6 hours ago, pringle said:

Been working on my post-flag tatts since 2021. Getting close to completion. Gus is my latest addition. His inclusion on my back beside Nathan jones just felt right.

Even a year on, it is still hard to come to terms with losing Gus...Yet we still have a footy team to watch each weekend.

In contrast, Gus has had to deal with the sudden and abrupt loss of footy, his job and his club/team-mates/best friends from his life altogether.

And the worst part of the situation is that it is all based on uncertain and imprecise science and a decision-making process that is less about player welfare than it is about avoiding future legal land-mines.

That’s fantastic! 

9 hours ago, pringle said:

Been working on my post-flag tatts since 2021. Getting close to completion. Gus is my latest addition. His inclusion on my back beside Nathan jones just felt right.

Even a year on, it is still hard to come to terms with losing Gus...Yet we still have a footy team to watch each weekend.

In contrast, Gus has had to deal with the sudden and abrupt loss of footy, his job and his club/team-mates/best friends from his life altogether.

And the worst part of the situation is that it is all based on uncertain and imprecise science and a decision-making process that is less about player welfare than it is about avoiding future legal land-mines.

That's boss AF

16 hours ago, pringle said:

Been working on my post-flag tatts since 2021. Getting close to completion. Gus is my latest addition. His inclusion on my back beside Nathan jones just felt right.

Even a year on, it is still hard to come to terms with losing Gus...Yet we still have a footy team to watch each weekend.

In contrast, Gus has had to deal with the sudden and abrupt loss of footy, his job and his club/team-mates/best friends from his life altogether.

And the worst part of the situation is that it is all based on uncertain and imprecise science and a decision-making process that is less about player welfare than it is about avoiding future legal land-mines.

where's the "it's coming home!" bit

17 hours ago, pringle said:

Been working on my post-flag tatts since 2021. Getting close to completion. Gus is my latest addition. His inclusion on my back beside Nathan jones just felt right.

Even a year on, it is still hard to come to terms with losing Gus...Yet we still have a footy team to watch each weekend.

In contrast, Gus has had to deal with the sudden and abrupt loss of footy, his job and his club/team-mates/best friends from his life altogether.

And the worst part of the situation is that it is all based on uncertain and imprecise science and a decision-making process that is less about player welfare than it is about avoiding future legal land-mines.

Thats commitment!

On 07/02/2025 at 15:39, whatwhat say what said:

where's the "it's coming home!" bit

I'll try to post the entire piece some time soon if I can get someone to photograph it for me. It covers the whole of my right arm and the upper half of my back. I've spent about 15 sessions in the chair so far to get to where it is today. Probably 2-3 sessions left, although with a bit of luck I'm hoping to continue onto another limb at the end of the season...

 

 

24 minutes ago, pringle said:

I'll try to post the entire piece some time soon if I can get someone to photograph it for me. It covers the whole of my right arm and the upper half of my back. I've spent about 15 sessions in the chair so far to get to where it is today. Probably 2-3 sessions left, although with a bit of luck I'm hoping to continue onto another limb at the end of the season...

 

 

If we snag a 5th flag from this era in the coming years it could be a bit more painful in the tattooist's chair.

7 minutes ago, gs77 said:

If we snag a 5th flag from this era in the coming years it could be a bit more painful in the tattooist's chair.

If we get 4 more flags I'll put up with as much pain as is necessary to get the job done (gulp)...

9 hours ago, pringle said:

If we get 4 more flags I'll put up with as much pain as is necessary to get the job done (gulp)...

if we get 4 flags in the next 4 years ill join you in getting my back covered!

There's little doubt that the AFL are using Brayshaw's retirement to send a message on long term contracts.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-introduces-buddy-franklin-rule-to-police-clubs-as-deals-beyond-2030-balloon-20250210-p5latb.html

But the rule, which is a less heated version of how the AFL dealt with Lance Franklin’s nine-year, $10 million deal in 2013, has not deterred clubs from offering these longer-term deals, despite the concerns about concussion and the risks clubs take, as evident in the Angus Brayshaw payout with years remaining on his contract.

