Remove this Banner Ad

The Jamarra Thread

Will Jamarra ever play senior footy for the Bulldogs again?

  • Yes

    Votes: 46 14.6%
  • No

    Votes: 228 72.2%
  • Unsure / Don't care

    Votes: 42 13.3%

  • Total voters
    316

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Watch it - if you don't like it, I'll leave the page. That's how confident I am that you will like it. Genuine challenge - let me know.

You cut Dougie off short and moved on quickly when it was genuinely interesting (he obviously knows a bit about JUH). Very light journalism. Good on you for having a go though.
 
You cut Dougie off short and moved on quickly when it was genuinely interesting (he obviously knows a bit about JUH). Very light journalism. Good on you for having a go though.
Didn't cut him off at all. Doug has respect for what should and shouldn't be said publicly. A few 'supporters' could learn a thing or two from that.
 
Didn't cut him off at all. Doug has respect for what should and shouldn't be said publicly. A few 'supporters' could learn a thing or two from that.
Yeah, nah, don't agree.
Doug is on a podcast, ex-captain, still hangs around the club, has a bloody wing named after him.
Posters on BF are just that, anon posters with nothing but words behind them.
Ofcourse Doug needs to be tactful with what he says, taking a swipe at posters on here for the same thing is two completely different things.
 
I find it a bit strange that any other club is after him.

If anything we've been more than accommodating, but only because we're on the hook for two more years and we've seen what he can do for us on the fox very recently. I don't buy the draft pick arguments, that's a sunk cost fallacy.

Given that other clubs would only offer him a one-year deal on minimum money, the chance that he breaks his new team rules or is unselectable for half a year, by definition, reduces his value by half.

This is even before we assume that his on-field output will decline because of the lack of professionalism, a bloke who doesn't train is clearly going to fall backwards.

The only way I can see it work maybe is if he has his contract terminated, is not getting paid anymore, and the lack of money and maybe a new city with different people makes him realise in a way that the last 6 months hadn't that he needs to get his act together, but sadly, by definition, it can't be at the Dogs
 
When you aren't at work you generally spend extra, well I do atleast.
The club petitioning the AFL to limit his pay to reflect the percentage of time he has spent at the club. As much to protect him as much as the club. The AFL won't sign off on anything to do with reducing pay or terminating a contract, this is due to multiple factors including impact on total player payments and salary cap as well as backlash from AFLPA.
Just to add to this post, and to try and decipher some of the cryptic reporting and statements from Bevo.

Usually in situations like these, clubs don't really bother making a huge effort reducing the salary. This is because the player themselves normally misses out on bonus/trigger money anyway (so the clubs get a discount), the AFLPA would fight it to not create a precedence, and also, in situations where clubs need to renegotiate or ask for a haircut in future, they're in a stronger bargaining position or have better relationships with players in general when asking these questions. Lastly there's also welfare/mental health element to it all.

This is despite the fact that the legal requirements written in contracts does allow for termination/reduction of payments. Jamarra hasn't been training, upholding other elements of his contract or even fulfilling the return to play adjustment to his contract. Dogs can legally terminate/reduce his contract if we wanted to enforce it but it would also lead to backlash with player managers/AFLPA/potential issues from mental health/welfare not to mention we still may marginally improce our draft hand.

The reason we're "working with the AFL" is to strengthen our already strong welfare/mental health treatment of him, so in the probable scenario two month's time when we ultimately termanite his contract, and then he tries to use his manager/the AFLPA and fire up a "well they didn't offer me welfare/treat my mental health concerns" we can say, yes, yes we did, look at the efforts and all of the support that we went through the AFL to try and give you.

Like many of the posters I have empathy for Jamarra and understand why he's getting through, and more broadly I understand why the AFLPA is a strong union that takes its positions and am on the players side. I also understand the need to have welfare and mental health considerations from your employer.

But in terms of reasonableness, even accepting all that, a employee still has to fulfil the duties of their contract, and I think the AFL and the Dogs will have been more than reasonable to Jamarra in taking all the right steps and considerations before we push through the contract termination.

Because ultimately if you can't sack a player for not turning up to training, turning up to work, what's ever the point of putting it as a minimum standard in a contract language?
 
I find it a bit strange that any other club is after him.

If anything we've been more than accommodating, but only because we're on the hook for two more years and we've seen what he can do for us on the fox very recently. I don't buy the draft pick arguments, that's a sunk cost fallacy.

Given that other clubs would only offer him a one-year deal on minimum money, the chance that he breaks his new team rules or is unselectable for half a year, by definition, reduces his value by half.

