PDA

View Full Version : The Rama Dilemma


Philzsay
31 Aug 2006, 10:57
What to do with Rama hey? I hope he does make it back and play AFL footy again at a reasonable level. Personally I would roll the dice, delist him and if he is able to play again gamble that noone else would dare recruit him. Considering he will be starting to move from his mid 20's to late 20's by the time he could seriously play AFL quality footy again I think this is a reasonable option to take.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,20311486%255E20322,00.html

Dons look at ways to keep Rama
31 August 2006 Herald-Sun
Rebecca Williams

ESSENDON has begun to investigate ways it can keep a place on its list for Adam Ramanauskas if his medical condition prevents him from playing next year.

Bombers chief executive Peter Jackson revealed yesterday he had consulted the AFL and there were no rules allowing Ramanauskas to retain ties with the club if he could not be listed for medical reasons.

Ramanauskas's career was put on hold in February after it was discovered the cancer in his neck had returned.

The 25-year-old is out of contract at the end of the season.

While Jackson said it was premature to speculate on his future, re-drafting Ramanauskas for 2008 was an option if he could not be listed next year.

"I've had an unofficial conversation (with the AFL) and there is no rules that allow us to keep him as our player if he's not on a list for medical reasons," Jackson said. "If his medical condition prevents him playing in 2007, and I don't know the answer to that yet, and he recovers sufficiently to be on the list in 2008, we would like to achieve that.

"There's probably only two ways that can be done. One is that we re-draft him.

"Hopefully if that had to happen, all other clubs would be sympathetic and not jump in, and allow us to take him under the draft process. I can't imagine the other 15 clubs not doing that."

Jackson said the other option was to seek a special exemption from the AFL commission, as Melbourne did after the death of tsunami victim Troy Broadbridge.

The Demons were granted permission to add Shannon Motlop to their list to replace Broadbridge.

"The only other option I suppose is to write a letter to the commission and claim it as a special circumstance, a bit like what Melbourne did with the Troy Broadbridge case where they were allowed to have an extra player that season," Jackson said.

Jackson would not comment on the midfielder's treatment, but said the Bombers would be thrilled if he was able to continue his playing career with the club.

"It's a private matter for him," Jackson said.

"I'm not making judgments about 2007.

"But if he's not on (the list) in 2007, the question becomes how do you get him back in 2008?

"There is still a good likelihood that this treatment will work and he'll recover and be strong enough to come onto the list in 2008. That's what we'd hope for."

Pevers-Legend
31 Aug 2006, 11:16
I hope the AFL comes to the party on this one. If not, I hope the spirit of the game and the 15 other clubs come to party.

really, everyone just wants this story to have a happy ending.

heres hoping.:thumbsu:

Longy413
31 Aug 2006, 11:17
Summed it up beautifully Pevers.

DaSawx
31 Aug 2006, 11:29
Surely all 15 clubs would dare not draft him if he askem them too

Pevers-Legend
31 Aug 2006, 11:34
Surely all 15 clubs would dare not draft him if he askem them too
Would that not be draft tampering - ala Brett Chalmers to the Pies?

DaSawx
31 Aug 2006, 11:38
Would that not be draft tampering - ala Brett Chalmers to the Pies?

I guess it could be, but everyone knows what he has been through and that he loves EFC

Nuts4Bolts
31 Aug 2006, 11:47
Hypothetical, Mark Riccuto is a 25 and not 32. He is stricken with a bad case of Ross River Fever as is told he's 2 years out of the game, maybe more. Does he get the same traetment as we hope Ramma will?

DaSawx
31 Aug 2006, 11:54
Hypothetical, Mark Riccuto is a 25 and not 32. He is stricken with a bad case of Ross River Fever as is told he's 2 years out of the game, maybe more. Does he get the same traetment as we hope Ramma will?

wouldn't bother me if he did

Philzsay
31 Aug 2006, 11:59
I have been thinking about this for a while (ie last 10 minutes) and I think the AFL should introduce a new rule or list called the "Long Term Injured List" or something to that effect.

