On 19/09/2014 at 11:24, Tall Defence said:

So he can sit on the sidelines for 2 years? No thanks.

I'm not following the essendon drug scandal closely, but I'm pretty sure they are looking at 3 month bans only.

they will serve most of this in the off season.

  On 19/09/2014 at 11:20, Moonshadow said:

FWIW, reported on AFL site as requiring no trade or compo in return.

Thanks. After your post I had a look here:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-09-19/ryder-quits-bombers

Some of the key passages concerning this:

"RUCKMAN Patrick Ryder has quit Essendon and requested a trade to a new club.

The important ruckman could attempt leave the Bombers on the grounds they seriously breached their duty of care to him through the supplements scandal of 2011-12.

That clause could also be used to convince the Bombers to orchestrate a trade.

Essendon would receive no compensation for losing Ryder under the new rule, which was pushed by the AFLPA and introduced as a result of the club's breaches."

So he's requested a trade, but you and 3165 look to be right - he could go for nothing. I'd expect Essendon to finalise a trade, but hopefully their reputation as trading Scrooges comes back to bite them and they lose him for nothing.

Regardless, I wouldn't touch him, or any of his teammates with the possibility of a two year ban, with a ten foot pole.

Spot on pants. With the possibility of a ban, not sure it's a good idea.

  On 19/09/2014 at 11:30, UTAH said:

I'm not following the essendon drug scandal closely, but I'm pretty sure they are looking at 3 month bans only.

they will serve most of this in the off season.

That was offered a few months back as a possability by ASADA, but no one took the offer at the time. Will the offer still be there, or as a result of the players sticking bye the club through the court process mean it's no longer there?

And even if the offer is still there, WADA then have to sign off on it. Just ask Wade Lees how that worked for his original 6 month ban a few years back in the VFL for having a protein shake (or something to that effect) stopped at customs with illegal substances in it which he wasn't aware of. Never even took the stuff.

I'm fairly sure he wants to get out of Victoria, so I highly doubt he will bother looking at us.

As for the breach of duty of care clause, using that would be speculative and risky, there are a lot of unknowns with how that clause works, so he'd want to have some seriously good legal advice before he tries to rely on it. I'd have thought the better option would be to request a trade, on the basis that Essendon stands to get something (on current form a decent draft pick at the least) and avoids more legal fees in dealing with the contract clause.

  On 19/09/2014 at 13:21, titan_uranus said:

I'm fairly sure he wants to get out of Victoria, so I highly doubt he will bother looking at us.

As for the breach of duty of care clause, using that would be speculative and risky, there are a lot of unknowns with how that clause works, so he'd want to have some seriously good legal advice before he tries to rely on it. I'd have thought the better option would be to request a trade, on the basis that Essendon stands to get something (on current form a decent draft pick at the least) and avoids more legal fees in dealing with the contract clause.

I agree, requesting the trade would be the better way to go about it.

Having said that, not knowing how long, (if at all) any suspension will be for, how many clubs will be willing to trade for him/any player from Essendon?

He's a very good player Ryder, but I wouldn't want Melbourne going anywhere near any of their players unless we know they're not one of the 34.

  On 19/09/2014 at 13:25, Tall Defence said:

I agree, requesting the trade would be the better way to go about it.

Having said that, not knowing how long, (if at all) any suspension will be for, how many clubs will be willing to trade for him/any player from Essendon?

He's a very good player Ryder, but I wouldn't want Melbourne going anywhere near any of their players unless we know they're not one of the 34.

From what I'd heard his wife became pregnant during the alleged doping regime. That's one of the reasons he has requested a trade as he is ticked off that it may effect his child's health. So from that I'd presume he is one of the 34.

I'm not sure the clause will be invoked ahead of this month's trade period. However, the potential for it to be used can be used as leverage against Essendon to accept something lower than what they would like for him. Currently they want a first round pick and a quality player for Ryder, which seems ridiculous given he faces a potential ban, clearly wants out of the club, and could potentially walk to wherever he wants, for nothing.

Ryder should be our number one target given our salary cap position and his reduced cost in any trade. It sounds like he wants to go interstate, but players have changed their mind on that before. And we can offer something that Brisbane and GWS cannot - the number one ruck role.

The risk of lengthy bans is overstated IMO.

  On 19/09/2014 at 11:30, UTAH said:

I'm not following the essendon drug scandal closely, but I'm pretty sure they are looking at 3 month bans only.

they will serve most of this in the off season.

From how I interpreted John Fahey's comments on ABC radio a short time ago I get the impression that they may have missed the boat on any reduced penalty.