This is even before we assume that his on-field output will decline because of the lack of professionalism, a bloke who doesn't train is clearly going to fall backwards.

The only way I can see it work maybe is if he has his contract terminated, is not getting paid anymore, and the lack of money and maybe a new city with different people makes him realise in a way that the last 6 months hadn't that he needs to get his act together, but sadly, by definition, it can't be at the Dogs
Yeah they are only interested in him if they can nab a bargain. Going to the dollar discount store and hoping for Jesse Hogan style redemption.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

At the end of the day Marra is not doing anything illegal, using violence or crime. He simply has stopped turning up to training and showing no interest in his footy career.

If he gets out on the LTI list for the rest of the year, he at least gets some time to work through whatever is going on with him, and make an informed decision on his future.

Every now and then a young player decides footy is not for them, Adelaide had one recently, even our own Tom Boyd, unfortunately for Marra he is not a young rookie but an up and coming star, and a pick one, so attracts media attention.
 
Didn't cut him off at all. Doug has respect for what should and shouldn't be said publicly. A few 'supporters' could learn a thing or two from that.
Nope, watched it again. He had more to say on JUH and you moved it away from the topic. Once again, good on you for doing a podcast and giving us access to Doug.
 
To be honest the one thing I don’t want happening is Marra playing for another club. I’ll be sympathetic if he decides to leave football because he can’t handle the demands of training and the spotlight… but if he plays for another club he is enemy number 1.
To have Dunkley, Smith and possibly Marra starring for other clubs when we desperately need them at the Bulldogs is too much.
This is a really selfish point of view but f@ck it… it’s the truth.
 
To be honest the one thing I don’t want happening is Marra playing for another club. I’ll be sympathetic if he decides to leave football because he can’t handle the demands of training and the spotlight… but if he plays for another club he is enemy number 1.
To have Dunkley, Smith and possibly Marra starring for other clubs when we desperately need them at the Bulldogs is too much.
This is a really selfish point of view but f@ck it… it’s the truth.
You're going to be sad then.

He will be turfed and end up at Cotton On for nothing and then the media will bash the dogs for giving him away for nothing
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

He will be turfed and end up at Cotton On for nothing and then the media will bash the dogs for giving him away for nothing
Who cares?

When the club decides the squeeze isn't worth the juice then they will do what's in its best interest and cast off the epicarp into the rubbish bin of its history. They'll wear any of he slings and arrows of a few reactionary media hacks who inherently side with a star player and concentrate their energies on the guys who buy into and want the club to succeed.

Having said that with a very few exceptions most commentary seems as bemused with JUH actions as the club is. And are placing the Balme squarely win his shoulders. Indeed there aren't any that I can think of that are running with his actions being the clubs fault.

If the situation does become completely untenable (and it appears to be sliding that way) and there is a parting of the ways and he happens to land at Geelong or anywhere else for that matter. Big deal. We take the hit and move on.

Players come and go. Some buy in and some dont. Some get the most out of their talent. Some dont.

Only one thing is certain. No player is bigger than the club.
 
To be honest the one thing I don’t want happening is Marra playing for another club. I’ll be sympathetic if he decides to leave football because he can’t handle the demands of training and the spotlight… but if he plays for another club he is enemy number 1.
To have Dunkley, Smith and possibly Marra starring for other clubs when we desperately need them at the Bulldogs is too much.
This is a really selfish point of view but f@ck it… it’s the truth.

I agree. It is bad enough losing Stringer, Dunkley, Smith and now Marra for whatever the reasons. To get so little compensation is shattering not even one early pick. It is not like we had a lot of early picks like GWS who have lost players but got well compensated for their loss. The lack of fair trades will probably cost us any chance we had of another flag in The Bont years
 
Last edited:
I have had concerns there has been some Cats involvement. I would prefer to keep him on our list in some capacity than hand him to Cats for next nothing. The club needs to make strong decisions here and if they sniff any cats interference or collusion I would ensure Marra does not play any footy for 2 years. Going to be tough for someone with his work ethic to come back after 2 years out of the game.
 
I have had concerns there has been some Cats involvement. I would prefer to keep him on our list in some capacity than hand him to Cats for next nothing. The club needs to make strong decisions here and if they sniff any cats interference or collusion I would ensure Marra does not play any footy for 2 years. Going to be tough for someone with his work ethic to come back after 2 years out of the game.
Very much stinks of Cotton On.

This time they aren't denying it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top