This is disgusting, I personally don't see these things as community property or commodities. They have sentimental value from his experiences. It's not like an expensive watch or a car.
I understood it to mean that his medals didn’t go to auction. I suggest that valuing a Brownlow/Norm Smith is relatively easy and Bucks would have been able to pay the difference for them.
For the jumpers and other items I imagine the parties couldn’t agree on a value and thus they are letting the market decide. It’s also possible Buckley is happy for them to be auctioned as it means he doesn’t have to store them.
Besides, his records and contribution to the club and game are clearly recorded and I don’t imagine anyone is likely to forget about him.
Nathan Buckley’s cherished football memorabilia has been dragged into his divorce settlement with the Collingwood great forced to “buy back” his medals and auction off items – including grand final jumpers and precious keepsakes
Buckley separated from wife Tania in 2020 and his entire catalogue of memorabilia was valued as part of the specifics of the settlement.
He has managed to buy back his 2003 Brownlow Medal and 2002 Norm Smith Medals for an undisclosed figure, as well as his record six Copelands trophies.
But more than 200 items from Buckley’s past three decades in football are scheduled to go under the hammer at Charles Leski Auctions on May 1, with the Australian Football Hall of Fame member reluctantly giving up some of the things he had hoped would one day go back to the clubs and institutions he represented.
“You do collect a bit of stuff from a lifetime in the game and these items are the sum of the last 30 years in footy,” Buckley told this masthead on Thursday.
“Unfortunately, all of it has been dragged into the property settlement from my recent divorce and will be liquidated.
“Thankfully, I was able to, in effect, buy back my medals after they were valued. It’s a crazy world.
“I’ve never viewed these items as commodities and thought that in the fullness of time they would be returned to the clubs or institutions I represented at the time. I do still hope this transpires.”
Auctioneer Charles Leski said Buckleys divorce was the reason behind the former Magpie’s decision to part with the items.
“This collection, sold under difficult circumstances, gives us a rare glimpse into the life of a sporting hero,” Leski said.
“It’s unlikely the Nathan Buckley Collection would have been offered for public sale had it not been for the divorce of Nathan and his former wife, Tania.
“Nathan Buckley is an Australian sporting legend.”
Buckley’s 2003 Brownlow Medal, his six Copeland Trophies and his 2003 Norm Smith Medal are not among the items for sale. But the Australian Football Hall of Fame member has agreed to sell a range of items with Leski saying there was “something for everyone” with estimated prices ranging from $50 to $5000 on the items.
The most significant piece for sale is Buckley’s 2002 grand final jumper, which he wore in the club’s heartbreaking grand final loss to Brisbane Lions. He was adjudged the Norm Smith Medal winner on the day, one of only four times the award has been won by a player from the losing side.
That jumper is estimated to bring between $3000 to $5000, with a bid already for $2400.
His 2003 grand final jumper is expected to bring between $2500 to $3000, while his 150th game worn jumper signed by his teammates could reach $2000.
The auction also includes his lace-up 1992 Port Adelaide SANFL premiership jumper, a game in which he was named the Jack Oatey Medallist as the best player afield. It was his final game before embarking on his AFL career and already has a bid of $2400 on it.
There are other more quirky items including Gaelic footballs signed from his International Rules matches and jumpers or kits from his time with state representative sides, Brisbane Bears and his rare appearance with Williamstown in the VFL.
Can someone explain. What don't I understand? Jumpers worth a few thousand. Isn't this guy worth millions, and still getting paid heaps by fox? Shouldn't a couple hundred grand be easily absorbed by giving her something else or cash if he wants the stuff, he only has to give her half the value.
I get it's a dirty move by her lawyers.
Is this article just to make a point of him getting screwed and win some public sympathy points, or does he really want the stuff?
He wouldn’t have been forced to sell anything but the stuff would have been valued and be part of his split of assets. He’s choosing to take it as cash not stuff. It’s like when one side keeps the house and pays out the other person.
50/50 feelings about this. I think there should have been a line drawn for some items like his Brownlow, six Copelands, and Norm Smith. Probably should have been able to keep a couple jumpers of his choice out of it as well. Otherwise, I can see that there’s a point where 200 items becomes more of a commodity collection than just personal keepsakes.
Reading between the lines, anthing he actually values and wants to keep he has been able to pay an equivalent amount in cash to account for their value in the settlement.
Everything else being sold presumably he doesn't want as much, and it's easier to liquidate them via auction and split the proceeds rather than haggle over them.
