The Jamarra Thread

[Cudi]

I live in Sydney – what is the Love Machine and where is it?

A club that has had three shooting incidents in the last month and a known bikie hangout.

Says all you need to know about the company JUH keeps.

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

The fact he’s out at 2am on a Sunday, when our boys are playing that day, says all you need to know.

Pay this bloke out and let him piss away him 800k on alcohol and online pokies. Cancer.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Our favourite journalist with and axe to grind with a new post:

BARRETT: Ugle-Hagan, Dogs set for last-ditch peace talks

The Western Bulldogs forward and his club will meet in a bid to revive his stalled AFL career, but failure won't stop rival interest, writes Damian Barrett

www.afl.com.au

Let me annotate some of how Damo is framing it:



If you consider not staying up to the early hours of the morning in important periods around game time and/or turning up to training as an arrangement you can handle, I agree, it doesn't work for the player, but then that player shouldn't be expected to be entitled to be paid money to be an AFL footballer and should retire.



"May" doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

I also disagree with Damo that it's normal for a 23-year-old to allow for their social life to put their employment at risk. For instance, if a normal employee played up at Christmas party and was issued a formal warning, even a party boy "normal" 23-year-old would not want to lose employment and tone down their subsequent social life.


Freudian slip here for Damo. I think Beveridge is more than happy for there to be genuine ongoing attempts to help Jamarra as a person, for no other reason that he doesn't want to potentially see his life spiral, or that life as not an AFL footballer is generally worse than life as an AFL footballer. He's not a ghoul or a bad person, even though Damo is writing in a way that he thinks he is. Beveridge is genuine and sincerely wanting to see Jamarra have a good life irrespective of whatever his future football contribution is. He doesn't think Jamarra is a bad person not deserving of care and treatment.



I wouldn't characterise this as annoyance as opposed to just a factual retelling of what the situation is, given that, we, as fans and members are stakeholders in Jamarra's position. Damo even stated earlier in the article how the AFL has welfare resources that the club doesn't have, so it's not annoyance, it's literally just Bevo explaining that fact.



I find it bizarre to characterise the fact that a coaches' primary focus is to utilise the players that are available for selection as how that grouping of players can be used to win games of football as "very pointedly". I think it's strange to see Beveridge, stating the obvious point, as being very pointed.



Of course there are discussions because we're trying to work through if we're in a legal position, should we desire to, to terminate his contract, as he's not fulfilling the reasonable terms of his contract such as turning up to training, or adhering to reasonable team rules such as curfews before games. It is actually incorrect on Damo to suggest that "they wouldn't allow it to happen".

In fact, if Damo was a good journalist, he would realise this is actually something Beveridge has once done with a player before: Luke Goetz had his contract terminated by the club as he, similar to Jamarra, struggled to fulfill the requirements of being an AFL player (after the club took all reasonable welfare steps before electing to terminate his player). Yes, the AFL would allow it to happen. This is ridiculous by Damo.


By all accounts it isn't the nature of the meetings themselves that have broken down - it's not as if Jamarra i refusing to listen to the club's demands or arguing in meetings or whatever - it's his adherence to such requirements outside of the meetings itself that is the issue (so Damo is incorrectly characterising the meetings).



Except if you completely ignore the (accurate) reporting from others in the media that Geelong are not interested in recruiting him.



Something that I will be holding Damo to.

Every week I wonder how his triple is allowed to get published, and how he's allowed to operate with a clear vendetta against our club and our coach.

Let me just quote myself when Damien Barrett wrote an opinion piece back in April trying to defend Jamarra's behaviour/social life as entirely normal or reasonable for a wealthy person of his age, just as a means to try and attack Bevo and the club. He also criticised us and that we were wrong to "abandon" him (not that we did, but even if we did at the time, it clearly wouldn't have been the wrong decision back then).

He was also convinced that JUH will play AFL next year, which now clearly appears wrong too.

Let us not forget what a grub Barrett is toward our club, and how it influences perception of our club given his influence in the media, for no other reason than a long-held personal vendetta against Bevo.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Can’t imagine many teams who could lose a KPF of the calibre of Jamarra for the whole season and still be #1 in scoring.

