Pay impasse between AFL and players shows no signs of abating.
THE impasse between the AFL and its players over a new wage deal shows no signs of abating after Andrew Demetriou suggested the league would not budge from its offer and claimed the players were still receiving ''mixed messages'' from their union.
Demetriou yesterday again scoffed at the prospect of discussions heading to mediation at Fair Trade Australia, declaring: ''I have never had to call on a mediator to sort out an issue.''
The AFL tabled a combined $1.09 billion deal to the AFL Players Association in May, up from $811 million in the current five-year deal, and says it boosted this figure in recent discussions in an ''overall framework'' of conditions, although exact costings have not been made public or given to the players.
The players maintain the offer is not good enough, as there won't be enough cash to introduce a pension scheme and increase superannuation and hardship payments.
''It's up to the players how they take it, and if you want to take it as player payments it's a significant increase,'' Demetriou said after announcing a new three-year sponsorship deal with Toyota. ''If you want to take it in annuities, then it has to come off player payments. You can't have everything that you are expecting.''
The AFL has valued the players' deal at $1.32 billion, a figure Demetriou said the league would not match. ''Absolutely they won't get it because we can't afford that,'' he said.
Asked if middle ground could be found, he replied: ''I would be very doubtful.''
AFLPA chief executive Matt Finnis last night said he was willing to compromise.
''We have consistently stated that players are willing to negotiate and compromise to get this deal done, for the good of the industry and fans. Any negotiation will inevitably require a degree of compromise from both sides,'' he said.
Demetriou said the repercussions would be great if the league added $300 million to its offer.
''The impact would be we go into significant debt, the clubs wouldn't get any money from the broadcast rights, we would have to cut development programs and we would, without doubt, have to increase admission prices,'' he said. ''There is no other money coming into the game. As I said, one of the nice things about the broadcast rights was the ability for the AFL to maintain affordability. That's my obligation to the game.''
Finnis said Demetriou's claims did not stack up.
''We think footy fans can see through these kinds of claims. They know that football is experiencing a period of unprecedented prosperity and that the game is in great shape,'' he said.
''Even if the AFL granted all of the players' requests, it would still leave $3.5 billion for all its other priorities.''
Demetriou continues to reject the players' push for a set 25-27 per cent of income.
''We are giving $1.1 billion and more. It's a significant amount of money,'' he said.
''It's exactly the amount of money of the broadcast rights, all the cash. It's $300 million more than last time. As I have said continuously, we have to provide for our clubs, our supporters, for our grassroots development.''
As revealed in The Age, the players are not only miffed with the deal but with Demetriou for publicly revealing they had rejected it.
Demetriou claimed the players had not helped their cause during the negotiations.
''I don't know if there was an agreement. We have asked the players' association not to make certain things public. They have spent the past few weeks doing just that,'' he said on 3AW.
''Every discussion we have had has been in the public domain. I think they have a media campaign and a PR company.''
The AFLPA hosed down speculation players would launch protest actions such as obscuring AFL logos on match-day jumpers.
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
What is the AFL wage dispute about and why should investors care?
The dispute is an impasse between the AFL and the AFL Players Association over a new multi‑year wage deal. The AFL tabled a combined $1.09 billion offer (up from the current $811 million five‑year deal), while players value their preferred package at about $1.32 billion and want measures such as a pension scheme, higher superannuation and increased hardship payments. Investors and stakeholders watch this because the outcome affects the league’s cash flow, sponsorships and how broadcast revenue is allocated across clubs and development programs.
How much has the AFL offered the players in the current negotiations?
The AFL says it has offered a combined $1.09 billion deal, which it describes as roughly $1.1 billion and about $300 million more than the last agreement. The league also says it discussed additional elements in an “overall framework,” but exact costings have not been made public or provided to players.
What are the key demands from the AFL Players Association (AFLPA)?
The players want stronger long‑term protections including a pension (annuity) scheme, higher superannuation contributions and larger hardship payments. They have also pushed for a set share of league income — reported as 25–27% — and have valued their preferred package at about $1.32 billion.
Why does the AFL say it can’t meet the players’ full demand?
AFL chief Andrew Demetriou says the $1.32 billion figure is unaffordable. He warned that adding roughly $300 million to the offer would push the league into significant debt, reduce money available to clubs from broadcast rights, force cuts to development programs and likely lead to higher admission prices for fans. He framed the offer on the table as already a significant increase.
Is mediation likely to resolve the AFL and players’ wage dispute?
Andrew Demetriou has publicly dismissed the prospect of using a mediator at Fair Trade Australia and said he’s doubtful discussions will need mediation. The AFLPA’s chief executive Matt Finnis, however, has said players are willing to negotiate and compromise, suggesting willingness to continue talks rather than escalate immediately to formal mediation.
Have public comments and media coverage affected the negotiations?
Yes. Demetriou has criticised the players’ union for giving 'mixed messages' and running what he described as a media campaign, saying the players made negotiations public. Players were reportedly upset that Demetriou publicly revealed they had rejected the offer. AFLPA leaders have pushed back, rejecting some of the league’s claims.
What might be the financial or fan‑facing consequences if the AFL raises its offer significantly?
According to Demetriou, a large uplift in the offer would mean the AFL could go into significant debt, reduce funding flowing to clubs from broadcast deals, cut grassroots and development programs, and likely increase admission prices for fans. The AFLPA disputes some of those claims, saying football is in a strong financial position and that even granting players’ requests would leave substantial funds for other priorities.
Are players expected to use on‑field protests, such as obscuring logos, during the dispute?
The AFL Players Association has downplayed and rejected speculation that players would stage protest actions like obscuring AFL logos on match‑day jumpers, according to the article.
Call 1300 880 160
Start a chat
Schedule a call
