Long-term trigger clauses relying on good faith to secure millions of dollars in deals

Some of the AFL’s biggest deals are containing clauses which would trigger monster, long-term deals. Jon Ralph unpacks why players like them – and the huge risk which comes with them.

The AFL has prevented clubs from officially inserting long-term trigger clauses in contracts in a move that means footy’s megastars are relying on good faith to secure millions in promised deals.

Many of footy’s stars are deciding upon complex deals that have a two year-initial contract that gives them the player option to take up lucrative long-term extensions if they remain happy at their clubs.

It gives them the guarantee of long-term money with an opt-in element but the flexibility of an escape clause if they decide they want out at a specified time in the contract.

Harley Reid could be running a risk of agreeing to an in-principal deal with the Eagles, relying on the club’s good faith. Picture: Janelle St Pierre/AFL Photos/via Getty Images)

But player agents have been told by the AFL the opt-in deals which have allowed players including Andrew Gaff and Josh Kelly to trigger secondary contracts are not officially permitted under the collective bargaining agreement.

Clubs have to submit a letter of intent as part of those deals which means there is effectively a good faith agreement or handshake deal instead of a locked-in contract to secure them the second half of that deal.

Melbourne star Kysaiah Pickett was considering a deal with a four or five-year trigger of that sort until it was made clear they are not guaranteed under the standard playing contract.

His manager Anthony Van Der Wielen spent weeks consulting AFL experts including AFLPA legal counsel Steve Slimming before it was made clear any secondary trigger clause was not legally binding.

As a result Pickett signed a fully guaranteed contract for nine years at $1.4 million a season instead of a deal with a clause.

West Coast star Harley Reid could soon sign a deal with a two-year extension to 2027 then a nine-year trigger.

Gold Coast’s Mac Andrew has a five-year deal with a four-year but his trigger is a games-based trigger instead of an opt-in deal.

Mac Andrew is on one of the longest deals in the AFL. Picture: Matt Roberts/AFL Photos/Getty Images.

Clubs are able to put games-based triggers into contracts to allow a player to meet a games total over the initial years of a contract to then lock in a subsequent contract at a specified price.

The AFL reasons that those players are being rewarded on objective measures that can also include best-and-fairest finishes so allows those types of contracts.

No club has ever contested the second part of an opt-in deal or tried to extricate itself from that contract.

But in an era when the AFL can medically retire players with concussion clubs could yet be caught out on trigger deals that are not officially in player contracts.

When club hierarchies can change within 12 months there is also a degree of nervousness among player managers about signing those deals when there is so much at stake.

But clubs are also aware it would be reckless or even crazy to renege on a trigger deal with a powerhouse player management stable.

Footy’s salary cap will reach nearly $20 million in two seasons when club marketing agreements are factored in so clubs are increasingly keen to use that space on long-term deals.

Originally published as Long-term trigger clauses relying on good faith to secure millions of dollars in deals