Tucks contract

[Shezza]

someone should ask Stig

 

[MightyTiger]

Are you saying McMahon had an clause in his contract that said if he played a certain amount of games he was entitled to an extra year? Because I think that is the issue here, that the club made a stupid decision 2 years ago and are now shortchanging Tuck to cover their arses.

How is he getting short changed?

The club clearly tried getting rid of him at the end of 09, no one bit they obviously gave him another contract and like all contracts there would be clauses in them.

I personally think this is smart contracting by the club(If True), if they gave him just a 1 year contract he would be free to walk out on the club and head off to GWS, as it is he's under contract and if the club feels he is not needed for this year and in the long term they can at least get something out of him from if he was to be poached.

 

[ize_]

How is he getting short changed?

The club clearly tried getting rid of him at the end of 09, no one bit they obviously gave him another contract and like all contracts there would be clauses in them.

I personally think this is smart contracting by the club(If True), if they gave him just a 1 year contract he would be free to walk out on the club and head off to GWS, as it is he's under contract and if the club feels he is not needed for this year and in the long term they can at least get something out of him from if he was to be poached.

But not playing him just so they can get out of keeping him for the last year of his contract? I don't like that at all.

However, given that this is something that has come from his family, it is pretty likely that this is just their perspective. Maybe he's not being played on merit, because of deficiencies in his game, and this is just his father's way of justifying it. I do not know. But if it's what the OP said, I think it's very poor form by the club.

 

[CamTinley]

Richmond have now gone without a win in their last eight games. It would be timely to start playing your best 22 I would have thought. If there is any truth in what is being suggested here, the Richmond FC might have dug themselves a very big hole.

 

[Shere Khan]

Richmond have now gone without a win in their last eight games. It would be timely to start playing your best 22 I would have thought. If there is any truth in what is being suggested here, the Richmond FC might have dug themselves a very big hole.

I'm not sure we could play Jackson and Tuck in the same team. Jacko's been good so far. Dropping him for Tuck wouldn't make sense.

 

[kainokaino]

I will be pissed off with the coaching staff if Tuck does not play this week, he is a centre clearance king and this is a game we should be confident of winning.

 

[_RT_]

Are you saying McMahon had an clause in his contract that said if he played a certain amount of games he was entitled to an extra year? Because I think that is the issue here, that the club made a stupid decision 2 years ago and are now shortchanging Tuck to cover their arses.

Not at all, I fully expect that the club gave all players on the list a decent crack at extending their careers, but McMahon was hardly given a real chance at saving his career and yet the majority of posters here seemed quite pleased about it. Now that someone says that same thing is happening to Tuck, people are up in arms about it.

 

[TheProwler]

Time to be a little more ruthless if we want to take the next step. If RFC are keeping the options open by only playing Tuck as an emergency for the first half of the season with the possibility moving him to GWS for a compo pick then I have no issue with that.

Is it any great surprise that collingwood are now at the top end of the competition? They haven't given a rats cracker who's toes they have stepped on in recent times and are now getting results. If Tuck was on their list and GWS were on the horizon I have no doubt they too would have him in the reserves.

Make no mistake the old phrase "Nice guys finish last" really does carry some weight

 

[Rustof]

Last year we were one of the best clearance teams in the comp. Anyone remember where we finished? Oh yea... 15th... With a massive 6 wins...

Clearances aren't the only thing to winning games. Tuck wouldn't have been the difference between us winning and losing in these first 4 rounds.

 

[TheProwler]

Last year we were one of the best clearance teams in the comp. Anyone remember where we finished? Oh yea... 15th... With a massive 6 wins...

Clearances aren't the only thing to winning games. Tuck wouldn't have been the difference between us winning and losing in these first 4 rounds.

Spot on

 

[MightyTiger]

I think they're very different situations. McMahon wasn't in our best 22 last season, whereas most would agree that Tuck is. If Dimma doesn't see it this way, and he's being left out of the side due to deficiencies, then I have no problem. This would be the same as the McMahon situation. But if the OP is correct and Tuck is being left out not on merit but because we made a stupid decision 2 years ago and are trying to cover for it, then I don't think this is okay.

How is it stupid?

Or do you mean forward thinking knowing either one of the expansion teams might value a bigger body midfielder then we would so instead of losing him for nothing we could at least get something out of him?

