Game Day PF2 Tigers won the Greatest Prelim in History|| Non North GD Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Passmore said:
He went at the man who had his head over the ball and got him high. Maybe not a suspension, but definitely worth a fine. And a fine means he's ******.

Rules are rules and he should miss. He made a bad split second decision. If they win Hardwick can call him onto the stage and give him his medal.
Click to expand...
It's 3 "minor" indiscretions in the year.

Deserves to go. Would have probably been suspended 2 times previously in past years.
 
Tas said:
He is the only one who created the circus by putting off re-signing and entertaining other offers and visiting other clubs on the eve of finals, I am sure he likes to remain at Richmond but if we had put down $2m a year, he would be in blue and white next year, Richmond getting closer to our offer is the only reason he stayed. He made a small sacrifice, but to get $1.3m out of his club that said they could only afford $850k. Someone else, or likely several players, will end up paying that price.

Paying a Martin or Kelly a huge wad of cash probably wasn't going to hurt us because we have a lot of space at present and we could shove half our senior list off a cliff and we probably wouldn't play any worse, it is not easy and a bit unreasonable to expect a premium to remain when your club is in the window to challenging for flags, what message does that tell to his team mates? Many of them who would likely find it difficult to get an increase on their modest earnings by comparison.

It is going to shift a lot of pressure towards any one who is on the cusp of rising and becoming a star and Richmond would have lost all of it's wiggly room to try and keep those kind of players. I think overpaying players is a slippery slope.
Click to expand...
Bang on.

It's laughable that their supporters think they can still afford a player or two just because a few fringe players are leaving. The martin signing will cost a player or two. They are very lucky cotchin and rance took under their open market value.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

How the **** can they say he was going for the ball in that freeze frame!?

If he had his right arm extended he would have his hand on the ****ing ball!

GONE! No way out!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Groin guru said:
Bang on.

It's laughable that their supporters think they can still afford a player or two just because a few fringe players are leaving. The martin signing will cost a player or two. They are very lucky cotchin and rance took under their open market value.
Click to expand...

They might be on a good wicket, there would be a lot of younger players that aren't though. Riewoldt (28), Rance (27) and Cotchin (27) would be where a lot of their money is for 27+ age group and don't think any of them will retire soon.

Minimum salary has a base of $100k now plus $4,400 per game played, so even a minimum standard AFL player kept on the books is going to cost something like $165k if they play 15 odd games. Someone that has been there for 50-100 games will likely be on $200k+ unless they are a colossal disappointment like Conca.

If you would go through Richmond's senior list and even put down conservative earning values, given how much of the cap space will be soaked by run of the mill players, it is quite difficult for clubs to be able to afford to pay very many players excessively. There would have to be a bunch of good players already not earning a decent living and I think the bulk of the CBA increase for Richmond is going to be siphoned off to pay Martin.

It will be interesting to see what happens, it is going to be much harder to tell players coming out of contract to do their bit and take unders when they have just forked out a Nigerian Prince settlement with Martin.
 
Tas said:
He is the only one who created the circus by putting off re-signing and entertaining other offers and visiting other clubs on the eve of finals, I am sure he likes to remain at Richmond but if we had put down $2m a year, he would be in blue and white next year, Richmond getting closer to our offer is the only reason he stayed. He made a small sacrifice, but to get $1.3m out of his club that said they could only afford $850k. Someone else, or likely several players, will end up paying that price.

Paying a Martin or Kelly a huge wad of cash probably wasn't going to hurt us because we have a lot of space at present and we could shove half our senior list off a cliff and we probably wouldn't play any worse, it is not easy and a bit unreasonable to expect a premium to remain when your club is in the window to challenging for flags, what message does that tell to his team mates? Many of them who would likely find it difficult to get an increase on their modest earnings by comparison.

It is going to shift a lot of pressure towards any one who is on the cusp of rising and becoming a star and Richmond would have lost all of it's wiggly room to try and keep those kind of players. I think overpaying players is a slippery slope.
Click to expand...

Sorry to intrude but Dusty is not on 1.3m a year. I know you need to believe that but it is simply not true. We have re signed him to 1.1m a year for 7 years but we have structured the deal so he will earn most of that in the next 4 years. Our club CEO is on record backing that up. Reason we can do that is we do not have Yarrans or Lids payments next year.

We also have organised some sponsorship work with puma that the AFL has signed off on.

Anyway, im off to drink more, have a nice night :)
 
Tiger71 said:
Sorry to intrude but Dusty is not on 1.3m a year. I know you need to believe that but it is simply not true. We have re signed him to 1.1m a year for 7 years but we have structured the deal so he will earn most of that in the next 4 years. Our club CEO is on record backing that up. Reason we can do that is we do not have Yarrans or Lids payments next year.

We also have organised some sponsorship work with puma that the AFL has signed off on.

