ADELAIDE reckons Carlton’s demands for Bryce Gibbs were “unreasonable.’’ The Blues say that Adelaide’s offer proved that he was worth more to Carlton than the Crows.

This is what happens when a deal — or marriage — collapses. The parties blame one another. But even if Carlton’s asking price — two first round picks — was exorbitant, the Blues were quite entitled to take a hard line in negotiations.

Gibbs could not be traded for a “fair’’ price, for two reasons. One is that he was contracted, not simply for a season (which would make him a free agent), but for three years.

The price for a contracted player is greater than if he is out of contract. Ask Tom Boyd and the Bulldogs.

Finals Week 1

Second, and more crucially, removing Gibbs would very likely send the Blues backwards in 2017, bearing in mind that their midfield is already dangerously thin.

LISTEN TO THE LATEST FOX FOOTY PODCAST BELOW, OR TAP HERE TO SUBSCRIBE IN ITUNES

Whether they recognised it or not, the Crows were, in effect, asking Carlton to accept a “reasonable’’ deal that would probably see them win fewer games next year.

Trading Gibbs, thus, was a far greater step than it would be for many other clubs. Alastair Clarkson’s resume allows him to do all manner of things — chuck out Sam Mitchell and Jordan Lewis, give up a generation of draft picks and treat the media with disdain. But Brendon Bolton, despite his excellence in 2016, isn’t in a position to lose one of his top three players, without gaining an over-the-odds return.

Bryce Gibbs is staying at Carlton in 2017. Picture: Wayne Ludbey Source: News Corp Australia

If the Blues fell back to the bottom next year and lost significant ground, the coach’s honeymoon would be shorter than Malcolm Turnbull’s. He also happens to coach Carlton, which is not noted for patience and has a legion of supporters who, while conditioned to the un-Carlton concept of a rebuilding program, want improvement, not regression.

Trading Gibbs had the potential to destabilise the Blues and, in this sense, it would be opposite to Brisbane’s position on Tom Rockliff, who became Australia’s most unwanted footballer.

The Lions were prepared to pay some of his salary and accept very modest offers. None came.

If you believe Carlton insiders, the best offer they received for Gibbs was Adelaide’s first pick (no 13) and the Crows’ future second rounder, but with the Blues sending back their future third rounder. Adelaide sources have not confirmed that the Crows wanted a third rounder back.

REPORT CARD: WE RATE EVERY CLUB’S TRADE PERIOD

The last offer by Adelaide before the siren sounded on the trading circus was pick 13, a future third rounder and Jake Kelly, the son of Collingwood premiership player and influential player agent Craig ‘Ned’ Kelly.

In refusing these offers, the Blues made candid admissions about their playing list and their prospects for 2017. Their view was that gaining the Adelaide future second rounder, with a future third rounder coming back, might not amount to much more than pick 13.

Let’s assume that the Carlton version of the best offer is accurate. If Gibbs left and they went backwards, that future third round choice wouldn’t necessarily be far ahead of the Adelaide future second pick — if Carlton finishes 17th and the Crows are 2nd, they’d be getting 13 this year and swapping say, pick 38 for pick 41 in 2017.

Zach Tuohy is off to Geelong. Picture: George Salpigtidis Source: News Corp Australia

The other factor to consider in this non-deal is that the Blues had managed to trade out Zach Tuohy for what was a pretty high return — Geelong’s future first round pick, which travelled up and down the eastern seaboard like an Irish backpacker and ended up at Tigerland (where most good picks die).

By the time the Gibbs deal was nearing deadline, the Blues had a) gained a good pick for Tuohy, b) lost a mature player of worth in Tuohy, and c) were getting Caleb Marchbank and various steak knives from GWS. Collectively, these acquisitions and subtractions reduced the attraction of trading the unlucky Gibbs.

What was a fair trade, considering Carlton’s overall position and the potential for self-harm?

I’d have accepted pick 13 and a second rounder — future makes this harder to predict — inside 30.

We mightn’t heard the last of the Gibbs dealings, given that he wanted to go home for family reasons. The Crows, doubtless, will consider a second crack at him. The Blues will know, too, that Gibbs’ value will only reduce over the next 12 months, but by that stage, they might be better placed to give up one of their top three players.

Carlton’s stand, written and authorised by Stephen Silvagni, was justified. Likewise, Adelaide’s unwillingness to give up two first rounders was sensible. The clubs had such different positions that it makes you wonder why they bothered negotiating.

The other 16 clubs will be quietly pleased that the Gibbs deal fell over. We keep hearing that “contracts are meaningless,’’ as Scott Pendlebury asserted, and that “players are dictating where they go.’’ Well, this contract had some teeth.

And Gibbs, who jumped on a plane and headed overseas, is left wearing — and feeling — Blue.