Our forward depth is insane and looks even better after the Croft debut.

Our father sons goes some way to making up for the way we have been robbed in the Dunkley and Sniff trades.

Edit: sorry wrong thread.

 

[doggiesin08]

A club that has had three shooting incidents in the last month and a known bikie hangout.

Says all you need to know about the company JUH keeps.

How old are “bikies” these days just out of interest?

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

If we do break the contract with Marra, and he does get picked up in by another club in 12 months (doubtful) would we get compensation the same way Carlton were compensated when we drafted Liam Jones

19

Liam Jones

Age

34

Ht

199cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.4

2star

K

6.5

3star

HB

2.9

3star

M

4.3

4star

T

2.0

4star

MG

134.5

2star

D

7.6

2star

K

6.1

3star

HB

1.4

1star

M

4.1

4star

T

1.4

2star

MG

116.3

2star

D

9.4

3star

K

7.4

3star

HB

2.0

2star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.2

4star

?

 

[The Inbetweener]

Can’t remember a players value dropping so much in one year. Genuinely would have got multiple 1st if we traded him last year.

 

[TiAn_]

“People close to the star player believe he may benefit from a change of scenery. The Sydney Swans are in the market for a key forward and have not publicly ruled out a move for him.

“Two club sources, unwilling to comment publicly, said on Monday they would be surprised if Ugle-Hagan was on the club’s list going into 2026.”

 

[Libbaaaa]

Let me just quote myself when Damien Barrett wrote an opinion piece back in April trying to defend Jamarra's behaviour/social life as entirely normal or reasonable for a wealthy person of his age, just as a means to try and attack Bevo and the club. He also criticised us and that we were wrong to "abandon" him (not that we did, but even if we did at the time, it clearly wouldn't have been the wrong decision back then).

He was also convinced that JUH will play AFL next year, which now clearly appears wrong too.

Let us not forget what a grub Barrett is toward our club, and how it influences perception of our club given his influence in the media, for no other reason than a long-held personal vendetta against Bevo.

Last Friday’s article was hilarious saying imagine if we had Sniff and Jamarra we might be top 2. Like we were at fault for Jamarra’s absence.

 

[_Cerberus_]

Very excellent post _Cerberus_ and all of this is valid and we can understand this on a personal level.

I think it's missing discussion of the logical next step: how do we factor in the Western Bulldogs as an institution's obligation to interact with all of what you have discussed?

I'm of the view that even fully understanding all of the above, and the fact that the Western Bulldogs has some duty of care obligation to the players we elect to draft, that we have done above and beyond what can be considered reasonable and ethical for us as a club to anyone in this situation. At some point, it is not the institutional duty of the Western Bulldogs to solve all of society's problems, even if some of those problems are more proximate to us as a club.

We can continue to support Jamarra in a more limited sense but surely the time has come from the start of the next pre-season to move on from him?

It really is a tricky one isn't it? I mean it's kind of an unprecedented situation, at least that we are aware of. And none of us here knows a single word of what has been discussed behind closed doors between Jamarra, the Bulldogs and the AFL. And what rules and programs have been put in place, and how much Jamarra has applied himself to them. Even the full nature of his personal issues are clouded amongst speculation.

All clubs have a duty to help their players out the best that they can. But in some circumstances there is only so much you can do. I actually feel for the club, because no matter what we do. We will probably be accused of being culturally insensitive at some point, or accused of being too hard or not fair. Or media flogs like Barrett will jump on the club and blame us for not making sure Jamarra was not tucked up in bed by 9pm, with a glass of milk and a bedtime story every night. I mean it was our fault apparently that Hunter was an alcoholic drink driver, that Smith is a egotistical prick using coke, that Stringer was turning up to preseason unfit, cheating on his partners, and that Jamarra is off the rails.

All players go through an intense introduction when they are first drafted. Which covers a whole range of things, from drugs, alcohol, general behaviors and associations, applying a standard as a public figure. And all are given a list of support networks they can access if needed and so forth. But when it comes to young people and big money, it's easy to fall into bad habits.

