The Jamarra Thread

[Bulldogs85]

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

WITHIN the next month, one final attempt will be made to properly reunite Jamarra Ugle-Hagan with football and the Western Bulldogs.

There is private acknowledgment that the peace-broking may prove as futile as all previous attempts, and that some in power at the Bulldogs may have already abandoned a future together. But there will be one last coordinated get-together of Ugle-Hagan, the many people – privately and professionally – actively assisting his welfare and Bulldogs officials before the 2025 season reaches its halfway point.
Ugle-Hagan's current arrangements with the Bulldogs have not worked for anyone, the player included. He has not played since last year's elimination final, he has lost relationships with several teammates, he was absent for a massive chunk of the off-season and recently has been attending an estimated 70 per cent of training sessions.

His social life may well be in keeping with a normal 23-year-old, but the Bulldogs have tired of it being aired on social media as he deals with his personal issues.
This year, Dr Kate Hall, the AFL's head of mental health and wellbeing, has effectively been overseeing a multi-tiered program to deal with Ugle-Hagan's issues and mental health care. Indigenous psychologists, to ensure Ugle-Hagan feels culturally safe, have been part of the treatment network.

The Hall-led department is regularly utilised by clubs, with Melbourne's Clayton Oliver

10

Clayton Oliver

Age

28

Ht

189cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

27.8

5star

K

9.5

4star

HB

18.4

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

6.3

5star

CL

6.3

5star

D

25.1

5star

K

11.1

4star

HB

14.0

5star

M

3.6

4star

T

5.6

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

19.2

5star

K

4.6

2star

HB

14.6

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

4.4

5star

CL

3.8

5star

last year also known to have entered the same arrangement.

Western Bulldogs coach Luke Beveridge will require the most convincing that there is a valid reason for him to even attend the upcoming attempt at establishing a base for a proper reunion, and last week he publicly revealed the AFL involvement with his wayward player.

"At the moment the decision-making in regards to Marra's future and what that entails is significantly in the AFL's hands," Beveridge said, in another example of his annoyance at the Ugle-Hagan situation.

"We're waiting on them to do certain things and we're continually interacting with them and working through it to work out what's best for Marra."
Very pointedly, Beveridge added: "My focus is absolutely, totally, on the group that's here. Sometimes he's here, sometimes he's not. If he is and he isn't, it's not worth talking about.

"If he is and he joins in, we carry on. But because he's not currently available for selection, it's not at the forefront of my mind. It's just making sure that the group who are playing are ready to go."

While there have been discussions at the Bulldogs about docking Ugle-Hagan's $850,000 salary for 2025, the AFL system, and the AFL Players Association, simply would not allow that to happen.

Ugle-Hagan is contracted to the Bulldogs on similar money for 2026.
If the last-ditch get-together with the Bulldogs breaks down like several get-togethers before them, player and club can immediately plan for futures apart, if they haven't already.

Ugle-Hagan has long known of an interest from Brisbane. And Sydney's questionable key forward plight has not improved in 2025. There would be nothing stopping Geelong, as it did last year with Bailey Smith

3

Bailey Smith

Age

25

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

, ripping out another wayward Bulldog.

As dire as his image and the now-competition wide adverse perception of his attitude has become, Ugle-Hagan will be playing in the AFL next season.

 

[_Cerberus_]

Hahaha. What a dead set prick Barrett is. The article is just full of swipes at the Dogs and Bevo, he couldn't help himself. As if he is constantly trying to blame us for past players issues, and not their own choices and actions that led to some moving on. Once again, we don't encourage players to go off the rails and act like fools in some cases.

Take Smith for example, he is now at Geelong, the so called best culture, still acts like a flog on the field and still parties it up outside. Then again, they would probably cover up any misbehavior like they did with "my drink was spiked Stengle".

As for the first part of the article. Interesting. I really hope Jamarra wakes up, and realizes what he is throwing away. Not feeling all that confident to be honest given nothing has worked so far. If he is willing to jump on board, and turn it around. He will have my support as a fan, and zero hard feelings if he hits the field again this year.

