Past #25: Robbie Tarrant - traded to RFC for CCJ&picks - 2yr deal at RFC - 174 NM games/44 NM goals - retires 13/7/23 effective immediately

Remove this Banner Ad

It’s probably just as simple as he wanted 2 years we offered 1, his management got offered 2 by Richmond and he agreed then we offered 2 but he’d already said yes to Richmond’s offer and stuck to his word.

I reckon you're probably close here.

IMO there's a middle ground to be walked between handing contracts out like candy to blokes and bordering on disrespectful negotiation, causing undue stress and anxiety about playing futures. I'm not so sure we're walking that middle ground.* Many would also have vivid memories of what happened with Brown and even some other guys last year. For a few it may be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

*Complete speculation.
 
Anyone else reckon the club statement was just the slightest bit... off?

It reads fine but something about it feels strange.
yeah I thought that too. "he will not accept the two-year offer put forward by the club" is not quite the usual "has informed the club that he intends to explore Free agency". They want to make sure the members know.
 
Anyone else reckon the club statement was just the slightest bit... off?

It reads fine but something about it feels strange.

Just compared it to the statement when Higgins was traded to Geelong and certainly is different - probably fair enough given Higgins was an amicable trade and Tarrant walked out. Both wish Higgins and Tarrant good luck (although Higgins' extends to his family). The big difference is that Higgins was thanked for his contribution (including a tribute video) and, whilst Tarrant's contribution is noted, there's no suggestion of a thank you at all. Might be reading too much into it but it feels that there's some small level of animosity here.

Trade: Higgins departs North (nmfc.com.au)

Tarrant to depart Arden Street (nmfc.com.au)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Everyone keeps saying the Hub was a disaster for us yet no detail ever provided.

Why was it more for us than other teams:
- Tigers had a number of incidents,
- Rohan screwed over his wife,
- Buckley had some incidents.

The only thing on record for us is the wives going to a game when they weren’t allowed to, even after an AFL official signed off on it.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

The silence is deafening.
 
Well we all know that Tarrant was disgruntled and had an issue with jade Rawlings last year.

this year we’ve heard that noble isn’t happy at all with the standards and subsequently has shipped off the strength and conditioning guys,

is it any stretch to think that they’vecommunicated that the leaders need to pull their socks up and take accountability for their part in sub par standards and taz hasn’t enjoyed this being levelled on them?
 
It’s probably just as simple as he wanted 2 years we offered 1, his management got offered 2 by Richmond and he agreed then we offered 2 but he’d already said yes to Richmond’s offer and stuck to his word.
Or he was told that one more year would be his last. As the club is moving in that direction, then offered a triggered second year. I still firmly believe the second yr was triggered. Would be a job security decision.
 
ARCHER ( you goose Hoj ) Thanks SBG. Was funny while typing l was thinking " l'm missing someone "
I didn’t include archer in mine as I was referring to out and out key position.

if we were to put in medium defenders that played tall I’d have both archer and firrito before taz
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Especially if we had the same contract on the table for him kinda makes it more fishy but I guess some players just want a fresh start.
 
Everyone keeps saying the Hub was a disaster for us yet no detail ever provided.

Why was it more for us than other teams:
- Tigers had a number of incidents,
- Rohan screwed over his wife,
- Buckley had some incidents.

The only thing on record for us is the wives going to a game when they weren’t allowed to, even after an AFL official signed off on it.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Time will tell.
 
It’s probably just as simple as he wanted 2 years we offered 1, his management got offered 2 by Richmond and he agreed then we offered 2 but he’d already said yes to Richmond’s offer and stuck to his word.
I just don't reckon its that simple tbh. He wasn't happy a while ago and I suspect this provided a nice out for him. Clearly nothing to do with money or contract length if media reports are correct.
 
Not bitter just sad. Loved him as a player and I am allowed to be disappointed he is leaving. Some players go to other clubs and I barely raise an eyebrow but Robbie isn't one of them for me.
Had hoped that Jack would have relinquished the captaincy this year and that Robbie had one or two years in the role.
 
I don’t understand why you felt compelled to post this. He was clearly having a whine because we have procured a young player after days of negativity aimed at lowly old Norf taking him and tried to present us here as being negative about Tarrant which is not true, at the time of him creating the narrative the thread was as said 99% supportive of Tarrant. Sure, not everyone is the same but some of the stuff on the Tigers CCJ thread has been borderline delusional and meme worthy.
Wasn't posted in defence of any flogs on our board. Was addressing the issue in supporters as a whole. Two wrongs and all that.
 
Wasn't posted in defence of any flogs on our board. Was addressing the issue in supporters as a whole. Two wrongs and all that.

You’re alright. I’m a morning grump.
 
The silence is deafening.

I suspect it was a simple as you don't bring families on a season long boys trip. Some wives, girlfriends will get angry.

Between that and senior players might feel like they are 2nd fiddle and just some temporary leadership to the young kids and they decide its not the way they want to go to into retirement.
 
Or he was told that one more year would be his last. As the club is moving in that direction, then offered a triggered second year. I still firmly believe the second yr was triggered. Would be a job security decision.

The club won’t be shy in telling us the contract offer. They just won’t talk money
I just don't reckon its that simple tbh. He wasn't happy a while ago and I suspect this provided a nice out for him. Clearly nothing to do with money or contract length if media reports are correct.

Not to do with contract length? If we offered him 2 years to begin with then I have no doubt he would’ve stayed.
 
The club won’t be shy in telling us the contract offer. They just won’t talk money


Not to do with contract length? If we offered him 2 years to begin with then I have no doubt he would’ve stayed.
Simple negotiation I reckon. When the decision was made he reportedly had a similar offer from us. he wanted to go.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top