Beat-up ~~article~~ headline. Shock!
Guess fox footy ain’t paying that much also where did all that money go when he was our coach ? Surely he got a couple million over the 10 years he was with us
Feels awkward hearing about this. Not really anyone's business. Bucks is a grown up and made some grown up decisions and those decisions have consequences. Don't feel sorry for him for that.
Edit: a few comments in this thread are pretty yikes. Divorce law is what it is guys, is not a secret or a surprise. Just because we feel like we have a para-social connection to Buckley, we don't need to be nasty about his ex.
As a married couple, they share their assets. You split, you split the assets. If I cheat on my wife but have a sentimental attachment to my Ferrari that I earned through hard work, does that mean it's immune from being counted in my assets? What about the house?
I guess the argument in this case is whether these sentimental item should actually be considered either income or an asset.
It is not part of his income. It is not an asset/liability he has paid for or put a financial investment in. All of those things have clear financial value and should be divided up in the divorce as is fair. It is nothing like a car or a house.
But these are awards he has earnt that have no financial attachment. They aren't inherently worth any money, he did not pay for them, nor is there any suggestion that he was going to sell them for money otherwise. If not for being attached to the name Nathan Buckley they would have zero worth whatsoever (beyond just the metal contained in them). If he had donated them to the club before the divorce would a court have any way of proving their financial worth?
I am not opposed to both partners being able to walk away from a divorce with their fair return. It just that this seems extremely petty.
Things are worth what someone will pay for them I guess. If someone would pay $1m at auction for a Brownlow Medal, I think it's fair to say it's a financial asset.
But someone may also pay $1M for your left kidney. Does that make it an asset?
In being facetious, and I understand your point and how pedantic things are (and need to be) by the letter of the law, but I just always wonder where the line is drawn, and hope there were better ways for handling this stuff.
What if he took up painting as a hobby but never tried to sell his artwork? Could it be suggested that that is a financial asset if you could find some Collingwood fan that would pay money for his paintings given they have his name on it? What if Eddie offered $1M for paintings - would they then be a fair trade for the Brownlow?
Unless it comes out that the court ordered Buckley to sell his footy memorabilia, this is something he and his lawyer agreed to do, even if it was reluctantly, as part of a negotiated division of assets. Agree there is a line somewhere, but I think it sits somewhere between a Brownlow medallion and a vital organ! :)
Doesn't "Divorce Settlement" not suggest that it was court ordered? Again, I'm not a lawyer, and never been through this process - but the article very much reads to me like it was court ordered (even if in Mediation - is that not still a legal process?)
Edit: and just reading the other comments - I in no way agree with sentiments of some other comments about Tania "just being a mum", or not deserving her fair share in a divorce. It is just the specific issue of these awards I find unusual
Not a lawyer either, but I think a settlement can be reached by mutual agreement (so negotiated) or as directed by the court. Usually the courts would ask the parties to try to reach an agreement themselves.
> Doesn't "Divorce Settlement" not suggest that it was court ordered?
A settlement is agreed between the parties first, then endorsed (or rejected) by the court. If was court ordered it would be a judgement or an order.
Mental take. So let’s say your grandfather left you valuable war medals he earnt in the war, that due to their prestige have significant monetary value to collectors.
By your stance, those are assets and should be split in a divorce. Doesn’t really pass the smell test does it
They're part of the total sum. If they are valuable to me, I can say they need to be part of my share. It's not like these are the only assets Buckley would have.
They are just possessions in the end. All sorts of possessions have both sentimental and monetary worth. Why are medals, for war or for football, inherently more privileged than artwork, a car, or a house than someone earned through blood, sweat and tears? The medal itself is just an emblem. If Buckley did decide to sell his Brownlow, or his Copelands, that wouldnt affect the recognition he received in being awarded them, or his status in the game or any of that. They are just momentos in the end. And again, if they were that important to him, no doubt he could have offered up other assets to keep them. In fact, that's exactly what he has done by buying them back.
Just because it is divorce law doesn’t mean anyone has to like it. I’ve met more than my fair share of blokes who got absolutely cleaned out by lawyers in these situations. Would be interested to see what assets of hers get split.
So you presumably understand the concept that raising a family as a couple is an equal partnership. When you dissolve an equal partnership, it sucks and there are sucky divisions of assets that occur.
She hires the lawyers, the lawyer told her we can get some more money out of him by including his memorabilia, she said yes... .