Also stuff the AFLPA, who won't allow money to be withheld for a clear breach of contract. They clearly don't care about player welfare, and only money. Having to much money to party with is one of the reasons a few young blokes go off the rails. Sometimes you need to protect them from themselves.

 

[dogwatch]

The degree to which that is possible might depend on how much the AFL knew and we didn't at the time of his re-signing.

It's a very flawed system that I expect to come into sharp focus during and post this episode. The clubs must be allowed every avenue to due diligence when they're putting these offers up.

I'm not known for going into bat for the AFL. I do agree with you that it's flawed but it needs to be seen in the context of equalisation. The following is my understanding of arrangements ... but I could be wrong. If so, I'm happy to be corrected on any of it.

The AFL pays player salaries directly. It's part of the equalisation suite of controls the AFL places on clubs (as distinct from the wild west free-for-all of the 70s and 80s). Every club gets an automatic allocation of $x million to cover all player salaries. Clubs have to project the player contract cash flows over the current and future years so that they stay within the salary cap (TPP). That is meant to stop any salary arms race developing among the clubs - that's what nearly sent half a dozen clubs broke in the 1980s. To implement and enforce it the AFL makes the player salary payments itself. So it must approve and monitor all clubs' contracts including front-loading, back-loading, bonuses etc. In theory no player gets paid anything apart from the salary payments they get straight from the AFL.*

It complicates the situation because on the one hand there is the employer/employee working relationship (club/player) but it is overlaid with the financial responsibility of the AFL as regulator and payer of salaries. That's why they talk about it as a triangular arrangement. I don't know the comparable details of other big commercial sports around the world but I'd have thought it was an unusual if not a unique arrangement. Add to all that the role and influence of the AFLPA which constrains both AFL and club. Never mind the Fair Work Act.

If all that is correct, then the flaws become more understandable. There are few precedents or models elswehere in the world. They won't have considered every possible eventuality. So they have to invent and tweak it as they go. As most people have acknowledged, this JUH episode is pretty much unprecedented in the history of the TPP scheme. Certainly for someone as high profile as an indigenous/NGA/#1 draft pick on around $850k p.a.. The AFL has to consider sensitivities all over the place.

Does it need to be fixed? Yes, for sure. But as they say, "it's complicated".

It may turn out that it's easier to work on those fixes when the dust has settled on the Jamarra case and it can be framed as more of a hypothetical situation than the highly sensitised circumstances we have now.

* Nothing in the above prevents the inevitable incursions from buccaneering boundary-pushers with their brown paper bags, farms, third party sinecures, overly generous player endorsement fees for product promotions, paid-out mortgages, overpaid post-career appointments, etc. But that's another story altogether and not particularly relevant to the Jamarra case. At least not yet.

 

[Freshwater]

Barrett has written a piece about Jamarra for the AFL website. The fact the AFL gave that so-called journalist the story is a disgrace because of his continued attack on Beverage. The fact the AFL have been working on helping JUH and would give sensitive information to a gutter grub like Barrett, who works in-house is just tone deaf to what’s happening in this whole situation. I can recall Chris Grant or Ameet Bains pulling the AFL up last year or the year before about Barrett and his constant criticism of Bevo? The AFL have zero morality yet often dip into political bs. Aussie rules is a great game in spite of the dickheads that claim they run it.

 

[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:

Ugle-Hagan's current arrangements with the Bulldogs have not worked for anyone, the player included.

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.

His social life may well be in keeping with a normal 23-year-old, but the Bulldogs have tired of it being aired on social media as he deals with his personal issues.

"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.

Western Bulldogs coach Luke Beveridge will require the most convincing that there is a valid reason for him to even attend the upcoming attempt at establishing a base for a proper reunion, and last week he publicly revealed the AFL involvement with his wayward player.

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.

"At the moment the decision-making in regards to Marra's future and what that entails is significantly in the AFL's hands," Beveridge said, in another example of his annoyance at the Ugle-Hagan situation.

