in, taking their careers to southeast Queensland, the AFL has granted the club a host of start-up concessions designed to ensure that a strong list can be constructed.

Apart from being able to fillet next year's national draft this year, with access to the dozen 17-year-olds, the club has also been given the right to sign one uncontracted player from each club and will hold picks 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15 in the 2010 national draft. Priority signings out of Queensland and the Northern Territory are also permitted.

At last week's meeting of agents, it was widely agreed that the element of compulsion and the ability to hold a player against his will for two seasons built into the access to the 17-year-olds amounts to a restraint of trade, although there has not been a legal challenge on those grounds run in decades.

Unlike draftees, who must agree to the terms of the draft before they can nominate for it, a reluctant 17-year-old need not agree to or sign anything but can still have his immediate future claimed by the club.

[Stripes]

This is the AFL playing hardball!

They will do everything in there power to have success in the North! 

[tigersalive]

It has got to be a restraint of trade.

A kid cannot be punished for refusing a contract when he is essentially a free agent to begin with.  What a disgrace. 


If he's chosen in the draft by GC then bad luck if he's not very keen, but you can't hold a kid to ransom if he says no to an offered contract.

[Infamy]

Sounds pretty like a pretty simple solution if you ask me
Just don't nominate yourself for the draft

[mightytiges]

Surely this is open to challenge legally? As TA said surely this is a restraint of trade. The kid (or his parents) hasn't signed anything  ???. It's a disgrace if this is allowed to go through.

It may backfire on the AFL in any case. An existing club could say to a 17 year old refuse now and we'll look after you for 2 years then pick you up cheaply from the VFL, WAFL or whatever.

Sounds pretty like a pretty simple solution if you ask me
Just don't nominate yourself for the draft

Do they need to nominate for the draft first to be considered by GC17? I thought they were ineligible for the upcoming draft and GC17 isn't part of this year's draft so that wouldn't work to my understanding.

[tigersalive]

Sounds pretty like a pretty simple solution if you ask me
Just don't nominate yourself for the draft

You don't have to nominate for anything to get approached by GC as far as I'm aware.

THey're too young to nominate for the national draft but this rules stops them participating in the following national draft.

It's essentially giving the kid no real option when it comes down to missing two years of AFL footy or get paid $60k a year and get a warm up year on the gold coast and then 1 year opportunity to play AFL.

It's not fair to put them in that situation.

[mightytiges]

Sounds pretty like a pretty simple solution if you ask me
Just don't nominate yourself for the draft

You don't have to nominate for anything to get approached by GC as far as I'm aware.

THey're too young to nominate for the national draft but this rules stops them participating in the following national draft.

It's essentially giving the kid no real option when it comes down to missing two years of AFL footy or get paid $60k a year and get a warm up year on the gold coast and then 1 year opportunity to play AFL.

It's not fair to put them in that situation.

Yep essentially forcing these kids to the Gold Coast.

[Chuck17]

Yep not fair but unfortunately most modern corporations dont run to fair anymore.

If they have a goal, they need to make it happen regardless of the means.

[Infamy]

So if you play any level of state representative football you are automatically eligible to be taken by the Gold Coast even without your permission? They must have signed some sort of contract before they started the season to be able to do that surely? Sounds like a massive legal issue to me and I can't see it holding up in court if challenged.

[tigerlily]

AFL would get smashed in any court....I would like to offer you a job, if you dont take it you can't work in this industry for two years, god i hope the Gold Coast debarkle spells the end of this demented Afl board.

[mightytiges]

So if you play any level of state representative football you are automatically eligible to be taken by the Gold Coast even without your permission? They must have signed some sort of contract before they started the season to be able to do that surely? Sounds like a massive legal issue to me and I can't see it holding up in court if challenged.

Yep if your date of birth is between January 1 and April 30 1992 you are open to an offer from GC17 and have to accept it or play at a lower level (TAC Cup, VFL, etc) for another 2 more years. I guess the AFL know they are able to make up their own rules as they go along and you need to accept them if you want to be a part of it all as unfair as this is .

The other issue for these kids is even if GC17 doesn't offer them a contract this year they could end up at the Gold Coast anyway via the 2010 draft if they are a top junior footballer. The AFL has deliberately set things up so that GC17 can pick the guts out of the 2010 draft. If they can't get these kids as 17 year olds they'll get them next year when they are 18.