I too, am satisfied that the club has done all that they can. Using the resources available with the help of the AFL. And it will be interesting to see come preseason, whether we are giving him a chance to rock up and rebuild himself. Or if the club senses no change, and decides to look after the interest of the club first. The club always comes before the individual. I do hope that if the outcome does result in his contract being torn up, that we still check in on him and make sure he has anything he needs to ensure he is okay in life and doesn't fall further down. And supply support services if needed.

As you have said. It's the duty of the person in question to take ownership of their own issues, and not blame others etc. The door is still open if he wants it badly enough. Whether it will be with us, or someone else is another question. The club will put its best interests first.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

At the end of the day, the club is his employer and can’t be held responsible for every mistake he makes, his family and other supports have a role to play as well.

 

[TiAn_]

Last Friday’s article was hilarious saying imagine if we had Sniff and Jamarra we might be top 2. Like we were at fault for Jamarra’s absence.

Barrett is a mouthpiece for Connors. Neither like our club/coach.

 

[Libbaaaa]

Barrett is a mouthpiece for Connors. Neither like our club/coach.

Almost feel off the couch tonight when he said on footy classified we have every right to get out of paying him his salary next year.

 

[Astro_]

Croft is already ahead of JUH, he actually turns up to training

I’ve been to more training session than JUH this year

 

[BulldogMuscle]

At the end of the day, the club is his employer and can’t be held responsible for every mistake he makes, his family and other supports have a role to play as well.

Incorrect.
The AFL are his employer, we are his custodian.

JUH's future has been taken out of the Dogs hands some time ago, it's been upto them with what happens with him / his future in the league.

If we do break the contract with Marra, and he does get picked up in by another club in 12 months (doubtful) would we get compensation the same way Carlton were compensated when we drafted Liam Jones?

We tried. AFL won't let us. The current agreement in place is if he continues on with us next year he will be on reduced player payments.

I'd almost bet money on no other club wanting him anymore.

 

[RWnBluey]

Incorrect.
The AFL are his employer, we are his custodian.

JUH's future has been taken out of the Dogs hands some time ago, it's been upto them with what happens with him / his future in the league.


We tried. AFL won't let us. The current agreement in place is if he continues on with us next year he will be on reduced player payments.

I'd almost bet money on no other club wanting him anymore.

It’s ridiculous that we’re being forced to keep him on the list and continue to pay him this year, but I find it mind boggling how he would be entitled to a single dollar from next year.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

It is such a difficult situation, I mean on one hand moving interstate might give him a fresh start away from these bad influences, but on the other hand he will be away from his family.

The suggestion that there seems to be a bikie connection is concerning, as once you get mixed up with them they demand loyalty, and things can get nasty if you try to extricate from them.

 

[Bulldogs85]

 

[dogwatch]

It’s ridiculous that we’re being forced to keep him on the list and continue to pay him this year, but I find it mind boggling how he would be entitled to a single dollar from next year.

It doesn't really affect your argument but technically we aren't paying him. The AFL is. The AFL has to approve/signoff the contract between club and player and the AFL-paid salary comes off our TPP allocation. Usually that's a straightforward and automatic process.

In theory the AFL could give us some remission on our TPP debits due to the special circumstances, even if they continued to pay Jamarra the full amount. Whether they would do that is anybody's guess. It not only sets an awkward precedent, it also invites another angle for unwanted media scrutiny when the AFL are wishing the whole JUH saga would just go away.

The obvious problem here is that we aren't free to just write (and terminate) our own contracts with the player. The AFL is the umbrella third party to the contract. So I presume we have to work within the constraints of a standard form AFL contract. There would only be certain bits we could customise with the player's agreement (eg front loading the salary). However most of the Ts and Cs would be boilerplate clauses that we can't change.

I expect Dale4captain would be one of the best placed people here to confirm all that. Am I correct, D4C?

