SA Footy

bd u15 09 wrote:Ryder to Port.

Apparently theres a nicely sized contract the Power have put in front of Ryder, although his missus wanting to go back to Queensland will probably win out.

Suri wrote:

bd u15 09 wrote:Ryder to Port.

Apparently theres a nicely sized contract the Power have put in front of Ryder, although his missus wanting to go back to Queensland will probably win out.

Yes would think almost zero chance of coming to Adelaide. If the Mrs wants to move home thats where he will be going.
Will find out in a couple of days if he intends to stay with us or not. Apparantly met with Bomber the day after our final and promised him if he did move he doesnt intend to use any get out clause and wants the club to get decent compensation for him

Booney wrote:

Rik E Boy wrote:

Booney wrote:Geelong won't retire any of that lot, not going to make the same mistakes two years in a row at Cat land. ( Namely Chapman and Podsiadly )

How would Pods and Chappy have helped us this year? Maybe advanced our season by one week maybe at best, but held us back longer in the future. I don't think it was a mistake to let either of those guys go. I think Geelong should retire a couple of the blokes daisy mentioned in his troll, um, I mean post. Kelly looks done for sure and Mackie might have some trade value. Maybe we could scam the Crows somehow.

Pods and Chappy were only servicable at best for their new clubs and the trade of Pods looked worse only because Vardy went down in the pre-season. Murdoch has come on a long way this season but if he was sitting in the Magoos for an extra dozen weeks this season he might be looking to move to another club.

If the Cats hang on to too many of the old guys that would be making the same mistake two years in a row. I'd keep Bartel and Enright only.

regards,

REB

The choice was keep the old guys on or see if the young blokes have what it takes. 7 wins under 2 goals masked the problem, some of the kids don't seem to have what it takes. ( At the moment )

If we kept the old guys we wouldn't have known whether or not they have what it takes. Some will, some won't, but we had to start finding out. Geelong certainly 'overachieved' this year and I don't think any problems were masked by the win/loss count, most observers knew Geelong were not a genuine contender. However, at the start of the year I felt that it was almost exclusively the premiership stars that helped us get these wins but towards the end of the year other players, Caddy, Guthrie, Murdoch and Horlin Smith in particular started to help contribute to jagging us a few wins.

@Daisy maybe I was trolling you a bit there. Despite my other trolling efforts, I'll don't think Dangerfield will become a Cat, but it's fun saying so. We are no sure thing to get Frawley either as apparently they are keen in the West. You'd think if Frawley wants success he'd be better off at Freo than Geelong who don't have as much depth as the Dockers. As for the money, I think the Catters aren't going to sell the farm in order to get Frawley. Hmm, maybe we are after Dangerfield after all.

regards,

REB

Rik E Boy wrote:

Booney wrote:

Rik E Boy wrote:

Booney wrote:Geelong won't retire any of that lot, not going to make the same mistakes two years in a row at Cat land. ( Namely Chapman and Podsiadly )

How would Pods and Chappy have helped us this year? Maybe advanced our season by one week maybe at best, but held us back longer in the future. I don't think it was a mistake to let either of those guys go. I think Geelong should retire a couple of the blokes daisy mentioned in his troll, um, I mean post. Kelly looks done for sure and Mackie might have some trade value. Maybe we could scam the Crows somehow.

Pods and Chappy were only servicable at best for their new clubs and the trade of Pods looked worse only because Vardy went down in the pre-season. Murdoch has come on a long way this season but if he was sitting in the Magoos for an extra dozen weeks this season he might be looking to move to another club.

If the Cats hang on to too many of the old guys that would be making the same mistake two years in a row. I'd keep Bartel and Enright only.

regards,

REB

The choice was keep the old guys on or see if the young blokes have what it takes. 7 wins under 2 goals masked the problem, some of the kids don't seem to have what it takes. ( At the moment )

If we kept the old guys we wouldn't have known whether or not they have what it takes. Some will, some won't, but we had to start finding out. Geelong certainly 'overachieved' this year and I don't think any problems were masked by the win/loss count, most observers knew Geelong were not a genuine contender. However, at the start of the year I felt that it was almost exclusively the premiership stars that helped us get these wins but towards the end of the year other players, Caddy, Guthrie, Murdoch and Horlin Smith in particular started to help contribute to jagging us a few wins.

