Collingwood champion Scott Pendlebury is set to earn a six-figure windfall from merchandise surrounding his record-breaking game in a move that has sparked debate.
Pendlebury will stand alone at the top of the all-time AFL games record list when he runs out against West Coast next week for his 433rd match.
WATCH THE VIDEO ABOVE: Pendlebury’s record-breaking merchandise deal sparks debate
Know the news with the 7NEWS app: Download today
The 38-year-old equalled North Melbourne great Brent Harvey on 432 games on the weekend, and will be rested this week against Sydney before returning to face the Eagles at the MCG.
Channel 7’s Tom Morris revealed on The Agenda Setters that Pendlebury will cash in on a variety of different initiatives surrounding the milestone next week.
He will wear up to 12 guernseys throughout the match, while custom boots, wine and even a limited edition watch are all set to be on offer to fans.
Normally the club take a portion of the profits made, but in this instance, Pendlebury will get it all.
And the move has been ticked off by the AFL, despite the “testimonial clause” being removed from the CBA.
“100 per cent of the profits that Collingwood would have otherwise made for Scott Pendlebury’s merchandise will instead go to the player,” Morris said on The Agenda Setters.
“Now this speaks to how much Collingwood love and admire Scott Pendlebury and crucially it’s likely to be a six-figure sum and it’s been ticked off by the AFL.
“Now this is boots, this is potentially as many as 12 jumpers and this is also his wine as well that he has started and posted on Instagram last night.
“I even understand there’s talks of him releasing a limited edition watch, maybe 25 or 50 watches for fans to auction off.
“So this is a huge sum of money that the AFL has ticked off as part of, I guess, their TPP process.”
The cash windfall immediately sparked debate on The Agenda Setters panel.
“Are the clubs furious about this, because this is very much skating on thin ice?” Kane Cornes said.
“So what’s to say other clubs or even Collingwood with Jack Crisp playing his 300th game next year that they can make 12 guernseys with a badge on it and they can then sell him and pay him less money?”
Host Craig Hutchison said Pendlebury is entitled to make as much money as he can.
“What’s your issue though? Is your issue that he shouldn’t make money? He’s entitled to make as much money. You think 100 grand is going to swing a salary cap?”
Nick Riewoldt said that if you do it across every player then it will add it up.
“We’re talking about special dispensation for one player. No problems with players being able to cash in on their name, image, likeness, milestones, all of that … What if someone kicks 100 goals?” Riewoldt said.
Cornes raised the possibility of other players doing something and wanted to know what the line is.
“Jeremy Cameron’s going to kick 800 goals next year. Why can’t he do something? No (I’m not comparing that to Pendlebury), but what’s the line?”
Caroline Wilson wondered how much Lance Franklin could have made from his history-making 1000th goal.
“I’ve never seen a scene like that in all of AFL history. And who knows? Who knows what he could have made out of that?” She said.
Morris reported that Collingwood insisted Pendlebury’s windfall was not discussed in contract negotiations.
“I asked Craig Kelly directly today, the Collingwood CEO, whether this was part of the contract negotiations informally last year. He vehemently denied that. But there’s no doubt this has been going on since at least late last year when the fixture came out,” Morrisa said.
“Ordinarily, 65 per cent of the profits would go to the player and 35 per cent to the club. Collingwood’s waived that. So Scott Pendlebury is making all the money.”
Cornes said it’s a “giant loophole” in the salary cap system.
The AFL previously had a “testimonial clause” in the CBA up to $100,000, but that has since been removed, which is why the club asked for special approval.
Riewoldt added: “Absolutely Scott Pendlebury should cash in, he’s done the work, he’s played the games. But I think if we’re opening it up for one player (then where do we stop?)“