Clubs would be able to put players on that list who would not play for the next year, and their spot would not count on any of the senior, rookie or veterans list. The idea would be to help clubs keep players like Rama or mainly for cases of knee recontructions for example Trent Hentschall who will miss all of next year.

Would have to work on how to stop it from being misused but I am sure that could be sorted out easily enough.

go_the_bombers
31 Aug 2006, 12:40
Surely all 15 clubs would dare not draft him if he askem them too

You would think they wouldnt

FootyGuru
31 Aug 2006, 12:45
could rama reject being drafted by these clubs come 2008???

Karlostj
31 Aug 2006, 12:46
Hypothetical, Mark Riccuto is a 25 and not 32. He is stricken with a bad case of Ross River Fever as is told he's 2 years out of the game, maybe more. Does he get the same traetment as we hope Ramma will?

If you want a scenario for Adelaide - how about Trent Henschell...

They say that he won't be back until 2008... Does that mean Adelaide can delist him and then redraft him in 2008 and have all clubs stand back and not draft him...?


Its a tough one for the AFL here, Rama's illness is obviously not footy related so perhaps there are grounds for some degree of latitude here....

Nuts4Bolts
31 Aug 2006, 13:59
If you want a scenario for Adelaide - how about Trent Henschell...

They say that he won't be back until 2008... Does that mean Adelaide can delist him and then redraft him in 2008 and have all clubs stand back and not draft him...?


Its a tough one for the AFL here, Rama's illness is obviously not footy related so perhaps there are grounds for some degree of latitude here....

I think that's the difference. If it's footy related then tough luck. But if it's and ilness such as cancer, ross river fever, depression or chronic fatigue then it's a bit more murky.

Crave
31 Aug 2006, 15:03
Never know with the AFL...occasionally they take the "Gestapo stance' and put their foot down. Id say there would be severe public backlash from all supporters if they didnt make some sort of concession. Then again, Ive heard some supporters mention that we shouldnt receive any preferential treatment.
For one spot, Id say just keep him on and promote a rookie in his place...he still deserves senior status as far as im concerned :thumbsu:

Longy413
31 Aug 2006, 15:06
Never know with the AFL...occasionally they take the "Gestapo stance' and put their foot down.

Ala the yellow armband situation.

Which the AFL did a complete turn around on by allowing Geelong and Melbourne to wear different coloured shoelaces as a showing of support to charity.

Crave
31 Aug 2006, 15:12
Ala the yellow armband situation.

Which the AFL did a complete turn around on by allowing Geelong and Melbourne to wear different coloured shoelaces as a showing of support to charity.


Exactly! Id like to think common sense will prevail this time round.

zafa23
31 Aug 2006, 18:32
Ala the yellow armband situation.

Which the AFL did a complete turn around on by allowing Geelong and Melbourne to wear different coloured shoelaces as a showing of support to charity.Wouldn't say it was a complete turn around as they allow players to wear shoes of any colour and the shoelaces are just part of the shoe. So its understandable why they'd allow shoelaces and not armbands. Having said that, I still don't understand why they didn't approve of the armbands in the first place.

Longy413
31 Aug 2006, 19:05
Wouldn't say it was a complete turn around as they allow players to wear shoes of any colour and the shoelaces are just part of the shoe. So its understandable why they'd allow shoelaces and not armbands. Having said that, I still don't understand why they didn't approve of the armbands in the first place.

It wasn't the armbands the didn't allow as such, it was the reasoning behind it.

They didn't allow it because they didn't want to create a precedent and therefore having charity requests every single week.

zafa23
31 Aug 2006, 19:21
Well in that case, it is a complete turnaround.

Darealrath
31 Aug 2006, 20:48
I doubt the AFL will give us special consideration because they'll be too worried about setting a precedent. Would love to be wrong though.

One of my dreams to see this bloke play for us again, not just from a selfish supporter p.o.v, but because it'll mean he's recovered from that god awful illness.