its a uneducated opinion don't bother me again.You realise a contract is able to be torn up if both parties agree to terms right? What part of that confuses you?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
its a uneducated opinion don't bother me again.You realise a contract is able to be torn up if both parties agree to terms right? What part of that confuses you?
Should count towards Bulldogs salary cap for remainder of contract
explain how
No, because Boyd was a trade not a FA signing.May have been asked already
Is the last 2 years part of salary cap even though not paid ?
Swans would have same issue if Buddy retires early
I understand it might be a bit emotional for you mate but the guy has only retired, not bloody died!Can you just not? No one really cares about this right now
He's already stepped away from the game once. I just think he's done with the game and doesn't enjoy playing it any more. But can see the merit in your suggestion as well.
I don't really think there's a wrong answer to the way he's handled this situation.
Would expect part of the agreement would prevent him playing AFL for any side for the next 2 years.Hang on, retire now gets delisted, the dogs all of sudden have millions in the cap to do what they want. What if he does a Mal Michael, Mummy, or J Marsh and comes back next year. If the dogs are allowed to spend like drunken sailors is criminal. Boyd's money should be factored into their salary cap for the duration of what his contract should of been or neutralized if he comes back in the foreseeable future. Somehow this is not a open and shut case, the usual suspects will be looking on with interest.
Clubs cannot. Both parties have to agree to it if the player was traded in.So clubs can now throw massive $$$ to get a player to them and then mid contract tear it up and use the money elsewhere. I thought new rules were bought in after the Buddy deal to stop this stuff. And then you add in backloaded contracts and so on. There is now way this should be allowed.
That's because Tippett didn't agree to not get paidThose final two years of his contract should count against the Bulldogs. They used that length of tenure to rip him out of a club early, they should now have to wear the consequences.
This should serve as a warning for clubs that want to dangle these uncommercial godfather style deals. They got a flag so it’s been a good investment but they should not get any relief because it’s ended early.
Pretty sure Swans had to pay Tippett against the cap beyond retirement.
No, because Boyd was a trade not a FA signing.
Is that right? Lets take a look at the responses to your statement here and see if your weight of numbers do add up:
Against...
For... *crickets.
No one is arguing he didnt play a ripper of a game, and many believe he should have been awarded the Norm smith medal but please, one of the GFs best ever? I dont think so matey. He played a great game, took 8 marks and 3 goals as a key forward (stats arent the be all and end all I know). Consider the following:
89 GF Dunstall kicked 8 and GAblett kicked 9 goals in the losing side and won the NSM.
1980 GF Kevin Bartlett Kicked 7 goals and took 9 marks from the midfield (NSM)
1992 Peter Matera kicked 5 goals from a wing (NSM) Peter Sumich also kicked 6 in the same game.
There are many more- most would agree Shueys performance in last years GF was one of the best in the AFL era.
Your numbers dont stack up, but I guess if you have been following footy for such a short time, you could be forgiven for thinking no one before 2016 had done much.
Neither has Boyd, he says as much in the article. There has been an agreement.That's because Tippett didn't agree to not get paid
GF aside - Bulldogs fans should be getting around him - to sacrifice $2m to the good of the bulldogs is a huge commitment.
Sure he didn't deliver on his multi million dollar promise - but thems the risks
Why? If he is off the list and they aren’t paying him a cent moving forward after this season, who cares?
Those final two years of his contract should count against the Bulldogs. They used that length of tenure to rip him out of a club early, they should now have to wear the consequences.
It's a mutual decision, and not without precedent.What a lot of rubbish, he was a contracted player who has not fulfilled the length of his contract. That ridiculous uncommercial deal was used to prize him out of a fledgling club. The discussions on that deal were going on for months before that trade period. They got their man, he got them a flag but now he’s gone. Tough t***ies, pay the price.
Tom and his manager Liam Pickering met with the Club this morning and reached a friendly resolution of all contractual matters. That resolution included that Tom’s payment in 2019 be reduced and that payments previously agreed for 2020 and 2021 be cancelled.
Every other club who operates under the same salary cap. This was the most talked about contract in years. A kid who had played 1 season being offered a million bucks a year and demanding a trade mid contract. You make a dud investment, you have to cop the loss.
Those final two years of his contract should count against the Bulldogs. They used that length of tenure to rip him out of a club early, they should now have to wear the consequences.
This should serve as a warning for clubs that want to dangle these uncommercial godfather style deals. They got a flag so it’s been a good investment but they should not get any relief because it’s ended early.
Pretty sure Swans had to pay Tippett against the cap beyond retirement.
What a lot of rubbish, he was a contracted player who has not fulfilled the length of his contract. That ridiculous uncommercial deal was used to prize him out of a fledgling club. The discussions on that deal were going on for months before that trade period. They got their man, he got them a flag but now he’s gone. Tough t***ies, pay the price.
So clubs can now throw massive $$$ to get a player to them and then mid contract tear it up and use the money elsewhere. I thought new rules were bought in after the Buddy deal to stop this stuff. And then you add in backloaded contracts and so on. There is now way this should be allowed.
What a lot of rubbish, he was a contracted player who has not fulfilled the length of his contract. That ridiculous uncommercial deal was used to prize him out of a fledgling club. The discussions on that deal were going on for months before that trade period. They got their man, he got them a flag but now he’s gone. Tough t***ies, pay the price.
Who is "here"? Are YOU the general consensus? The Bulldogs board? BigFooty? He had a good game, but three goals and 14 disposals isn't up there with the great GF performances.Well the general consensus here is that it was one of the best Grand Final performances ever so I guess weight of numbers is stacked against you hey?