While it may seem "ridiculous" that we're locked into these conditions, it is way better for us than the free-for-all arrangements that used to exist pre-1990. Those wild west days of clubs writing and paying their own contracts literally sent us broke. And nearly crashing out of the competition for ever.

 

[RWnBluey]

It doesn't really affect your argument but technically we aren't paying him. The AFL is. The AFL has to approve/signoff the contract between club and player and the AFL-paid salary comes off our TPP allocation. Usually that's a straightforward and automatic process.

In theory the AFL could give us some remission on our TPP debits due to the special circumstances, even if they continued to pay Jamarra the full amount. Whether they would do that is anybody's guess. It not only sets an awkward precedent, it also invites another angle for unwanted media scrutiny when the AFL are wishing the whole JUH saga would just go away.

The obvious problem here is that we aren't free to just write (and terminate) our own contracts with the player. The AFL is the umbrella third party to the contract. So I presume we have to work within the constraints of a standard form AFL contract. There would only be certain bits we could customise with the player's agreement (eg front loading the salary). However most of the Ts and Cs would be boilerplate clauses that we can't change.

I expect Dale4captain would be one of the best placed people here to confirm all that. Am I correct, D4C?

While it may seem "ridiculous" that we're locked into these conditions, it is way better for us than the free-for-all arrangements that used to exist pre-1990. Those wild west days of clubs writing and paying their own contracts literally sent us broke. And nearly crashing out of the competition for ever.

Yes, I understand how the AFL’s remuneration framework is structured. My concern is, firstly, that we’re not being allowed to terminate his contract despite what appears to be a clear breach. Secondly, regardless of whether his salary falls within the TPP, he should not be entitled to any further payment beyond this season.

If the AFL genuinely wishes to support him, that assistance should come in the form of access to specialist care and support networks not through ongoing financial handouts. The worst thing for him at this stage would be more free cash to enable poor decisions and fund a destructive lifestyle.

 

[doggiesin08]

Can’t remember a players value dropping so much in one year. Genuinely would have got multiple 1st if we traded him last year.

I mean apparently we tried but St Kilda did their due diligence. In terms of comparable value destruction, Andrew Lovett was actually traded for a first rounder in October 2009 and by December 2009 had been stood down indefinitely.

 

[Here we go dogs]

Let me just quote myself when Damien Barrett wrote an opinion piece back in April trying to defend Jamarra's behaviour/social life as entirely normal or reasonable for a wealthy person of his age, just as a means to try and attack Bevo and the club. He also criticised us and that we were wrong to "abandon" him (not that we did, but even if we did at the time, it clearly wouldn't have been the wrong decision back then).

He was also convinced that JUH will play AFL next year, which now clearly appears wrong too.

Let us not forget what a grub Barrett is toward our club, and how it influences perception of our club given his influence in the media, for no other reason than a long-held personal vendetta against Bevo.

His always had it in for or club. He consistently called us irrelevant pre bevo. Not worth a breath.

 

[House_of_Dahl]

I live in Sydney – what is the Love Machine and where is it?

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Whether involved in the shooting or not, the fact he was at a nightclub known for its criminal patrons and its history of bikie violence, shows he still struggles with making good decisions. Even after all the support and guidance those from club and AFL level have provided, he still can’t get it together.

Whatever slim chance he had staying at the club has now vanished. The players, particularly the leaders would be so over this shit. The club needs to terminate his contract day one of the off season and be done with it.

 

[Cookie]

Incorrect.
The AFL are his employer, we are his custodian.

JUH's future has been taken out of the Dogs hands some time ago, it's been upto them with what happens with him / his future in the league.


We tried. AFL won't let us. The current agreement in place is if he continues on with us next year he will be on reduced player payments.

I'd almost bet money on no other club wanting him anymore.

Personally, I couldn't give two poos about the bloke. He's living his choices.
BUT, the Dogs are down a player, and have been all year and the AFL hasn't done a thing to address our list being one short.
On the upside, with the imminent arrival of Snoop Dogg, the AFL could relieve Marra of his duties and transfer them to Snoop Dogg's entourage.
He's qualified to fit in well in that group.