Roast Marlion Pickett go fund me and neal balme comments

[PatrickBateman]

Yes, but the skill I cultivated is held in higher regard than the skills of other (child development, education, health). That isn't supply and demand, that is subjective decisions made about what is important.

Cultivated? Let's hear about this skill then and discuss.

Who is making this decision then? Occupation X is less important that Y? If you're going to compare government jobs with corporate, there will be discrepancies. But even within the government, supply and demand rules still apply for determining salary. This is a capitalist economy after all.

Example. Why are STEM qualifications rewarded with higher pay? Two reasons, 1 - qualifications are harder than others to obtain, 2 - there's a scarcity of those skills in the workforce. No one decides that these skills are more important that teaching or nursing, the market rewards them for being in shorter supply.

If supply and demand truly determined peoples wages, people like teachers, cleaners and child care workers would be the highest paid people in the workforce.

If there are no teachers, and child care workers, society would be far more impacted than other higher paying jobs.

There's plenty of evidence out there of oversupply re teachers, graduates not able to find placement, etc. There's a heap of supply for child care workers and cleaners, both require little to no education.

Business owners aren't stupid, they won't generally pay more for an employee than their market worth. Since the government is paying with our money, they should be doing to same, for the most part they do.

 

[La Dispute]

Richmond shouldn't have paid him a pittance at the outset.

They knew as a mature age player with a young family he'd have need more than the average project rookie fresh out of the TAC system, so why did they lowball him?

Even 100-120k would have made a massive difference at this point in time, and it still only represents less than half of his worth.

 

[B4Bear]

Richmond shouldn't have paid him a pittance at the outset.

They knew as a mature age player with a young family he'd have need more than the average project rookie fresh out of the TAC system, so why did they lowball him?

Even 100-120k would have made a massive difference at this point in time, and it still only represents less than half of his worth.

True, but separate to this.

 

[Forever North]

Sympathise with Marlion here. Every case should be treated on its merits and in this instance Marlion has fallen through the cracks so to speak given his unique circumstances. Trying to survive on his lowly current footy wage with 4 kids, rent, bills etc would be impossible as it is for thousands of others currently. He hasn’t had the opportunity to build up his wealth and bank balance so far during his very brief but spectacular footy career. Rather than trying the old school cash under the table routine he and the club are doing the right thing by going through the correct channels seeking some additional funds to get by. The guy would be stressing out and embarrassed enough without all of this playing out in the media.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Richmond shouldn't have paid him a pittance at the outset.

They knew as a mature age player with a young family he'd have need more than the average project rookie fresh out of the TAC system, so why did they lowball him?

Even 100-120k would have made a massive difference at this point in time, and it still only represents less than half of his worth.

Maybe you are right but you are also missing the point

the Pickett story is being used as a case study that would be the same for all players on the lowest pay base

the issue it’s trying to highlight is that the guys at the bottom despite sacrificing less money than the guys at the top they are sacrificing more in terms of the importance of that money due to the lower overall income

its not about just Pickett it’s about all players on rookie or low payments

 

[La Dispute]

True, but separate to this.

Hardly - the club is given their tacit approval for him to seek alternative form of employment, which he wouldn't need to do if they paid him pay closer to his market worth, rather than pay him the absolute bare minimum.

They knew his personal situation was very different to the average project rookie, and he was already on the verge of breaking into their best 22, but couldn't have given less of a *.

 

[Richard Punch]

You really want the government to determine how much each occupation is worth instead? If not, what's your alternate solution?

Again, it has nothing to do with 'people's' ideas of supply and demand, it's not an idea. It's an economic principle, which works a lot better than anything else has in the history of mankind.

I'd challenge that - pretty sure before these liberal economic principles were shoved down the throats of every colonised corner of the world humankind was actually better off..

 

[FRUMPY]

Maybe you are right but you are also missing the point

the Pickett story is being used as a case study that would be the same for all players on the lowest pay base

the issue it’s trying to highlight is that the guys at the bottom despite sacrificing less money than the guys at the top they are sacrificing more in terms of the importance of that money due to the lower overall income

its not about just Pickett it’s about all players on rookie or low payments

But this is what the AFLPA and therefore the players signed off on. It was always a dumb arrangement squarely trying to look after the highest paid.