Hypothetically, if Tuck were out of contract at the end of this year and Tuck felt he wanted to play again, GWS could take him for nothing, this way he is still under contract, we can still use his services if needed and if GWS come sniffing we take a compensation pick for losing him.

 

[ize_]

Not at all, I fully expect that the club gave all players on the list a decent crack at extending their careers, but McMahon was hardly given a real chance at saving his career and yet the majority of posters here seemed quite pleased about it. Now that someone says that same thing is happening to Tuck, people are up in arms about it.

I think they're very different situations. McMahon wasn't in our best 22 last season, whereas most would agree that Tuck is. If Dimma doesn't see it this way, and he's being left out of the side due to deficiencies, then I have no problem. This would be the same as the McMahon situation. But if the OP is correct and Tuck is being left out not on merit but because we made a stupid decision 2 years ago and are trying to cover for it, then I don't think this is okay.

 

[beaver fever]

But not playing him just so they can get out of keeping him for the last year of his contract? I don't like that at all.

However, given that this is something that has come from his family, it is pretty likely that this is just their perspective. Maybe he's not being played on merit, because of deficiencies in his game, and this is just his father's way of justifying it. I do not know. But if it's what the OP said, I think it's very poor form by the club.

The club didn't have to give him that option of an extra year. They could have just said 1 year. The two groups obviously negotiated and both agreed with the terms of the extra year. If they didn't agree, he would have been delisted. Sure the RFC were in the better bargaining position, but hey Tuck is not a lock 22 player. He is lucky to have the option. Better players are ahead of him, that is why he is not getting games.

We are building a premiership list, and playing Tuck ahead of others will not help that task.

 

[NQTIGER]

Not at all, I fully expect that the club gave all players on the list a decent crack at extending their careers, but McMahon was hardly given a real chance at saving his career and yet the majority of posters here seemed quite pleased about it. Now that someone says that same thing is happening to Tuck, people are up in arms about it.

RT get off the fence, if the club is behaving in this fashion , then we have learnt nothing from the last 30 years.

The Football management department and im looking at CC , has NFI about building a CLUB and TEAM.

IT sure looks that way and the head coach is involved, you cant ask the troops to go over the top for you when you arent equal with them.

WE cant win a clearance yet we keep our best extractor out of the side, they could have played him early get some momentum up sign some more members, then the Leg could be used to give him a break, or were they afraid that he would be performing and dropping him would be too hard.

WE still have a long way to go in the PROFFESIONALISM stakes and it shows in our performance.

 

[Ty German]

I will be pissed off with the coaching staff if Tuck does not play this week, he is a centre clearance king and this is a game we should be confident of winning.

I kinda of like the way we are heading with playing youth over the usual suspects. Bringing back Tuck is a bandaid fix. Not sure if we can play both Tuck and Jacko in the same side with the way the speed of the game is going.

 

[nut]

if true.... disgraceful.... The Mcmahon situation was a disgrace as well... does nothing to instil fairness through the playing group.

Lots of factions with in the club with too much influence...

 

[Yoda_]

If you play Tuck, won't it mean you are stunning the development of the kids like Cotchin, Martin etc?

Same with what happened with Lucas & Lloyd. Both club favorites both could still perform at the top level but both were moved on in the best interests of the club for the long term.

I have been a huge fan of Tuck and could seriously see him picked up as a rookie by GWS, give him 1 year contracts (possibly two first up), would see him until he is 32 and would have given good solid service to a fledgling club like GWS.

 

[_RT_]

RT get off the fence, if the club is behaving in this fashion , then we have learnt nothing from the last 30 years.

The Football management department and im looking at CC , has NFI about building a CLUB and TEAM.

IT sure looks that way and the head coach is involved, you cant ask the troops to go over the top for you when you arent equal with them.

WE cant win a clearance yet we keep our best extractor out of the side, they could have played him early get some momentum up sign some more members, then the Leg could be used to give him a break, or were they afraid that he would be performing and dropping him would be too hard.

WE still have a long way to go in the PROFFESIONALISM stakes and it shows in our performance.

How am I sitting on the fence? Is it because I don't take what someone has posted on here as gospel?

As for why Tuck isn't in the side, who should he replace in in the midfield setup out of Martin Cotchin & Jackson seeing as all 3 play the same type of role? Or are you suggesting that we add Tuck to that group and then have the 4 of them competing for time in the middle.

 

[kainokaino]

If you play Tuck, won't it mean you are stunning the development of the kids like Cotchin, Martin etc?

