The White Tiger
Senior List
- Jun 12, 2006
- 196
- 0
- AFL Club
- Richmond
http://richmondfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=299478 If anyone could tell me how to post the article i'd appreciate it, cheers.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Club update- Rodan Humm Roach
- Thread starter The White Tiger
- Start date
- Tagged users None
just copy and paste would work wouldnt it?
Tiger list management update
8:00:31 AM Thu 21 September, 2006
richmondfc.com.au
The Richmond Football Club wishes to clarify the situation regarding the futures of senior list players David Rodan, Tom Roach and Jeremy Humm, following comments made on last night’s ‘Footy Show’.
All three players, who are out of contract, have been involved in on-going discussions with the Club about their playing futures over the past few weeks.
They were advised before this week’s Best and Fairest count that a place on the senior list in ’07 for each of them couldn’t be guaranteed and were welcome to look at opportunities elsewhere. This remains the Club’s position.
No formal decision will be made on Club delistings until the end of the upcoming AFL trade period.
Yep, works a treat.
Tiger list management update
8:00:31 AM Thu 21 September, 2006
richmondfc.com.au
The Richmond Football Club wishes to clarify the situation regarding the futures of senior list players David Rodan, Tom Roach and Jeremy Humm, following comments made on last night’s ‘Footy Show’.
All three players, who are out of contract, have been involved in on-going discussions with the Club about their playing futures over the past few weeks.
They were advised before this week’s Best and Fairest count that a place on the senior list in ’07 for each of them couldn’t be guaranteed and were welcome to look at opportunities elsewhere. This remains the Club’s position.
No formal decision will be made on Club delistings until the end of the upcoming AFL trade period.
Yep, works a treat.
so in other words they are gone.
The White Tiger
Senior List
- Jun 12, 2006
- 196
- 0
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #5
I dunno,computers weren't around when i was a kid so my skills aren't the best. When i go to copy its not highlighted, some more detailed instructions would be appreciated Darth,thanx
beaver's army said:
I posted this link up on a bay 13 thread last week and thats the way I read it aswell beaver.
Anyone can read between the lines there !!!
Certainly was what we were told:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/Rodan-to-stay-with-Richmond-in-AFL/2005/10/21/1129775942329.html
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/Rodan-to-stay-with-Richmond-in-AFL/2005/10/21/1129775942329.html
FlyingTiger
Debutant
jezza said:
to quote the article:
"Rodan, 22, who missed the entire 2005 season after rupturing a knee ligament in a pre-season practice match, has agreed to a two-year performance-based contract."
Sounds like the performance base may have included a set number of senior games played which would give the club an out.
I think.
Maybe?
FT
linger_isgod
All Australian
Richmond coaches are a bit annoyed about it, because they wanted to keep it in-house. They were planning on offering the three players on the trade market before officially delisting them. Not that they would have been worth much, although might have gotten a late draft pick for Rodan. But now other clubs will just wait for Pre-Season Draft if they have any interest, becuase they know they'll be delisted.
yea im rather annoyed that its gotten out, would just make clubs trade more if they thought it was their only chance to get one of them.linger_isgod said:
i don't think humm can be traded anyway, considering he started the year on the rookie list, although its not as if any club would want him anyway, so he will be delisted. apparently rodan is actually getting a bit of interest, but i am unsure what is happening with roach.
Gawwwn.
- Banned
- #15
rodan was on a 2 yr contract but it was performance based and had conditions. his second yr was only guaranteed based on his perfornmance of the first yr. thus iirc, he only played 5 games this yr and underperformed big time making sure his second yr part of the contract was void.banzai said:
bye bye u rodant
The players had already been told they weren't guaranteed a new contract and should look for opportunities elsewhere. Their managers would already have the word out to all other clubs that their player is looking for a new job. If other clubs are interested in out-of contract players they can either trade for them or take their chances in the PSD. It makes no difference whether or not the public are also in the know.linger_isgod said:
The White Tiger said:
if you highlight the text you want, try pressing ctrl+c (which is the equivalent of copy) moving into your post or text document or whatever you want to paste into and then press ctrl+v (shortcut for paste). sometimes this works when using the menu doesnt. goodluck. btw computers werent around when i was a kid either - well they were but we are talking commodore 64 and my family never had one.
Crumden said:
exactly, if club recruiters are worth thier salt its not like they wouldnt know anyway. if a club sees a player (eg. rodan) as filling a need they may still trade for him so that no one else gets him.
footy4eva said:
Not how I understand the rules. There is no freedom for clubs to offer different contract types to different players. All players are on the same standard player contract. The players association worked long and hard to remove any options clause (where either player or club has the option of taking up extra years).
A performance based contract in modern AFL basically means a minimum base contract ($50k) plus higher match payments and bonuses for things like placing in the best and fairest. The types of bonuses on offer are heavily restricted.
Saying "performance based contract" is basically marketing spin to appease fans.
If Rodan is delisted we will be putting $50k in his pocket (as I understand the rules), unless we can get someone else to pick him up and we can $20-30k towards the base amount with the other club picking up the rest and any match payments.
Crumden said:
Spot on. Those guys know they are not required players and it would take a strange turn of events to get a new deal.
Basically the club wants to keep its options open because they can't officially delist anyone until October 31. Someone might want one of them in a trade. We might trade Richo, Coughlan and Tuck for Fiora and then have two extra vacancies and decide to keep Rodan for one more year.
No point the club making hard and fast decisions before they need to.
sante
Emu
We may shop Rodan around and see what we can get and if its nothing...delisted
