Joe Daniher takes his early contender for mark of the year last Saturday.Credit:Jono Searle/AFL Photos/Getty Images
The cause of the teeth gnashing is that the Lions lodged documents to extend Daniher’s initial three-year contract by two more years.
The clubs say this reveals the fact the offer for Daniher to Brisbane was always planned to be a five-year deal not three. They argue that the first Daniher contract offer was three years on high dollars to make sure Essendon drew a first-round draft pick as compensation. The extra two-year deal now,it is assumed,is on lower dollars than the first three years to smooth out the total amount paid to him.
Loading
OK. But even if that is all true - although the clubs and his management unsurprisingly insist it is not - does that amount to draft tampering? The two clubs worked to the rules the AFL had in place and worked those rules to their mutual advantage.
When does a trade negotiation become collusion?
The Lions say they only offered Daniher an initial three-year deal because he had barely played for the previous two years,and they wanted to minimise their exposure. Now that he has played a full season and done a second full pre-season,they feel comfortable extending his deal.
If we accept that the Lions offered a three-year deal to make sure Essendon would get the first-round compensation pick and therefore not match their contract offer and force them to trade for the player,then all we can be sure of is they worked the salary cap and rules to their advantage.