 

[La Dispute]

Maybe you are right but you are also missing the point

the Pickett story is being used as a case study that would be the same for all players on the lowest pay base

the issue it’s trying to highlight is that the guys at the bottom despite sacrificing less money than the guys at the top they are sacrificing more in terms of the importance of that money due to the lower overall income

its not about just Pickett it’s about all players on rookie or low payments

And every rookie is valued differently - in his case he was given a dodgy contract extension despite being a much older rookie who was a few weeks away from breaking into the senior team, and who's off-field requirements were larger than most in his original pay bracket.

Regardless whether his salary was going to be halved, the Richmond FC are drastically underpaying him when they had the perfect opportunity to reward him for his effort over his first 6 months at the club.

Really dodgy list management.

 

[FRUMPY]

Sympathise with Marlion here. Every case should be treated on its merits and in this instance Marlion has fallen through the cracks so to speak given his unique circumstances. Trying to survive on his lowly current footy wage with 4 kids, rent, bills etc would be impossible as it is for thousands of others currently. He hasn’t had the opportunity to build up his wealth and bank balance so far during his very brief but spectacular footy career. Rather than trying the old school cash under the table routine he and the club are doing the right thing by going through the correct channels seeking some additional funds to get by. The guy would be stressing out and embarrassed enough without all of this playing out in the media.

How has he fallen through the cracks? Do you think rookies should get paid more based on how many kids they have or if they have kids with a disability or certain needs?

 

[cleanhands]

It’s all about how can the Richmond Football Club get a better deal for Marlion Pickett to play football at Richmond

 

[Pykie]

This has nothing to do with stingyness.

Richmond are well within their rights to give him an immediate contract extension on what he's actually worth, which would no doubt pickup the shortfall.

They aren't though are they.... have to fit Dusty and Lynch in...

The gofundme would set a dangerous precedent.

 

[Muddiemoose]

And every rookie is valued differently - in his case he was given a dodgy contract extension despite being a much older rookie who was a few weeks away from breaking into the senior team, and who's off-field requirements were larger than most in his original pay bracket.

Regardless whether his salary was going to be halved, the Richmond FC are drastically underpaying him when they had the perfect opportunity to reward him for his effort over his first 6 months at the club.

Really dodgy list management.

If you read the article it says that both Picketts manager and Richmond decided not to sign a long term deal before playing more games so a fair value could be arranged

Both parties were obviously happy with the details of his contract or he would of taken up one of the offers from a WA club that has been reported on elsewhere

this is only an issue because of covid19

 

[Thetrader15]

Maybe you are right but you are also missing the point

the Pickett story is being used as a case study that would be the same for all players on the lowest pay base

the issue it’s trying to highlight is that the guys at the bottom despite sacrificing less money than the guys at the top they are sacrificing more in terms of the importance of that money due to the lower overall income

its not about just Pickett it’s about all players on rookie or low payments

Perhaps the AFLPA should have though about this for their members - they are the ones who negotiated the deal.

It should have been easy. Anyone of base salary keeps it, then those at the top (like the AFLPA President and Pickett's mate Dusty) make up for it.

There is enough money there, it's just the top end of town who don't want to help out their 'mates'.

 

[Thetrader15]

Sympathise with Marlion here. Every case should be treated on its merits and in this instance Marlion has fallen through the cracks so to speak given his unique circumstances. Trying to survive on his lowly current footy wage with 4 kids, rent, bills etc would be impossible as it is for thousands of others currently. He hasn’t had the opportunity to build up his wealth and bank balance so far during his very brief but spectacular footy career. Rather than trying the old school cash under the table routine he and the club are doing the right thing by going through the correct channels seeking some additional funds to get by. The guy would be stressing out and embarrassed enough without all of this playing out in the media.

Sure it'll be tough, but isn't it only for 2 moths that they get 50% pay?

 

[PatrickBateman]

I'd challenge that - pretty sure before these liberal economic principles were shoved down the throats of every colonised corner of the world humankind was actually better off..

Sure, those nations today who don't operate under a capitalist economic model are doing just fine...

 

[Muddiemoose]

Perhaps the AFLPA should have though about this for their members - they are the ones who negotiated the deal.

