A quick question, is this new clause only added to Essendon players contracts or do all AFL players have this added to their contracts.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Sydney v Brisbane Lions - 2:30PM AEST Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 61% chance -- What's your tip? -- Ticketing Buy, Sell -- Teams on Thurs »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Grand Final
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
it's been in every players contract for about a decadeA quick question, is this new clause only added to Essendon players contracts or do all AFL players have this added to their contracts.
Been there a long time.A quick question, is this new clause only added to Essendon players contracts or do all AFL players have this added to their contracts.
Been there a long time.
Before you could walk and had to go to the draft.
Now you can be a delisted free agent and choose where to go. But applies to all clubs.
Yes. but whether it would apply to Ryder isn't confirmed. It's not like most here think of a player just choosing to invoke it.thats the new clause, yes ? what the AFLPA had been chasing for several years.
Yes. but whether it would apply to Ryder isn't confirmed. It's not like most here think of a player just choosing to invoke it.
Some argue - Peter Gordon for example - that said person continued in their job for a further 2 years and did not want to walk away etc, what causes it now. - incidently that is part of the issue with Essendon's case against ASADA not challenging a rule early enough.Some would argue that just not having full records of what Ryder was injected with at the behest of the club is a serious breech of duty of care.
Some argue - Peter Gordon for example - that said person continued in their job for a further 2 years and did not want to walk away etc, what causes it now. - incidently that is part of the issue with Essendon's case against ASADA not challenging a rule early enough.
Not saying it couldn't be warranted, just it is far more complex than most think.
Some argue - Peter Gordon for example - that said person continued in their job for a further 2 years and did not want to walk away etc, what causes it now. - incidently that is part of the issue with Essendon's case against ASADA not challenging a rule early enough.
Not saying it couldn't be warranted, just it is far more complex than most think.
I think that is a complex answer rally. As I said, I'm not saying it woudn't get up, it isn't a simple though as the HTB seem to think in a legal sense.Isn't Ryder entitled to change his mind?
Especially if his wife is beginning to get concerned?
The fact that Ryder may have not cared in the past does not mean it's no longer a failure in Essendon's duty of care.
Some argue - Peter Gordon for example - that said person continued in their job for a further 2 years and did not want to walk away etc, what causes it now. - incidently that is part of the issue with Essendon's case against ASADA not challenging a rule early enough.
Not saying it couldn't be warranted, just it is far more complex than most think.
I think that is a complex answer rally. As I said, I'm not saying it woudn't get up, it isn't a simple though as the HTB seem to think in a legal sense.
Part of Essendon's issue with their court case was Middleton believed players should have questioned the AFL's rights to compel during the interview.
I just think plenty from both sides seem misunderstand it. I'm not saying he wouldn't be enabled - just there is more to the question than most knoe
Bit hard to argue that given the signed consent forms which made reference to "thymosin", etcHe could argue he thought he was getting Vitamin C injections and until it was proven otherwise had no reason for concern since the investigation he now does.
Agree.You position is pretty fair.
I'm also not convinced it's something either party really want to test out in court.
Chance are a trade is going to end up going through for a bit less than Ryder's value.
I don't think that was his point.Bit hard to argue that given the signed consent forms which made reference to "thymosin", etc
Some argue - Peter Gordon for example - that said person continued in their job for a further 2 years and did not want to walk away etc, what causes it now. - incidently that is part of the issue with Essendon's case against ASADA not challenging a rule early enough.
Not saying it couldn't be warranted, just it is far more complex than most think.
Bit hard to argue that given the signed consent forms which made reference to "thymosin", etc
But up until SC notices were issued, the player could argue that he believed the club's stance that nothing bad had happened.Some argue - Peter Gordon for example - that said person continued in their job for a further 2 years and did not want to walk away etc, what causes it now. - incidently that is part of the issue with Essendon's case against ASADA not challenging a rule early enough.
Not saying it couldn't be warranted, just it is far more complex than most think.
That might be his stance now. If Essendon play hard ball, Ryder might become less generous.Agree.
The feeling I get with Ryder is part of the decision of where he goes will be who offers the best (or, an acceptable) deal with Essendon, keep both sides happy.
I had the feeling Paddy didn't want out, but now i don't know, i thought his wife wanted to go back to Brissy, so now she will go where the best deal is?Agree.
The feeling I get with Ryder is part of the decision of where he goes will be who offers the best (or, an acceptable) deal with Essendon, keep both sides happy.
Every employer in every industry has a duty of care to its employees, even if their contract doesn't mention it.A quick question, is this new clause only added to Essendon players contracts or do all AFL players have this added to their contracts.