Jared Rivers - New Assistant coach (Defence)

Remove this Banner Ad

Could the decision by the club come down to money?

Traditionally line coaches have been on significantly more cashola than development coaches. Perhaps we cut ties with Rivers because it meant we could afford 2 other coaches instead of one?
Potentially but why not get rid of non coaching staff instead like an extra physio or 2 or an extra media staff, or other random staff to save money
 

Log in to remove this ad.

You would think Rhyce has done a bit of assistant coaching in defense as a part of his apprenticeship, if it was a toss up between Patch, Scotland, and Rivers, the right choice was made, (imo).

Rivers said he thinks Rhyce is making the defensive line his own responsibility given the fact he was defensive line coach in Sydney and has plenty of experience. That was Jared’s theory on why his position had been made reduntant anyway.
 
Rivers said he thinks Rhyce is making the defensive line his own responsibility given the fact he was defensive line coach in Sydney and has plenty of experience. That was Jared’s theory on why his position had been made reduntant anyway.

Makes perfect sense to make a role redundant if you have those skills elsewhere. Rational decisions and not emotional decisions are required.
 
Rivers said he thinks Rhyce is making the defensive line his own responsibility given the fact he was defensive line coach in Sydney and has plenty of experience. That was Jared’s theory on why his position had been made reduntant anyway.
He’s had six months to make an impression, don’t mean to sound harsh but we obviously think he’s replaceable.

him airing his grievances via sen, probably means we made the right call.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

They just said on AFL360 that because we've made him redundant, we now can't fill that role of defensive coach again for 2 years by law. Real concerning.
The role might be redundant as they say, but HR departments exist to get around these things by creating or exploiting loopholes and this would not even present the slightest concern to them. They do it every day in every industry.
 
They just said on AFL360 that because we've made him redundant, we now can't fill that role of defensive coach again for 2 years by law. Real concerning.
The universities have a similar problem I think which is what some of the tension is between staff asking for redundancies vs the uni trying to trim fat- they can’t replace the redundancies so they want to control which position vanishes.
 
They just said on AFL360 that because we've made him redundant, we now can't fill that role of defensive coach again for 2 years by law. Real concerning.

He had a contract for 2 years. We're almost half way through the 1st. So basically we can't put on another coach next season.

Given the soft cap is going to reduce, this shouldn't be a problem.
 
They just said on AFL360 that because we've made him redundant, we now can't fill that role of defensive coach again for 2 years by law. Real concerning.
The fact that it is deemed a redundancy is actually a big tax benefit to Rivers - a Termination Separation Package (TSP) (which only applies to bona fide redundancies, ie where the position is 'abolished') has substantial tax concessions on the pay out, which wouldn't apply if we just 'let him go'.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top