@Daisy maybe I was trolling you a bit there. Despite my other trolling efforts, I'll don't think Dangerfield will become a Cat, but it's fun saying so. We are no sure thing to get Frawley either as apparently they are keen in the West. You'd think if Frawley wants success he'd be better off at Freo than Geelong who don't have as much depth as the Dockers. As for the money, I think the Catters aren't going to sell the farm in order to get Frawley. Hmm, maybe we are after Dangerfield after all.

regards,

REB

I'd argue that Freo's window isn't open for much longer once Pavlich, Sandilands and McPharlin retire. Mundy is 29 so not getting better.


If I was Frawley, I'd be happy to join a team that had Selwood, Taylor, Hawkins, Christensen, Motlop, Caddy, Horlin-Smith, Guthrie etc with a lot of footy in front of them still.

whats crows fans thoughts on okeefe rumours to Adelaide?

Johno6 wrote:whats crows fans thoughts on okeefe rumours to Adelaide?

Would make a handy assistant coach IMO

I think that is all its for.

I highly doubt they would be bringing him to Adelaide to talk about gap filling in a Pods type capacity.

Brodlach wrote:

Johno6 wrote:whats crows fans thoughts on okeefe rumours to Adelaide?

Would make a handy assistant coach IMO

Have to agree Brod.

Was a great player under the Kirk era where the bloods culture galvanized a side to a drought breaking flag. Certainly has the experience in what it takes to bring together a playing group, that along with a club, has lost its tightness.

valleys07 wrote:I think that is all its for.

I highly doubt they would be bringing him to Adelaide to talk about gap filling in a Pods type capacity.

Could rookie list him to play in the sanfl and assist in the development of the young players

Ryder met with Brisbane today.
Caroline Wilson saying Port are the front runners for him.
Watch us end of with the Fuschia or Shitcock in the trade lol

Jim05 wrote:Ryder met with Brisbane today.
Caroline Wilson saying Port are the front runners for him.
Watch us end of with the Fuschia or Shitcock in the trade lol

What trade, he'll walk for free.

kickinit wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Ryder met with Brisbane today.
Caroline Wilson saying Port are the front runners for him.
Watch us end of with the Fuschia or Shitcock in the trade lol

What trade, he'll walk for free.

Guess we will find out soon enough.
Paddy has apparantly indicated to the club that he wouldnt seek to use the get out clause and he wants to see the club fairly compensated. Think his manager is using a fair bit of bluff to drive up his price as several high profile people have said the clause wouldnt hold up in court. Hope it doesnt get to that point and a fair deal is negotiated.

Jim05 wrote:

kickinit wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Ryder met with Brisbane today.
Caroline Wilson saying Port are the front runners for him.
Watch us end of with the Fuschia or Shitcock in the trade lol

What trade, he'll walk for free.

Guess we will find out soon enough.
Paddy has apparantly indicated to the club that he wouldnt seek to use the get out clause and he wants to see the club fairly compensated. Think his manager is using a fair bit of bluff to drive up his price as several high profile people have said the clause wouldnt hold up in court. Hope it doesnt get to that point and a fair deal is negotiated.

Essendon might be using a bit of bluff of their own .. If they challenge that clause in court and lose, the floodgates would be well and truly open ..

Jim05 wrote:

kickinit wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Ryder met with Brisbane today.
Caroline Wilson saying Port are the front runners for him.
Watch us end of with the Fuschia or Shitcock in the trade lol

What trade, he'll walk for free.

Guess we will find out soon enough.
Paddy has apparantly indicated to the club that he wouldnt seek to use the get out clause and he wants to see the club fairly compensated. Think his manager is using a fair bit of bluff to drive up his price as several high profile people have said the clause wouldnt hold up in court. Hope it doesnt get to that point and a fair deal is negotiated.

