Jump to content

Wait for this to be rorted!

george_on_the_outer
george_on_the_outer
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

The Age is reporting that Richmond and Rance have come to an agreement to pay out part of his salary that he would have otherwise been paid.

One-sixth of quite a bit: Alex Rance leaves $1.4 million on the table

The result is that Richmond now have buckets of $$$'s available under the salary cap for this year and next.

If this is allowed by the AFL, then you can be sure that Sydney and Collingwood will exploit the same avenue for their 10 and 7 year signings, when they can't make it to the end of their contracts!

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
    • Angry 3
     
    44 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

    The Age is reporting that Richmond and Rance have come to an agreement to pay out part of his salary that he would have otherwise been paid.

    One-sixth of quite a bit: Alex Rance leaves $1.4 million on the table

    The result is that Richmond now have buckets of $$$'s available under the salary cap for this year and next.

    If this is allowed by the AFL, then you can be sure that Sydney and Collingwood will exploit the same avenue for their 10 and 7 year signings, when they can't make it to the end of their contracts!

    Very smart business! Shame we have no million dollar babies to take advantage of it.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    It surprising that he will be paid anything really given that he effectively walked away from it.

    I don't have a huge problem with this, given that Rance will not be getting the full value of his contract.

    What I would have a problem with is if Buddy walked away, insisted he be paid out the full ten years value and the AFL let that payment happen outside the salary cap.  But I don't think that's what's happening here.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    39 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

    It surprising that he will be paid anything really given that he effectively walked away from it.

    I don't have a huge problem with this, given that Rance will not be getting the full value of his contract.

    What I would have a problem with is if Buddy walked away, insisted he be paid out the full ten years value and the AFL let that payment happen outside the salary cap.  But I don't think that's what's happening here.

    If his contract were back-end loaded, I could understand that he may have accrued payments that need to be paid out at the conclusion of his time as a player, whether it occurs at the expected end of the contract or earlier. 

  • Quote
    2 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

    The Age is reporting that Richmond and Rance have come to an agreement to pay out part of his salary that he would have otherwise been paid.

    One-sixth of quite a bit: Alex Rance leaves $1.4 million on the table

    The result is that Richmond now have buckets of $$$'s available under the salary cap for this year and next.

    If this is allowed by the AFL, then you can be sure that Sydney and Collingwood will exploit the same avenue for their 10 and 7 year signings, when they can't make it to the end of their contracts!

    My understanding is that a player retiring has the full contract amount in the salary cap.

    It would be a major change if it Richmond was allowed to circumvent that.  Rort city comes to mind.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    A matter worthy of scrutiny and observation. This will test the 'colours' of the AFL, itself. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
    2 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

    If this is allowed by the AFL, then you can be sure that Sydney and Collingwood will exploit the same avenue for their 10 and 7 year signings, when they can't make it to the end of their contracts!

    It's a near guarantee that the AFL will find a way to let Sydney off the hook with the remainder of Buddy's contract.  And if they're not in the finals when he retires, it's an absolute guarantee.

    Which of course sets the precedent.

     

    13 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

    My understanding is that a player retiring has the full contract amount in the salary cap.

    It would be a major change if it Richmond was allowed to circumvent that.  Rort city comes to mind.

    Ohhhh geee, but don't we want to see the best clubs at their best? No-one wants to see the top clubs crippled by pointless salary cap restrictions like this, do they? Especially the premiers. They've got DUSTY, Jack, little Rioli, Captain Cotch ... what a shame if those players don't get to play in their best possible team just because of the retirement of a true champion of the game ...

    (read this in your best McAvaney or Darcy voice)

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
    • Angry 1

    I’m not too sure what the ‘rort’ is.
     

    If a club parts with a player before the contract ends and the player takes a lower exit fee then the club should be able to use any savings back into its salary cap. 

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
     
    39 minutes ago, bandicoot said:

    I’m not too sure what the ‘rort’ is.
     

    If a club parts with a player before the contract ends and the player takes a lower exit fee then the club should be able to use any savings back into its salary cap. 

    "Crikey! Buddy's just retired and the mil we still owe him is stuck on our salary cap!"

    "Don't worry about it. We'll pay him out 50 grand and after Gil's signed off on it, we'll make him game day ambassador to the coterie group on 950 grand. Easy."

