Port Adelaide chairman David Koch says the four clubs with banned Essendon players are "paying for somebody else's indiscretion", but insists the Power's premiership hopes will not be derailed by losing Paddy Ryder and Angus Monfries.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The AFL, with petitions from all clubs, have ruled that St Kilda, Melbourne, the Western Bulldogs and Power cannot sign top-up players, as the Bombers have been able to do, despite also being disadvantaged by the fall-out of the supplements saga.
The Power had argued that they should at least be allowed one top-up player, but will now be limited to a 42-man list this season, one less than the three other clubs.
The Demons will be without Jake Melksham, whom they signed during the last trade period, the Bulldogs have lost forward Stewart Crameri from their senior list, while the Saints will be without Jake Carlisle, also taken during the recent trade period.
These clubs can now only upgrade a rookie-listed player to the senior list.
The Power have arguably been hardest hit, for Ryder is one of the best ruckman-forwards in the league, while Monfries is a premier small forward.
Ken Hinkley's men failed to make the finals last year, having reached a preliminary final in 2014, and had been expected to again be a premiership challenger with Ryder and Monfries on board.
"It's no excuse for our performance this year, it will have no bearing whatsoever but we just think it is a silly disadvantage. We are paying for somebody else's indiscretion," Koch said.
The Power signed Ryder in 2014 when he was already mired in the drugs saga, but Monfries came aboard during the 2012 trade period when the scandal had yet to erupt.
Koch said he understood the "buyer beware" argument about Ryder.
"I can see people's argument with that. Our argument is that we were relying on both information from Essendon and the AFL, who constantly said they were innocent victims," he said.
"With Angus, no-one knew anything about it – why should we pay? It's ridiculous.
"They [Essendon] are paying the consequences, the players are paying the consequences and now we pay the consequences as well.
"How can the Bombers have more top up players than us when they knew exactly what went on and they re-signed some of their existing players that went through it. We end up with less players than them? It's annoying but that's life."
The Bombers are allowed to sign up to 10 top-up players to cover for the dozen banned for a year by the Court of Arbitration for Sport for being administered a banned drug.
Many of the 34 players implicated in the saga have agreed to appeal to the Swiss Federal Court, with this to be made official on Wednesday when the 30-day appeal window closes. The appeal is expected to be argued predominantly in French.
Lawyers for the players are expected to argue CAS made factual errors, and the initial hearing should not have been conducted as a fresh case. The three-man CAS panel found the players were significantly at fault. Appeal costs will be covered by the Bombers' insurance.
- JON PIERIK