If he's talking to clubs then he is obviously looking at using the clause. Essendon isn't going to trade him. I'd also like to see Essendon try and fight it in court. They purchased a banned substance and gave it to the players to take, and to the players knowledge its was all ok and safe to use. Yeh Essendon didn't put any players safety at risk.

As I said I dont think it will get to court. Paddy and the club are still talking which can only be a good thing. If he genuinely wants a move to be near his wifes home I hope we can make it happen. As sad as it would be to lose him he is far from replaceable

kickinit wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

kickinit wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Ryder met with Brisbane today.
Caroline Wilson saying Port are the front runners for him.
Watch us end of with the Fuschia or Shitcock in the trade lol

What trade, he'll walk for free.

Guess we will find out soon enough.
Paddy has apparantly indicated to the club that he wouldnt seek to use the get out clause and he wants to see the club fairly compensated. Think his manager is using a fair bit of bluff to drive up his price as several high profile people have said the clause wouldnt hold up in court. Hope it doesnt get to that point and a fair deal is negotiated.

If he's talking to clubs then he is obviously looking at using the clause. Essendon isn't going to trade him. I'd also like to see Essendon try and fight it in court. They purchased a banned substance and gave it to the players to take, and to the players knowledge its was all ok and safe to use. Yeh Essendon didn't put any players safety at risk.

Bulldogs President Peter Gordon who also happens to own one of the most high profile legal firms in Melbourne looked in to using the clause last year to get Crameri but recently admitted he didnt think the clause would hold up. Player Manager Craig Kelly also believes the clause wont hold up due to the fact that players were free to walk last year yet he stayed and played this year. Caroline Wilson who everyone takes as gospel also has said the clause wouldnt hold up numerous times.
As Paul Roos recently said, the clause applies to all clubs not just Essendon and if this goes ahead it would mean several players from several clubs could find their way out of existing contracts with how loosely the clause is written.
Guess we will wait and see

In the spirit of the gams and sport in general, I doubt a club even as unscrupulous as Essendon ( ) would try and invoke lengthy legal proceedings to keep a player who no longer wishes to remain at the club.

As you rightfully note, if Ryder communicates to Essendon his intentions, Essendon are (adequately) compensated in turn then all parties avoid the QC bills arriving in the post.

Regardless of this, if Ryder does successfully negotiate an early exit from his contract without using any legal loophole and Essendon oblige the flood gates could well open.

As for Brendan Goddards comments about the "unethical" nature of clubs circling around the Bombers trying to convince players to leave, didn't Essendon circle around him and seduce him into leaving St.Kilda?

Not sure on Goddard's scenerio except he was a FA and able to go anywhere, differance is Ryder still has 2 years to run on an existing contract. From a neutral it sounds like Ryder and his manager are angling for more money and using this get out clause business as leverage. If he wants to leave because of the drug fiasco then fair enough but it doesnt seem this way. First he wanted to be near his wife's family in Brissie then Port come along with a bigger offer and he looks at them, now today Swans have apparantly offered a bigger contract again, this smacks of Tippett all over again. The funniest thing was Ryder's manager saying yesterday that they have got a further meeting with Essendon next week but at the moment the club is about $150k short a year from convincing him to stay which suggests its all about the money.
Plenty of other clubs would be watching this closely because if one players invokes the clause it could open floodgates and players from everywhere could leave if they have any grievances with their club for example it was mentioned yesterday that Lamumba and others could leave Collingwood due to homophobic slurs aswell as other players who feel they are being marginalised at their club or put in unsafe conditions.
Very interesting times ahead, the scenery at AFL clubs could be changed forever, we already have FA and if this get out clause stands up it will mean contracts could be easily broken and then we are not far away from someone challenging the draft or salary cap

Special One wrote:

valleys07 wrote:I think that is all its for.

I highly doubt they would be bringing him to Adelaide to talk about gap filling in a Pods type capacity.

Could rookie list him to play in the sanfl and assist in the development of the young players

Think they will do this & if they get a few injuries they can play him if need be in the seniors

Ryder now linked to Sydney..

heard that a few weeks back, but i did read it again today for the first time in a while.