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.

Very pointedly, Beveridge added: "My focus is absolutely, totally, on the group that's here. Sometimes he's here, sometimes he's not. If he is and he isn't, it's not worth talking about.

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.

While there have been discussions at the Bulldogs about docking Ugle-Hagan's $850,000 salary for 2025, the AFL system, and the AFL Players Association, simply would not allow that to happen.

Ugle-Hagan is contracted to the Bulldogs on similar money for 2026.

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.

If the last-ditch get-together with the Bulldogs breaks down like several get-togethers before them, player and club can immediately plan for futures apart, if they haven't already.

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).

There would be nothing stopping Geelong, as it did last year with Bailey Smith

3

Bailey Smith

Age

25

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

, ripping out another wayward Bulldog.

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

As dire as his image and the now-competition wide adverse perception of his attitude has become, Ugle-Hagan will be playing in the AFL next season.

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.

 

[dogwatch]

...

What would be closer to fair is getting his salary excluded from the cap for both 2025 (we can front load others) and next year. It still sucks for us, but it’s closer.

This sounds reasonable but even if the AFL agrees, who pays the 2x $850k? Does the AFL still foot the bill as well as paying for whoever we reward with the newly available salary cap space?

Now I'm sure the AFL has buckets of money to throw around but they wouldn't like the idea of setting the precedent of putting their hands in their pocket for another $1.7m just because a player has gone off the rails and has become borderline unusable within his current contract. "Not our fault" they could say, and with some justification.

If it meant we had to pay that $1.7m instead, would you think it was still fair? We DO get to pay somebody else which will help retain or attract quality players but we'll have to find $1.7m from somewhere. After the Adam Kneale payout it's not a good time to be asking that.

In the circumstances it's possible the AFL would stump up the money just to see the problem go away. But I wouldn't be holding my breath on it.

 

[Struggle]

Turning up to 70% of training sessions is way more than I expected it to be

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Turning up to 70% of training sessions is way more than I expected it to be

Whether this is accurate is another thing, this is Barrett.

 

[go_sports_team]

Turning up to 70% of training sessions is way more than I expected it to be

There is no way that is true.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Meh...

That Barrett piece is hardly worth parsing out or critiquing given it's just a cobbling together of known, knowns and brings nothing at all new to the table. Im not sure that anything that mentions a pow wow between player and club happening at some nebulous time between now and the mid season break contains much in the way of credibility.

Something thats seems to run somewhat counter to the unlikely training figure of 70%. If true it would be an astoundingly good result given the circumstances and the ongoing narrative surrounding him and make the entire brouhaha somewhat of a tempest in a teacup.

Its just more of the same speculative nonsense grist for the mill.

 

[Dogs Rule]

Staggering how the AFL let their in-house 'journalist' take out his personal vendetta with the coach and the club in thinly veiled snipes day after day and week after week. It's kind of pathetic.

 

[Mr. Walker]

I don’t like the idea of getting compensation and the precedent it sets. Why should we get compensation picks for Jamarra but other clubs not for medical retirements?

I have not seen any proof that another club has tried to induce JUH to break his contract with the Dogs but if an AFL investigation did cotton on to this fact I think there is a case for compensation.

 

[Fossie 32]

if an AFL investigation did cotton on to this fact I think there is a case for compensation.

 

[DiamondDogs8]

Found this quite funny from the Midweek Tackle. What a shame that we missed out on so many bonafide stars of the competition!

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

What if the psychologist says that for his mental wellbeing, he needs to be selected and included in game days?

But only if turning up is optional.

 

[Golden_6]

View attachment 2292000
Found this quite funny from the Midweek Tackle. What a shame that we missed out on so many bonafide stars of the competition!

That was absolutely hilarious. We’re all aware that taking Jamarra wiped out our 2020 draft hand but this is the best they could come up with?

It also ignored the fact that we drafted McNeil that year and acquired Poulter from the same draft. Those two names belong with those random group of players listed.