It should have been easy. Anyone of base salary keeps it, then those at the top (like the AFLPA President and Pickett's mate Dusty) make up for it.

There is enough money there, it's just the top end of town who don't want to help out their 'mates'.

I agree 100% people are getting too caught up in Pickett and missing the point

It’s the AFLPA’s oversight and the fact it was agreed to by a majority of players without thinking about the impact on everyone

 

[Forever North]

How has he fallen through the cracks? Do you think rookies should get paid more based on how many kids they have or if they have kids with a disability or certain needs?

Can he go out and get another job stacking shelves, holding up lollipop signs etc like for instance some hard-up airline pilots have?
Can he access family tax benefit, rent assistance or any other type of welfare payment from the government currently? (I’m not too sure how the system works here)

The guys situation is unique, he can’t go out and get another job and earn some cash in the real world as he is not allowed to by the AFL. If there is any way without breaking the rules of getting any additional money from his club then of course he should be allowed to pursue it. I think his case is legit unlike the many bullshit cases, conflicts, scandals, dodgy deals that the AFL ignore or sweep under the carpet.

 

[Richard Punch]

Sure, those nations today who don't operate under a capitalist economic model are doing just fine...

Correct - and I'm guessing you can't understand the tragic irony of your statement

 

[FRUMPY]

Can he go out and get another job stacking shelves, holding up lollipop signs etc like for instance some hard-up airline pilots have?
Can he access family tax benefit, rent assistance or any other type of welfare payment from the government currently? (I’m not too sure how the system works here)

The guys situation is unique, he can’t go out and get another job and earn some cash in the real world as he is not allowed to by the AFL. If there is any way without breaking the rules of getting any additional money from his club then of course he should be allowed to pursue it. I think his case is legit unlike the many bullshit cases, conflicts, scandals, dodgy deals that the AFL ignore or sweep under the carpet.

Why cant he get another job - maybe working from home or his missus go and get a job. Now his income is low, he could/would/should be getting family tax benefits payments from the government etc. He could draw down $10,000 of his Super under the Covid-19 laws etc....

 

[PatrickBateman]

Correct - and I'm guessing you can't understand the tragic irony of your statement

No, you missed the sarcasm.

 

[Richard Punch]

No, you missed the sarcasm.

Trump-like. Tally ho old chap.

 

[La Dispute]

If you read the article it says that both Picketts manager and Richmond decided not to sign a long term deal before playing more games so a fair value could be arranged

Both parties were obviously happy with the details of his contract or he would of taken up one of the offers from a WA club that has been reported on elsewhere

this is only an issue because of covid19

That's incredibly convenient and blase of Richmond's management team - they knew he'd be happy playing for 60k per year if he got opportunity at AFL level, and there's little point relocating the family again back after 6 months.

Minimum compliance standards for a guy who'd done everything right since crossing over is very poor.

 

[Muddiemoose]

That's incredibly convenient and blase of Richmond's management team - they knew he'd be happy playing for 60k per year if he got opportunity at AFL level, and there's little point relocating the family again back after 6 months.

Minimum compliance standards for a guy who'd done everything right since crossing over is very poor.

It is what it is
To get to the top teams need to make the most of the TPP cap
Picketts base wage is low but it’s also propped up by bonus’s and match payments that could of seen him earning well over 150k for the season

Like I said a couple of times the issue isn’t Picketts contract pre covid it’s the fact that because of the situation of covid has slashed all players contracts in half regardless of individual circumstances

If Pickett was getting paid more on his contract it wouldn’t change the problem that the guys are the bottom are getting shafted they just would of used a different player as an example to show it

 

[Muddiemoose]

and it was their top end team mates who shafted them by agreeing to the deal.

Players can do a GoFund Me, but if there is any advertising or attention brought about by the club or players, it needs to go into the salary cap IMO.

Otherwise, we could theoretically have Muce Brathieson setting up a GoFundMe page for Chris Judd and getting Prob Batt donating $300k to it

I haven’t seen any confirmation but I don’t think he will be allowed to accept any payments from the go fund me
(I definitely think that is the correct decision)
It opens up to many possibilities for the cap to be exploited