Anyway, im off to drink more, have a nice night :)
Click to expand...
Whatever makes you sleep well at night Tiger69 :)
 
Tiger71 said:
Sorry to intrude but Dusty is not on 1.3m a year. I know you need to believe that but it is simply not true. We have re signed him to 1.1m a year for 7 years but we have structured the deal so he will earn most of that in the next 4 years. Our club CEO is on record backing that up. Reason we can do that is we do not have Yarrans or Lids payments next year.

We also have organised some sponsorship work with puma that the AFL has signed off on.

Anyway, im off to drink more, have a nice night :)
Click to expand...

I just used the figure the media used when they announced he was staying, I don't know how accurate these figured bandied about are.

According to Ralphy, Richmond carried $300k of this $700k final year contract, not sure if that is accurate or not either.

According to Niall, Yarran was set to be paid around $350k for 2017 and 2018.

So Richmond has saved $650k for one year, something they would have factored into their available space already when they have been re-signing players. You would need to lose a significant amount of TPP space (and not have it replaced with incoming players like Prestia, Caddy, etc) for it to make a permanent dent. Like us when we lost 5 odd senior players and are replacing players with drafted players who are on limited contracts.
 
Tiger71 said:
Sorry to intrude but Dusty is not on 1.3m a year. I know you need to believe that but it is simply not true. We have re signed him to 1.1m a year for 7 years but we have structured the deal so he will earn most of that in the next 4 years. Our club CEO is on record backing that up. Reason we can do that is we do not have Yarrans or Lids payments next year.

We also have organised some sponsorship work with puma that the AFL has signed off on.

Anyway, im off to drink more, have a nice night :)
Click to expand...

Fair enough. It's just a disgrace that the AFL still retains the ability to tamper with the salary cap rules when it suits them, a la the Puma deal.

If it was Ben Brown being targeted by Richmond, say when they realise in 7 days time that they are a gun big forward short, I doubt that the AFL would be providing us a similar leg-up.
 
LuvtheKangas said:
Fair enough. It's just a disgrace that the AFL still retains the ability to tamper with the salary cap rules when it suits them, a la the Puma deal.

If it was Ben Brown being targeted by Richmond, say when they realise in 7 days time that they are a gun big forward short, I doubt that the AFL would be providing us a similar leg-up.
Click to expand...
Since when did the AFL believe in doing the honourable thing?

All you have to do is look at the way the AFL has handled *.
 
TheSmokingGun said:
Since when did the AFL believe in doing the honourable thing?

All you have to do is look at the way the AFL has handled *.
Click to expand...

On this, we're on the same page, mate. They are a disgrace.

The smaller clubs cop the brunt of it, though. On the other hand, Richmond success is a bonanza for the AFL.

I suspect they'll even change the interpretation of the bump rule to get Cotchin off this week. Most would agree that in pure football terms, what he did shouldn't even be looked at - it was good hard play and you want your players to do that every time. But they've created this monstrous system that means it must be examined and in the context of everything that has happened this season, the best he could possibly get is a fine. And we all know what that means in this particular case. So, it will be interesting to see the disingenuous, cynical way they manufacture the outcome.
 
Tiger71 said:
Sorry to intrude but Dusty is not on 1.3m a year. I know you need to believe that but it is simply not true. We have re signed him to 1.1m a year for 7 years but we have structured the deal so he will earn most of that in the next 4 years. Our club CEO is on record backing that up. Reason we can do that is we do not have Yarrans or Lids payments next year.

We also have organised some sponsorship work with puma that the AFL has signed off on.

Anyway, im off to drink more, have a nice night :)
Click to expand...
71, I know you're still suffering from PTSD re the Martin saga, but your team just made a GF for the first time in 35 odd years. Do yourself a favor and ignore opposition comment for the next week, embrace the festivities and then come back and sympathise with us about how much we all hate Adelaide after they beat you in the GF.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

giantroo
  • Locked
Game Day Round 19 - Saints vs North GD Thread
51 52 53 54 55
Replies
1K
Views
20K
StiffArm
StiffArm
Twinkletoes
  • Locked
Game Day North v GWS Hobart blockbuster GD thread.
45 46 47 48 49
Replies
1K
Views
17K
Woolly Mammoth
Woolly Mammoth
Gasometer
Game Day Rd 15 The Non North By Round Thread
Replies
5
Views
478
Twinkletoes
Twinkletoes
Gasometer
Review Random Threads from NMFC BF History
Replies
0
Views
411
Gasometer
Gasometer
Twinkletoes
  • Locked
Game Day Rd 4: Gather Round: North v Brions battle of the cellar dwellers Game Day thread
53 54 55 56 57
Replies
1K
Views
23K
ohmygewd
O
andana
Preview North v crows Saturday 27 @1.45pm in Hobart
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
229
Views
8K
The Nostradamus
The Nostradamus
Twinkletoes
  • Locked
Game Day Rd 15 Crows v Kangas (mutual Port hate/end the AO hoodoo) GD thread
45 46 47 48 49
Replies
1K
Views
17K
Roosurgence
R

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top