CARLTON is making all the right noises when it comes to a future involving Matthew Kreuzer.

Oh yes, we want to keep him. Oh yes, we've offered him a contract. Oh, we do want him to be our ruckman next year and beyond.

The Blues' commitment to him, though, is conditional. And their position on this is both understandable and justified.

At fault is not their dedication to the still-young man they recruited eight years ago, but the AFL's clumsy decision to attach compensation to departed players when it introduced free agency in 2012.

Time for a change: Callum Twomey's view

Free agency, AFL style, is a shambles on so many levels.

It actually encourages low-ranked clubs to off-load big-name players. It hinders and ultimately stalls the workings of the trade period, as a club that has a free agent depart will not risk mitigating its compensation package by attracting another free agent onto its books.

Basically, if Carlton is told it will be given a draft pick immediately after its first selection should Kreuzer leave as a free agent, then Kreuzer will not be a Blue in 2016.

If they are told the compensation in the event of him leaving as a free agent is a pick at the end of the first round, then he probably stays.

As nearly always with the AFL, there is wriggle room within its free agency "rules". And right now on this matter, the AFL doesn't know which way to wriggle.

When Melbourne requested a compensation draft pick last year because of poor form, it was rejected by the AFL. But it then suited the AFL to provide the Demons with draft pick No.3 for the exiting free agent James Frawley.

But there are complications in granting such lucrative compensation in 2015.

The Brisbane Lions are as dire a patient in the AFL club hospital as Carlton, which means the AFL knows it cannot "gift" the Blues draft pick No.2 for Kreuzer.

Doing so would allow Carlton to take key position players Jacob Weitering and Josh Schache with picks one and two.

Even if the Lions were to receive the same style of compensation for losing their free agent Matthew Leuenberger, in the event of the Blues' receiving pick two for the Kreuzer loss the Lions would get access only to picks three and four.

It wouldn't be beyond the two clubs to conspire for the Blues to take only Weitering and not Schache as well. Given the fact that gun deal-makers Stephen Silvagni and Greg Swann are in charge of what will happen, that could easily occur.

But that would reek of draft manipulation, an even greater controversy, no matter the spin that would follow.

This is not the first time we have railed against the AFL's free agency rules.

Prominent player manager Marty Pask first alerted us to its pitfalls on the very first day of the introduction of free agency in 2012, and we then witnessed a stalled three weeks of clubs negotiating trades.

"Giving clubs compensation for losing a free agent goes against what free agency represents," Pask said in 2012.

"Clubs are waiting for their compensation picks. They won't do anything which compromises what that pick might be."

Pask has always argued that clubs that lose free agents need to be incentivised to get back into the exchange market, if not immediately then the very next free agency period, and not simply stockpile lucrative draft picks.

Free agency in its purest and best form does not provide compensation.

In providing compensation, the AFL has actually and actively contributed to making the powerful clubs more powerful.

Remember, the powerful clubs pay exactly the same salary cap dollars as the weaker clubs. There is no economical justification for the powerful clubs to be the ones sourcing the best free agents.

Due to the compensation packages on offer in the AFL free agency system, it has become all too easy for the weaker clubs to sit back and lose the big-name free agents to the stronger clubs.

Free agency compensation has actually exacerbated the great divide between strong and weak clubs.

After this year, the AFL must remove compensation for a loss of a free agent. Just come out and say that it got it horribly wrong.

Twitter: @barrettdamian