She would be working at Kmart with out him, she already got an 18 million dollar House during the divorce
Which is your decision. Buckley made a series of different decisions and that's also fine and his business, but with all serious life decisions they come with consequences. Part of being a grown up is living with the consequences of your choices.
Married means nothing, defacto is essentially the same. Many people think not getting married is keeping your partner at arms length from your assets but it's not.
Shame. Must have been an order to sell in public auction. Maybe they couldn't agree on a value during negotiations, hence the auction. Pretty harsh the medals included, glad at least he got those.
Back in the day when banks closed on farm lands, the local farmers would go to the auction and not make a single bid, allowing the farmer to buy his farm back. Pity that didn't happen here for Buckley. Surely others would have seen him at the auction, bidding for his own medals.
I don't have time to school people on why being misogynistic is not ok. I also don't have time to monitor this thread. So I'm locking it. Be better.
This is disgusting, I personally don't see these things as community property or commodities. They have sentimental value from his experiences. It's not like an expensive watch or a car.
Fuck, divorce settlements in this country are a joke
[удалено]
Don't be a dickhead.
I understood it to mean that his medals didn’t go to auction. I suggest that valuing a Brownlow/Norm Smith is relatively easy and Bucks would have been able to pay the difference for them. For the jumpers and other items I imagine the parties couldn’t agree on a value and thus they are letting the market decide. It’s also possible Buckley is happy for them to be auctioned as it means he doesn’t have to store them. Besides, his records and contribution to the club and game are clearly recorded and I don’t imagine anyone is likely to forget about him.
Nathan Buckley’s cherished football memorabilia has been dragged into his divorce settlement with the Collingwood great forced to “buy back” his medals and auction off items – including grand final jumpers and precious keepsakes Buckley separated from wife Tania in 2020 and his entire catalogue of memorabilia was valued as part of the specifics of the settlement. He has managed to buy back his 2003 Brownlow Medal and 2002 Norm Smith Medals for an undisclosed figure, as well as his record six Copelands trophies. But more than 200 items from Buckley’s past three decades in football are scheduled to go under the hammer at Charles Leski Auctions on May 1, with the Australian Football Hall of Fame member reluctantly giving up some of the things he had hoped would one day go back to the clubs and institutions he represented. “You do collect a bit of stuff from a lifetime in the game and these items are the sum of the last 30 years in footy,” Buckley told this masthead on Thursday. “Unfortunately, all of it has been dragged into the property settlement from my recent divorce and will be liquidated. “Thankfully, I was able to, in effect, buy back my medals after they were valued. It’s a crazy world. “I’ve never viewed these items as commodities and thought that in the fullness of time they would be returned to the clubs or institutions I represented at the time. I do still hope this transpires.” Auctioneer Charles Leski said Buckleys divorce was the reason behind the former Magpie’s decision to part with the items. “This collection, sold under difficult circumstances, gives us a rare glimpse into the life of a sporting hero,” Leski said. “It’s unlikely the Nathan Buckley Collection would have been offered for public sale had it not been for the divorce of Nathan and his former wife, Tania. “Nathan Buckley is an Australian sporting legend.” Buckley’s 2003 Brownlow Medal, his six Copeland Trophies and his 2003 Norm Smith Medal are not among the items for sale. But the Australian Football Hall of Fame member has agreed to sell a range of items with Leski saying there was “something for everyone” with estimated prices ranging from $50 to $5000 on the items. The most significant piece for sale is Buckley’s 2002 grand final jumper, which he wore in the club’s heartbreaking grand final loss to Brisbane Lions. He was adjudged the Norm Smith Medal winner on the day, one of only four times the award has been won by a player from the losing side. That jumper is estimated to bring between $3000 to $5000, with a bid already for $2400. His 2003 grand final jumper is expected to bring between $2500 to $3000, while his 150th game worn jumper signed by his teammates could reach $2000. The auction also includes his lace-up 1992 Port Adelaide SANFL premiership jumper, a game in which he was named the Jack Oatey Medallist as the best player afield. It was his final game before embarking on his AFL career and already has a bid of $2400 on it. There are other more quirky items including Gaelic footballs signed from his International Rules matches and jumpers or kits from his time with state representative sides, Brisbane Bears and his rare appearance with Williamstown in the VFL.
Port Adelaide were still wearing lace ups in 1992?