Same with what happened with Lucas & Lloyd. Both club favorites both could still perform at the top level but both were moved on in the best interests of the club for the long term.

I have been a huge fan of Tuck and could seriously see him picked up as a rookie by GWS, give him 1 year contracts (possibly two first up), would see him until he is 32 and would have given good solid service to a fledgling club like GWS.

Mate we have got rid of a lot of older players so the kids can develop...
Simmonds, Brown, Johnson, Bowden and there are more.
You still need to have a few older tough bodies in the side, like I have said many times, if Collingwood and Geelong can play as many midfielders as they do and be the top 2 teams in the league (over the last few years) then why cant Richmond do the same thing?

It is a shit theory to say that Tuck is competing for a spot with the likes of Martin, Cotchin... Tuck is a clearance machine he could actually be teaching these kids a thing or two. The other thing that annoys me is how quickly people forget that he can play in multiple positions, when he came into the side last year he was played across half back and was playing really good football.

And gifting to many kids games does nothing in the long term, look at Tambling for example, he was gifted games from day one and was a lazy footballer, kids should be made to earn games and compete for there spot at coburg. I use Collingwood in this example as well, look at the depth and hunger in there side, it is because no one was gifted games.

 

[Yoda_]

Mate we have got rid of a lot of older players so the kids can develop...
Simmonds, Brown, Johnson, Bowden and there are more.
You still need to have a few older tough bodies in the side, like I have said many times, if Collingwood and Geelong can play as many midfielders as they do and be the top 2 teams in the league (over the last few years) then why cant Richmond do the same thing?

Older guys? You already have Newman (28), Moore (27), King (27), Foley (25), Thursfield (25), Jackson (24), Morton (24), McGuane (24) and Deledio (24) in your best 22, so not sure how old you can go?

As for your last question here, i think the gap between your best 3 mids and your bottom 3 mids is far greater than that of say a Collingwood or Geelong.

It is a shit theory to say that Tuck is competing for a spot with the likes of Martin, Cotchin... Tuck is a clearance machine he could actually be teaching these kids a thing or two. The other thing that annoys me is how quickly people forget that he can play in multiple positions, when he came into the side last year he was played across half back and was playing really good football.

They are competing for the same spot, most Richmond supporters would agree? He is a clearance machine, but why play him and take the clearances, stagnating the careers of players like Cotchin & Martin?

Like I said in my original post, I am a huge fan, just dont think he has enough 'hurt' factor to outpoint your best back 6. FWIW, I think your half back line is one of the better ones in the league, just still young and developing.

And gifting to many kids games does nothing in the long term, look at Tambling for example, he was gifted games from day one and was a lazy footballer, kids should be made to earn games and compete for there spot at coburg. I use Collingwood in this example as well, look at the depth and hunger in there side, it is because no one was gifted games.

I definitely agree on this one. I was shot down majorly for even suggesting David Hille play reserves football last weekend, because that us what Matthew Knights wouldn't of done, but Hird & co. have made everyone work hard, fight and compete with one another for spots in the starting 21.

I can see Tuck finished at the end of this year and more than 50% chance of him being selected by a major premiership contender intent on a clearance machine, or one of the two fledgling clubs.

 

[MightyTiger]

Mate we have got rid of a lot of older players so the kids can develop...
Simmonds, Brown, Johnson, Bowden and there are more.
You still need to have a few older tough bodies in the side, like I have said many times, if Collingwood and Geelong can play as many midfielders as they do and be the top 2 teams in the league (over the last few years) then why cant Richmond do the same thing?

It is a shit theory to say that Tuck is competing for a spot with the likes of Martin, Cotchin... Tuck is a clearance machine he could actually be teaching these kids a thing or two. The other thing that annoys me is how quickly people forget that he can play in multiple positions, when he came into the side last year he was played across half back and was playing really good football.

And gifting to many kids games does nothing in the long term, look at Tambling for example, he was gifted games from day one and was a lazy footballer, kids should be made to earn games and compete for there spot at coburg. I use Collingwood in this example as well, look at the depth and hunger in there side, it is because no one was gifted games.

I think you are missing the point, Tuck plays the same role as Cotchin, Martin, Jackson, Foley and Grigg play, from who within that group does he replace?

Collingwood for instance have Luke Ball as there only true in and under clearance player who feeds it out to the likes of Pendlebury, Thomas, Swan, Beams and so on.