 

[TiAn_]

Damo is right about one thing though, he will be playing football somewhere next year and the ‘lost to football’ chat is just naive or wishful thinking.

Even if the club wants to part ways, everyone there needs to at least maintain the appearance of being prepared to keep him on for the rest of the year, including Bev. Otherwise we’ll be getting zero from Geelong/Brisbane at the trade table.

 

[theAthenian]

If anyone still thinks its a mental health issue....
..... then the only person you are facilitating is his dealer.

Its time for the club to get on the front foot and demand compensation from both afl and player.

 

[Mojorisin]

That was absolutely hilarious. We’re all aware that taking Jamarra wiped out our 2020 draft hand but this is the best they could come up with?

It also ignored the fact that we drafted McNeil that year and acquired Poulter from the same draft. Those two names belong with those random group of players listed.

The only actual player we missed out on was Rowe (who is now back at SANFL) and we picked up McNeil instead.
It's impossible to predict what the draft would've looked like had we decided not to draft Marra, but if I weren't matching a bid we wouldn't have brought in all those picks between 26 and 50 they speak on.
If I had to speculate we may very well not have Treloar either given how tied up his deal was in us receiving all those pick.

 

[Dogs Rule]

Damo is right about one thing though, he will be playing football somewhere next year and the ‘lost to football’ chat is just naive or wishful thinking.

Even if the club wants to part ways, everyone there needs to at least maintain the appearance of being prepared to keep him on for the rest of the year, including Bev. Otherwise we’ll be getting zero from Geelong/Brisbane at the trade table.

Absolutely. He's got another year on his contract. He's a contracted player. End of. Reach deep into those pockets Cotton On, might even need to get Morris Finance involved. Not sure if he's a farmer though.

 

[Unorth]

Damo is right about one thing though, he will be playing football somewhere next year and the ‘lost to football’ chat is just naive or wishful thinking.

Even if the club wants to part ways, everyone there needs to at least maintain the appearance of being prepared to keep him on for the rest of the year, including Bev. Otherwise we’ll be getting zero from Geelong/Brisbane at the trade table.

Correct but what happens with Jamarra as an asset depends on who makes the decisions.

We know for better and worse Bevo is a very emotional decision maker who gets say in matters beyond coaching. His concern is only on coaching for this season and if sacking Jamarra appeased the players he has available, he’d do it like he essentially did Stringer. It ends with JUH playing for Geelong, Sydney or Brisbane, winning plenty of games, while we get nothing back aside from some kind of moral win (doesn’t count towards the ladder unfortunately).

If we act more rationally and let Power and co. take control of his future we might be able to extract something out of the situation.

Which means being prepared to keep Marra next season. It’s shitty that we have to pay Marra within the cap but we just have to cop it.

the club has the choice to either act rationally or emotionally around this. We can sack Jamarra or trade him for a future 4th round pick, compounding the losses of Dunkley and Smith, or we can be patient around this even if it isn’t a “fair” situation. The key will be in not letting Bevo (currently not even contracted beyond this year) have real input into a situation with long term ramifications.

The caveat here is if this is influencing Bont’s contract situation you then do what you have to.

 

[DognBones]

Some excellent commentary and analysis in the posts above. If only Barrett could shrug off his petty grievances and headline grabbing 'journalistic' style, he might be able to write something half as intelligent.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

I thought no Victorian clubs are interested including Geelong. His best chance is with the SA clubs.

 

[Libbaaaa]

Damo is right about one thing though, he will be playing football somewhere next year and the ‘lost to football’ chat is just naive or wishful thinking.

Even if the club wants to part ways, everyone there needs to at least maintain the appearance of being prepared to keep him on for the rest of the year, including Bev. Otherwise we’ll be getting zero from Geelong/Brisbane at the trade table.

That ship has sailed though, we all need to make peace with any return for Jamarra being less than the Dunkley and Smith trades. Only way that changes is if he somehow comes back into the team and kills it.

 

[maddog37]

Culturally safe. Ok.