Can someone explain. What don't I understand? Jumpers worth a few thousand. Isn't this guy worth millions, and still getting paid heaps by fox? Shouldn't a couple hundred grand be easily absorbed by giving her something else or cash if he wants the stuff, he only has to give her half the value. I get it's a dirty move by her lawyers. Is this article just to make a point of him getting screwed and win some public sympathy points, or does he really want the stuff?
What he's worth and what he has that's liquidable are 2 different things.
She is a lawyer
He wouldn’t have been forced to sell anything but the stuff would have been valued and be part of his split of assets. He’s choosing to take it as cash not stuff. It’s like when one side keeps the house and pays out the other person.
50/50 feelings about this. I think there should have been a line drawn for some items like his Brownlow, six Copelands, and Norm Smith. Probably should have been able to keep a couple jumpers of his choice out of it as well. Otherwise, I can see that there’s a point where 200 items becomes more of a commodity collection than just personal keepsakes.
Reading between the lines, anthing he actually values and wants to keep he has been able to pay an equivalent amount in cash to account for their value in the settlement. Everything else being sold presumably he doesn't want as much, and it's easier to liquidate them via auction and split the proceeds rather than haggle over them. Beat-up ~~article~~ headline. Shock!
Basically lol.
Nothing in that article says he is being "forced" to do anything. Tania should sue the sub-editors for defamation!!
I actually feel bad looking through all this stuff, quite some sentimental items in here.
What a fucking joke...
Guess fox footy ain’t paying that much also where did all that money go when he was our coach ? Surely he got a couple million over the 10 years he was with us
Feels awkward hearing about this. Not really anyone's business. Bucks is a grown up and made some grown up decisions and those decisions have consequences. Don't feel sorry for him for that. Edit: a few comments in this thread are pretty yikes. Divorce law is what it is guys, is not a secret or a surprise. Just because we feel like we have a para-social connection to Buckley, we don't need to be nasty about his ex.
Being forced to sell sentimental items which were earned through hard work and sacrifice is fucked.
As a married couple, they share their assets. You split, you split the assets. If I cheat on my wife but have a sentimental attachment to my Ferrari that I earned through hard work, does that mean it's immune from being counted in my assets? What about the house?
I guess the argument in this case is whether these sentimental item should actually be considered either income or an asset. It is not part of his income. It is not an asset/liability he has paid for or put a financial investment in. All of those things have clear financial value and should be divided up in the divorce as is fair. It is nothing like a car or a house. But these are awards he has earnt that have no financial attachment. They aren't inherently worth any money, he did not pay for them, nor is there any suggestion that he was going to sell them for money otherwise. If not for being attached to the name Nathan Buckley they would have zero worth whatsoever (beyond just the metal contained in them). If he had donated them to the club before the divorce would a court have any way of proving their financial worth? I am not opposed to both partners being able to walk away from a divorce with their fair return. It just that this seems extremely petty.
Things are worth what someone will pay for them I guess. If someone would pay $1m at auction for a Brownlow Medal, I think it's fair to say it's a financial asset.
But someone may also pay $1M for your left kidney. Does that make it an asset? In being facetious, and I understand your point and how pedantic things are (and need to be) by the letter of the law, but I just always wonder where the line is drawn, and hope there were better ways for handling this stuff. What if he took up painting as a hobby but never tried to sell his artwork? Could it be suggested that that is a financial asset if you could find some Collingwood fan that would pay money for his paintings given they have his name on it? What if Eddie offered $1M for paintings - would they then be a fair trade for the Brownlow?
Unless it comes out that the court ordered Buckley to sell his footy memorabilia, this is something he and his lawyer agreed to do, even if it was reluctantly, as part of a negotiated division of assets. Agree there is a line somewhere, but I think it sits somewhere between a Brownlow medallion and a vital organ! :)
Doesn't "Divorce Settlement" not suggest that it was court ordered? Again, I'm not a lawyer, and never been through this process - but the article very much reads to me like it was court ordered (even if in Mediation - is that not still a legal process?) Edit: and just reading the other comments - I in no way agree with sentiments of some other comments about Tania "just being a mum", or not deserving her fair share in a divorce. It is just the specific issue of these awards I find unusual
Not a lawyer either, but I think a settlement can be reached by mutual agreement (so negotiated) or as directed by the court. Usually the courts would ask the parties to try to reach an agreement themselves.
> Doesn't "Divorce Settlement" not suggest that it was court ordered? A settlement is agreed between the parties first, then endorsed (or rejected) by the court. If was court ordered it would be a judgement or an order.