Geelong have Ling and Selwood as your true in and under players who feed it out to the likes of Bartel, Chapman, Corey and the list goes on.

We need team balance, we cant have to many of the same type playing the same role and leaving us exposed in other areas.

And as others have mentioned, we were one of the best clearance teams in the comp last year, yet we came 15th.

And yes I agree gifting games to kids is not good, but out of that midfield group I put forward who does he replace that isn't performing.

 

[Rayzorwire]

I think Rayzor that most Richmond people would agree that Tuck is the best clearance player at our club right now (by some way). Foley used to have lots of spectacular clearances but hasn't spent huge amounts of time in the middle this year.

I like Foley pc, but he's spent a fair bit of time in the centre, (as has Grigg so we can play Martin more forward at times) and he hasn't been competitive enough so far IMO, hopefully he'll improve. I think the decision to play him in the seniors straight away this year was sound as long as we had Tuck to fall back on when necessary. Without Tuck it's been a significant failure, we've effectively been a mid short, Vickery has had twice as many centre bounce clearances as Foley in less game time on the ball.

Interesting to see people up in arms about this possibly happening to Tuck, but barely a word was uttered when it was appearing to happen to McMahon, in fact I believe nearly every poster was happy to see it happen.

It's a question of loyalty RT, we owed McMahon no more loyalty than anyone else on the list. Tuck, however, has been unquestionably the best player we've had over the last 6yrs, he's played hurt for us probably 30-40% of his career, spent an entire season kicking on his left foot because he physically couldn't use his right, but still been available for every single game, played on the best in the business every week and almost never let us down.

All the times in the last 6yrs we would have been humiliated without Tuck, all the times he literally carried the team on his shoulders in the middle and gave more than anyone else on the ground bar perhaps Richo, we owe him a massive debt of respect and gratitude like no other player on our list.

Contract rumours aside, the way he's been treated is just wrong on every level. What other club would do this to a 28yo who'd been their backbone for over half a decade, was in some of the best form of his career last year, and has a father who played over 400 games after a late start? You add to players like that and build around them, not leave them in the reserves and publicly shame them by playing kids who have been at the club 5 minutes and others far less committed or capable ahead of them.

 

[Infamy]

It would be pure stupidity of the club if they didn't do everything possible to get Tuck taken by GWS. We've tried to trade him before and there have been no takers, but given GCS's poor form and not looking like winning a single game GWS must look at a bigger bodied midfielder to help protect their kids, especially given they don't look like signing anyone big in their first year. They'll lose by 200 point every week otherwise.

It would be in the best interests of both Richmond with a compensation draft pick and Shane with a longer contract.

 

[MightyTiger]

Michael Tuck is that you? ^^

 

[_RT_]

It's a question of loyalty RT, we owed McMahon no more loyalty than anyone else on the list. Tuck, however, has been unquestionably the best player we've had over the last 6yrs, he's played hurt for us probably 30-40% of his career, spent an entire season kicking on his left foot because he physically couldn't use his right, but still been available for every single game, played on the best in the business every week and almost never let us down.

All the times in the last 6yrs we would have been humiliated without Tuck, all the times he literally carried the team on his shoulders in the middle and gave more than anyone else on the ground bar perhaps Richo, we owe him a massive debt of respect and gratitude like no other player on our list.

Contract rumours aside, the way he's been treated is just wrong on every level. What other club would do this to a 28yo who'd been their backbone for over half a decade, was in some of the best form of his career last year, and has a father who played over 400 games after a late start? You add to players like that and build around them, not leave them in the reserves and publicly shame them by playing kids who have been at the club 5 minutes and others far less committed or capable ahead of them.

Footy clubs aren't required to show loyalty, they are asked to build teams that can win games of footy and in turn give you a chance of winning a flag. Tuck has no doubt been a very good player for us over the journey but right now the club believes that they have kids that can be just as good if not better than Tuck has been and the only way to develop them is to play them.

As for him not playing, I see plenty of people(me included) calling for Tuck to replace Nahas White Edwards or King, but the truth of the matter is Tuck can't replace them because he can't play the role that these guys play, he can't be the defensive small forward that Nahas & King are, he can't play the defensive tagger that White plays because Tuck is a ball hunter and he can't play the running link role that Edwards play either as his disposal is just as bad as Edwards has been. That means for him to play he needs to replace one of Cotchin Martin or Jackson in the midfield. So who out of those 3 would you have Tuck replace?