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    13 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    "Crikey! Buddy's just retired and the mil we still owe him is stuck on our salary cap!"

    "Don't worry about it. We'll pay him out 50 grand and after Gil's signed off on it, we'll make him game day ambassador to the coterie group on 950 grand. Easy."

    It makes you wonder doesnt it.

    Gee wilikons.

  • Quote

    4 minutes ago, old dee said:

    Rance  has broken the contract why do they have to pay $1?

    I suspect as earlier mentioned it might have been backloaded.

    Interesting though... Gary Ablett's contract at the Suns was reportedly front loaded but no mention of him having to repay for that last season.

    Seems that it may only work one way unless the contracts are getting more specific about these eventualities.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Contracts mean absolutely nothing now

    It is at best a bargaining tool

    Surplus money back in a clubs Salary Cap is complete madness

    The end of the Salary Cap...

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Author
    3 hours ago, bandicoot said:

    I’m not too sure what the ‘rort’ is.
     

    If a club parts with a player before the contract ends and the player takes a lower exit fee then the club should be able to use any savings back into its salary cap. 

    But Richmond can now pay extra to other players on their list who would otherwise be pushed out by the salary cap, thus keeping their list intact. 

    Or they can go chasing other players in the mid-season draft that they couldn't because of salary cap pressure, if they have a spot caused through injury..

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    As @bandicoot says, I don't think Richmond is rorting on this occasion,  Rance screwed them over.

    But @Mazer Rackham has shown how this could be used as a precedent for other clubs to rort in future.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    2 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

    As @bandicoot says, I don't think Richmond is rorting on this occasion,  Rance screwed them over.

    But @Mazer Rackham has shown how this could be used as a precedent for other clubs to rort in future.

    Yes. Richmond are not at fault here at all, they are merely maximizing their situation. But if they succeed all Clubs will want the same opportunities going forward. 
     

    AFL integrity is at stake....

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    5 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    "Crikey! Buddy's just retired and the mil we still owe him is stuck on our salary cap!"

    "Don't worry about it. We'll pay him out 50 grand and after Gil's signed off on it, we'll make him game day ambassador to the coterie group on 950 grand. Easy."

    Promise a fortune over 8 years to blow away any other clubs in the hunt for a 26 year old star, but then use the money on other players when he retires at 31.

    Edited by Moonshadow

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1
    • Angry 1

    8 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

    What I would have a problem with is if Buddy walked away, insisted he be paid out the full ten years value and the AFL let that payment happen outside the salary cap.  But I don't think that's what's happening here.

    This can't happen. Fitzpatrick was so hysterical about Buddy going to Swans when he wanted him to go to his team GWS that he threw the book at the Swans without any justification or authority. Banned them from trading any players in to the Club for 2 or possibly even 3 years. Literally made the Board members each personally sign an agreement acknowledging that if Buddy retired before the end of his contract and walked away all of his remaining salary would stay in the salary cap even if he didn't get paid. 

    He's obviously playing this year, so the most it will be relevant to is the last two years and at this stage he certainly looks likely to play on for at least next season. I read at the time that hiis contract was shaped so that the first 3 years were $750k the middle 3 years were something like $1.4m, $1.6m, $1.5m and the remaining 3 back at $750k. It matched the total amount offered by GWS but over 9 years not 6. They had Goodes and Tippett and a few other expensive players on the list when he started so couldn't offer the $1.5m a year Hawks offered but just for 3 years and GWS for 6.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    3 hours ago, It's Time said:

    This can't happen. Fitzpatrick was so hysterical about Buddy going to Swans when he wanted him to go to his team GWS that he threw the book at the Swans without any justification or authority. Banned them from trading any players in to the Club for 2 or possibly even 3 years. Literally made the Board members each personally sign an agreement acknowledging that if Buddy retired before the end of his contract and walked away all of his remaining salary would stay in the salary cap even if he didn't get paid. 

    He's obviously playing this year, so the most it will be relevant to is the last two years and at this stage he certainly looks likely to play on for at least next season. I read at the time that hiis contract was shaped so that the first 3 years were $750k the middle 3 years were something like $1.4m, $1.6m, $1.5m and the remaining 3 back at $750k. It matched the total amount offered by GWS but over 9 years not 6. They had Goodes and Tippett and a few other expensive players on the list when he started so couldn't offer the $1.5m a year Hawks offered but just for 3 years and GWS for 6.

