Talking Footy

Does it really matter anyway - I don't understand what point either of you are making?

Cos was saying that AFL players can play anywhere they want and sign a contract to that effect, although he changed it to calling the contract a restraint of trade.

Cracker was saying that AFL players can't play anywhere because of the contracts, and claims that Cos thinks they can - and Cos did say "Players play for leagues outside of the the AFL ALL THE TIME. All the time."

It has got lost a bit I reckon though. Cos got involved in a fight over semantics and lost.

No I think Cos misunderstood Cracker and went the semantics line, and Cracker killed him.

NRLCrap1 is correct.

The_Wookie wrote:

The Draft is a restraint of trade. There is no other top grade of football in the country.

Yes, this is the sort of reply I was expecting and didn't get.

The fact there is no league commensurate with the AFL - does that make the draft '"a restraint of trade"?
Certainly there are numerous leagues were you can be paid. So does the amount matter in legal terms?
And do the conditions of employment constitute restraint of trade - many industries have a lot more severe restrictions?

Every employment contract is a restraint of trade - but it is a LEGAL restraint of trade - I think your all arguing symantics

Semantics, and yes you are correct as well. Cos789 (who I now have on ignore) claims that no such restraint exists. And yet he can not give any example of this even when prompted with the example of Buddy Franklin.