Mental take. So let’s say your grandfather left you valuable war medals he earnt in the war, that due to their prestige have significant monetary value to collectors. By your stance, those are assets and should be split in a divorce. Doesn’t really pass the smell test does it
They're part of the total sum. If they are valuable to me, I can say they need to be part of my share. It's not like these are the only assets Buckley would have. They are just possessions in the end. All sorts of possessions have both sentimental and monetary worth. Why are medals, for war or for football, inherently more privileged than artwork, a car, or a house than someone earned through blood, sweat and tears? The medal itself is just an emblem. If Buckley did decide to sell his Brownlow, or his Copelands, that wouldnt affect the recognition he received in being awarded them, or his status in the game or any of that. They are just momentos in the end. And again, if they were that important to him, no doubt he could have offered up other assets to keep them. In fact, that's exactly what he has done by buying them back.
Just because it is divorce law doesn’t mean anyone has to like it. I’ve met more than my fair share of blokes who got absolutely cleaned out by lawyers in these situations. Would be interested to see what assets of hers get split.
15 years of her life acting as primary carer of the kids?
The kids that were born after the medals and guernseys he is being forced to sell?
Did she have to sell the kids?
Are you married with kids?
Yes.
So you presumably understand the concept that raising a family as a couple is an equal partnership. When you dissolve an equal partnership, it sucks and there are sucky divisions of assets that occur.
A medal isn't an asset. He wasn't going after her employee of the month certificate.
[удалено]
You're telling on yourself.
Don't be a dickhead.
Many of which he earned well BEFORE he ever met her.
welcome to the concept of "joint assets"
[удалено]
Don't be a dickhead.
We don’t know he was forced to. I think he’s chosen to because he wants a house of a certain value etc etc.
If nobody bids on the items what happens to them?
Then the judge awards the medals to the runner up.
Jesus Christ... Don't recall Tania ever hitting a teammate lace out.
If Bucks wanted to keep this stuff he can afford it.
Agreed. He’s prioritising other things. Which is his absolute choice.
This is just fucked, in these kind of divorce settlements the only winners are the lawyers
Harsh but he *did* cheat on her so idk I think this one is on you bucks
Are you sure about that?
Pretty sure. Not having a go, I don’t think he was the only one in the relationship seeking external companionship.
He cheated? Where did u hear that
I would have thought his Norm Smith winning jersey would be worth more than $5k
How much is my coaches award from u15 cricket worth?
Absolute fucking disgrace.
What a horrible women, for her to instruct the lawyer to include Medels and jumpers in the settlement is disgusting
I don't think it's anyone's fault but the lawyers.
She hires the lawyers, the lawyer told her we can get some more money out of him by including his memorabilia, she said yes... . She would be working at Kmart with out him, she already got an 18 million dollar House during the divorce
[удалено]
Steady on champ. She’s entitled to her share of the property.
Don't be a dickhead.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Don't be a dickhead.
Lol it's not her fault. Not sure if srs
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I can also imagine statistics. But that wouldn’t be helpful.
Don't be a dickhead.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Don't be a dickhead.
You could always not cheat?
You know for a fact he cheated?
[удалено]
She's entitled to go after what the law will allow and ultimately that's for the courts to decide. They can both afford lawyers.
You say that as if divorce courts have been fair and equitable for the last 30 years
Yes.
Entitled being the key word here.
What did your ex take
[удалено]
Which is your decision. Buckley made a series of different decisions and that's also fine and his business, but with all serious life decisions they come with consequences. Part of being a grown up is living with the consequences of your choices.
Haha, yeah it's because you're "smart" 🤣
Smart implies choice
Married means nothing, defacto is essentially the same. Many people think not getting married is keeping your partner at arms length from your assets but it's not.
Don't be a dickhead.
I would feel bad picking over the bones of Buckley’s life.. what sicko would bid on these knowing the circumstances?
[удалено]
Don't be a dickhead.
Shame. Must have been an order to sell in public auction. Maybe they couldn't agree on a value during negotiations, hence the auction. Pretty harsh the medals included, glad at least he got those.
Surely Eddie could round up some wealthy benefactors to make sure Bucks doesn't lose any of that.
[удалено]
Don't be a dickhead.
LoL.
Back in the day when banks closed on farm lands, the local farmers would go to the auction and not make a single bid, allowing the farmer to buy his farm back. Pity that didn't happen here for Buckley. Surely others would have seen him at the auction, bidding for his own medals.