    True.

    https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/afl-clears-buddys-10m-move/news-story/0c7a141bcd96ed14358b98de4f4168e7

     

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1
    8 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    "Crikey! Buddy's just retired and the mil we still owe him is stuck on our salary cap!"

    "Don't worry about it. We'll pay him out 50 grand and after Gil's signed off on it, we'll make him game day ambassador to the coterie group on 950 grand. Easy."

    I thought players signed as free agents or restricted free agents, if they retired early, contract remains as part of salary cap.

     

    Rance is a different case.

     

    more likely though, I am wrong

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    6 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

    But Richmond can now pay extra to other players on their list who would otherwise be pushed out by the salary cap, thus keeping their list intact. 

    Or they can go chasing other players in the mid-season draft that they couldn't because of salary cap pressure, if they have a spot caused through injury..

    Or they can restructure some contracts to front load them into this year giving them a war chest to splurge in October.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    11 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

    Or they can restructure some contracts to front load them into this year giving them a war chest to splurge in October.

    How does JDG look in yellow and black?

  • Quote
    • Angry 1

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREVIEW: Sydney

      The two teams competing at the MCG on Sunday afternoon have each traversed a long and arduous path since their previous encounter on a sweltering March evening in Sydney a season and a half ago. Both experienced periods of success at various times last year. The Demons ran out of steam in midseason while the Swans went on to narrowly miss the ultimate prize in the sport. Now, they find themselves outside of finals contention as the season approaches the halfway mark. The winner this week will remain in contact with the leading pack, while the loser may well find itself on a precipice, staring into the abyss. The current season has presented numerous challenges for most clubs, particularly those positioned in the middle tier. The Essendon experience in suffering a significant 91-point loss to the Bulldogs, just one week after defeating the Swans, may not be typical, but it illustrates the unpredictability of outcomes under the league’s present set up. 

        • Clap
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 2 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Brisbane

      “Max Gawn has been the heart and soul of the Dees for years now, but this recent recovery from a terrible start has been driven by him. He was everywhere again, and with the game in the balance, he took several key marks to keep the ball in the Dees forward half.” - The Monday Knee Jerk Reaction: Round Ten Of course, it wasn’t the efforts of one man that caused this monumental upset, but rather the work of the coach and his assistants and the other 22 players who took the ground, notably the likes of Jake Melksham, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kozzie Pickett but Max has been magnificent in taking ownership of his team and its welfare under the fire of a calamitous 0-5 start to the season. On Sunday, he provided the leadership that was needed to face up to the reigning premier and top of the ladder Brisbane Lions on their home turf and to prevail after a slow start, during which the hosts led by as much as 24 points in the second quarter. Titus O’Reily is normally comedic in his descriptions of the football but this time, he was being deadly serious. The Demons have come from a long way back and, although they still sit in the bottom third of the AFL pack, there’s a light at the end of the tunnel as they look to drive home the momentum inspired in the past four or five weeks by Max the Magnificent who was under such great pressure in those dark, early days of the season.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Southport

      The Southport Sharks came to Casey. They saw and they conquered a team with 16 AFL-listed players who, for the most part, wasted their time on the ground and failed to earn their keep. For the first half, the Sharks were kept in the game by the Demons’ poor use of the football, it’s disposal getting worse the closer the team got to its own goal and moreover, it got worse as the game progressed. Make no mistake, Casey was far and away the better team in the first half, it was winning the ruck duels through Tom Campbell’s solid performance but it was the scoreboard that told the story.

        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Sydney

      Just a game and percentage outside the Top 8, the Demons return to Melbourne to face the Sydney Swans at the MCG, with a golden opportunity to build on the momentum from toppling the reigning premiers on their own turf. Who comes in, and who makes way?

        • Thanks
      • 228 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Brisbane

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse a famous victory by the Demons over the Lions at the Gabba.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

        • Clap
        • Love
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 35 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Brisbane

      The Demons pulled off an absolute miracle at the Gabba coming from 24 points down in the 2nd Quarter to overrun the reigning premiers the Brisbane Lions winning by 11 points and keeping their season well and truly alive.

        • Haha
        • Love
        • Like
      • 498 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All