One would have to be certain that he would be allowed to play to consider offering anything in return, and frankly it would stick in the craw to give anything at all to those cheats.

First there was a little rumour that the Swans are interested and we know they get their man when they are.

Second, how would it play out if Bombers refused to trade and then he goes to Court. It could go on for months and how does a new club put him on their list if it is after the relevant dates for lists.

The AFL would have to pass a new rule to allow that to happen. You could have players then bobbing up all through a season wanting to change clubs.

I suppose if the AFL want a result they will engineer it. Only thing I know for sure is that we won't benefit.

The atheletes convicted of doping will under asda rules be able to claim significant delay due to the investigation taking so long for no fault of the athelete . Probably wont include the clubs court case period but some of the asada investigation period . 6 month bans ? 3 months? Id wait and see before picking up a bomber drug cheat .

  On 19/09/2014 at 21:28, Fat Tony said:

Ryder should be our number one target given our salary cap position and his reduced cost in any trade. It sounds like he wants to go interstate, but players have changed their mind on that before. And we can offer something that Brisbane and GWS cannot - the number one ruck role.

The risk of lengthy bans is overstated IMO.

We can also offer Simon Goodwin as his coach which may also appeal. Further Essendon may prefer to deal with us considering we are near the bottom, rather than strengthen one of the other teams who may then proceed to displace them from contention the top the eight. Better to trade to someone that you don't consider a threat rather than somebody who is likely to use the asset effectively against you!

won't happen.

He can go to any club without giving Essendon a trade because of the player Association agreement made last season with all players who want to leave Essendon.

The players may only get a 6 month ban which will be served in the off season hence the reason Essendon have been pushing the verdict out with law suits.

Definitely a player worth having a look at to replace MC.

Has nominated Port Adelaide. Reported that Essendon is only interested in players by way of exchange.

  On 26/09/2014 at 08:19, Whispering_Jack said:

Has nominated Port Adelaide. Reported that Essendon is only interested in players by way of exchange.

This will be good.

God I hate Essendon. I hope they can't work out a trade and he walks. They are a joke to deal with.

The worst team in history to deal with good luck port

Classic folk at Essendon. From the supporters right up to the top, just the most delusional characters around.

  On 26/09/2014 at 08:19, Whispering_Jack said:

Has nominated Port Adelaide. Reported that Essendon is only interested in players by way of exchange.

Interested to see what players people think would equate to an even trade.

No doubt the Bombers will be asking for Ollie Wines which is utterly ridiculous. Maybe they could go with John Butcher and Andrew Moore for Ryder? Bomber fans would scoff at that I'm sure but I can't see what else they would readily give up for him.

More interesting to see who'd even want to go to Windy Hill !!!!

  On 26/09/2014 at 09:09, Wiseblood said:

Interested to see what players people think would equate to an even trade.

I think the 'players only' request Jack mentioned will have to be softened on by Essendon. If Port are willing to part with pick 16 and steak knives, I'd take it and make sure it was a good steak knife. Neade? I haven't watched much footy outside of Melbourne games for eight years, but during the finals he looked a bit out of his depth but had potential.

Part of Port's strength is their midfield and the way their players run and find space. I wouldn't be giving up anyone who was going to be a relatively significant part of their premiership push. In the end, I think pick 16 and someone on the fringe gets it done late in trade week as Ryder pushes harder and talk of court starts appearing in the paper.

  On 26/09/2014 at 09:34, pantaloons said:

If Port are willing to part with pick 16 and steak knives, I'd take it and make sure it was a good steak knife. Neade? I haven't watched much footy outside of Melbourne games for eight years, but during the finals he looked a bit out of his depth but had potential.

Neade had a blinder (for at least a half) against Freo the week before if my failing memory stands up. Played a big part in Port's comeback.

  On 26/09/2014 at 09:34, pantaloons said:

I think the 'players only' request Jack mentioned will have to be softened on by Essendon. If Port are willing to part with pick 16 and steak knives, I'd take it and make sure it was a good steak knife. Neade? I haven't watched much footy outside of Melbourne games for eight years, but during the finals he looked a bit out of his depth but had potential.

Part of Port's strength is their midfield and the way their players run and find space. I wouldn't be giving up anyone who was going to be a relatively significant part of their premiership push. In the end, I think pick 16 and someone on the fringe gets it done late in trade week as Ryder pushes harder and talk of court starts appearing in the paper.

Great points mate. Ryder has already nominated PA so it's not as if someone else will trump them sometime during trade week. Brisbane, the only club who might, are focused solely on Beams now (and rightly so), so if Port holds their nerve they'll get it done for the pieces you mentioned... or it gets very, very messy.