North board approved mammoth Blakey offer amid police investigation

Kangaroos sign off on eight-year, $12 million deal while Victoria Police probes Pullman hotel allegations

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
Sources3 outlets
North Melbourne's board has approved an eight-year, $12 million offer to recruit Sydney Swans defender Nick Blakey, who nominated the Kangaroos as his preferred destination on Friday while a Victoria Police investigation continues into allegations arising from the Sydney Swans' Pullman hotel incident.

The Kangaroos' board, led by president Sonja Hood, and the executive led by Jen Watt signed off on the offer after extensive due diligence, according to multiple reports. The board's approval indicates the club is satisfied with the circumstances surrounding his recruitment. North Melbourne also consulted its AFLW players and kept them informed about the club's pursuit of Blakey.

Blakey's relationship with the Swans soured after he and four other players were suspended by the club over a night of wild partying at Melbourne's Pullman East hotel in August. Three women, working as exotic dancers, have variously alleged they were sexually assaulted and touched inappropriately without consent. No charges have been laid, and all five Swans players who served season-ending club suspensions denied criminal wrongdoing.

Riley Bice is no longer subject to the investigation and is being treated as a witness. Blakey, Isaac Heeney, Chad Warner and James Jordon remain persons of interest. If the deal proceeds, Blakey is poised to become one of the highest-paid players in the competition, with the trade period continuing as the race for his signature plays out.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The reported eight-year, $12 million deal would make Blakey one of the AFL's highest-paid players and reshape North Melbourne's list around a marquee defender.
  • The move is advancing while a police investigation into serious allegations remains unresolved, raising questions about how clubs weigh sporting ambition against reputational and ethical risk.
  • The case tests the AFL's approach to players facing criminal investigation, including whether a trade can proceed before the investigation concludes.

Background

The AFL trade period is the annual window in which players can be moved between clubs. Contracts of eight years are rare in the league, and the reported figure would place Blakey at the top end of player pay. The allegations stem from a night at a Melbourne hotel in August, after which the Swans suspended five players for the remainder of the season. Victoria Police is investigating complaints from three women who worked as exotic dancers at the event.

Key Perspectives

North Melbourne: The club's board has approved the offer after what it regards as extensive due diligence and is satisfied with the circumstances. It also took the unusual step of consulting its AFLW players before proceeding. Sydney Swans: The club suspended the five players for the season and has seen Blakey's relationship soured. Blakey has now nominated North Melbourne as his preferred destination. Players and police: All five suspended players denied criminal wrongdoing and no charges have been laid. One player is now a witness, while Blakey, Heeney, Warner and Jordon remain persons of interest in the ongoing investigation. Critics/Skeptics: Some will question whether a club should commit a contract of this size and length to a player who remains a person of interest in a criminal investigation, and whether the league should permit the trade to be finalised before the matter is resolved.

What to Watch

  • Whether Victoria Police lays charges or clears the remaining players before the trade window closes.
  • The AFL's response to the deal and whether it formally approves the move.
  • Any further statements from North Melbourne, the Swans or the players' representatives as the investigation continues.
  • The final details of the trade, including what Sydney receives in compensation.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workSubscribe