Traded #30: Patrick Ryder - Returns to the club as Indigenous Player Development Manager

Remove this Banner Ad

Ryder can walk out the door and i doubt the AFL is gonna stand in his way after the attitude of the EFC over the past 2 years, it would take a miracle for the grievance tribunal to go against his wishes.
You may get nothing at all for him yet either.It's such a odd situation.

Oh good.

These guys are here.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ryder can walk out the door and i doubt the AFL is gonna stand in his way after the attitude of the EFC over the past 2 years, it would take a miracle for the grievance tribunal to go against his wishes.
What attitude of the EFC?
 
You may get nothing at all for him yet either.It's such a odd situation.

Oh yeah, that "clause".

54079-Dr-Evil-air-quotes-lasers-gif-A6nY.gif
 
great so now we have to deal with a steady stream of Port flogs this time telling us how we have to accept their stale chips or lose him for nothing?
It's fun isn't it? * I can't wait for an answer to this, one way or the other. Actually, that last sentence sounds very familiar...
 
Ryder can walk out the door and i doubt the AFL is gonna stand in his way after the attitude of the EFC over the past 2 years, it would take a miracle for the grievance tribunal to go against his wishes.

You may get nothing at all for him yet either.It's such a odd situation.

Could be because your club said that if any player wanted to leave because of the supplements program they wouldn't stand in their way.

upload_2014-9-17_14-57-52.jpeg
 
Check our trade history, that's what you'll be dealing with dealing with Port Adelaide, we won't split the group up
Then you shouldn't get Ryder. We should be stubborn in this situation. It's more than just about Paddy's welfare. There's no reason that we can't provide the personal support he needs especially amongst his mates at the club who seem to respect him. If we let him go for peanuts however, it destroys the integrity of contractual agreements, opens a precedent for other players to take advantage of our generous nature, sets us back in pursuit of a flag, and frays the fabric of our club. He is CONTRACTED. You'll give us what we want or you don't get him.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Richmond fans fell back in love with Martin pretty quickly. The fences can be mended very easily. I think the current circus says much less about Ryder and much more about where the game is going in general.

We are going to see a lot more contracted players (from all clubs) playing the field in coming years.
Fair enough if a player is coming out of contract, or if a contracted player tries to renegotiate in the silly season. But bringing this s**t up in the season whilst contracted? I want this mentally weak ***** out the club.
 
* me, how can so called media get it so wrong

"The 26-year-old is considering activating a clause which allows him to break his contract due to health fears from Essendon's 2012 supplements program."

He can't ******* activate a clause. He can ask to go the greviance tribunal which consists of independent arbiters chosen by the AFLPA and ask that it be considered by them, but he can't "activate" s**t
 
Yeah that post is a shocker.

Sorry to repeat others here, but if you're chasing a player that's in the top 6 best players at their current club, and he's contracted for a further two years, you're gonna have to cough up more than a player in the 26-30 range of the pecking order.

It has to be a player within the top 10, or a very high draft pick and a player in the top 10-15.
For example if I were Essendon, I'd be asking for one of:

- Harlett
- Trengove
- Wines
- Gray

or:

- Top 10 pick + one of Broadbent, Westhoff, Neade, Pittard, Lobbe, Moore
 
im not really interested in Ryder anyway, but at the end of the day if he wants to walk i think the club will pretty much take what they get from any club in the trade period to avoid him going the the grievance tribunal, i think the AFL would be encouraging Essendon to make a trade or risk loosing him for nothing

Two lies in the first line.

Off you go.
 
Do people still think that the judge is handing down a guilty/not guilty verdict on the 'saga'? Have they not been listening?

No, that's the problem, they have been listening to the media.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top