33 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

There's little doubt that the AFL are using Brayshaw's retirement to send a message on long term contracts.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-introduces-buddy-franklin-rule-to-police-clubs-as-deals-beyond-2030-balloon-20250210-p5latb.html

But the rule, which is a less heated version of how the AFL dealt with Lance Franklin’s nine-year, $10 million deal in 2013, has not deterred clubs from offering these longer-term deals, despite the concerns about concussion and the risks clubs take, as evident in the Angus Brayshaw payout with years remaining on his contract.

Long term deals help the lesser clubs attract and keep super stars. If the AFL take this away we will see more players move away from the clubs rebuilding or being absent from finals football or just not having the right brand enhancing attributes. Perhaps some sort of dynamic salary cap to offset contract length, might be able to overcome this.

39 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

Long term deals help the lesser clubs attract and keep super stars. If the AFL take this away we will see more players move away from the clubs rebuilding or being absent from finals football or just not having the right brand enhancing attributes. Perhaps some sort of dynamic salary cap to offset contract length, might be able to overcome this.

Or how about if the AFL medically retire a player, the AFL pay out the contract. 

The AFL want these players not play for legal reasons down the track, then they should be responsible for any payout.

The player is then removed from the playing list, another player can be added through "Special Circumstances". Player wage is also removed from the clubs salary cap.

2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

There's little doubt that the AFL are using Brayshaw's retirement to send a message on long term contracts.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-introduces-buddy-franklin-rule-to-police-clubs-as-deals-beyond-2030-balloon-20250210-p5latb.html

But the rule, which is a less heated version of how the AFL dealt with Lance Franklin’s nine-year, $10 million deal in 2013, has not deterred clubs from offering these longer-term deals, despite the concerns about concussion and the risks clubs take, as evident in the Angus Brayshaw payout with years remaining on his contract.

I didn't read this article to mean that clubs can't offer long contracts. Only that the Board would be required to sign off on any such deal rather than leaving it solely to the football department. 

2 hours ago, GS_1905 said:

Long term deals help the lesser clubs attract and keep super stars. If the AFL take this away we will see more players move away from the clubs rebuilding or being absent from finals football or just not having the right brand enhancing attributes. Perhaps some sort of dynamic salary cap to offset contract length, might be able to overcome this.

every club has players on significant long-term (ie 5 or more year) deals these days, and have had for some time

it is definitely not just a 'lesser club' thing

I caught a piece on the news that stated that Zurich insurance are holding up the insurance payout to Gus. The statement said that the discussions were at a stalemate and we’re going nowhere. If true, I think that is disgusting by Zurich, and I certainly won’t be supporting them - club sponsor or not.

Has anyone else heard or know more about this?

Edited March 19Mar 19 by Neil Crompton

11 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I caught a piece on the news that stated that Zurich insurance are holding up the insurance payout to Gus. The statement said that the discussions were at a stalemate and we’re going nowhere. If true, I think that is disgusting by Zurich, and I certainly won’t be supporting them - club sponsor or not.

Has anyone else heard or know more about this?

And they are a primary sponsor of the club too… 

15 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I caught a piece on the news that stated that Zurich insurance are holding up the insurance payout to Gus. The statement said that the discussions were at a stalemate and we’re going nowhere. If true, I think that is disgusting by Zurich, and I certainly won’t be supporting them - club sponsor or not.

Has anyone else heard or know more about this?

So the MFC presumably leaked this?

33 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I caught a piece on the news that stated that Zurich insurance are holding up the insurance payout to Gus. The statement said that the discussions were at a stalemate and we’re going nowhere. If true, I think that is disgusting by Zurich, and I certainly won’t be supporting them - club sponsor or not.

Has anyone else heard or know more about this?

from my understand zurich needs certain things from the brayshaw camp and / or afl in order to move to the next phase

for whatever reason, those obligations haven't been fulfilled

51 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I caught a piece on the news that stated that Zurich insurance are holding up the insurance payout to Gus. The statement said that the discussions were at a stalemate and we’re going nowhere. If true, I think that is disgusting by Zurich, and I certainly won’t be supporting them - club sponsor or not.

Has anyone else heard or know more about this?

As an insurance company, I’m sure they only ever jack up their premiums, though the moment they need to pay out a claim it’s time to stall the process

🤬

Fancy a profit gouging, faceless corporation trying to screw over a claim?

I'm shook!! 

Pretty hard to get a Payment out of an insurance company these days. The Fine Print covers their [censored] on every level 

Fight The Power Gus…

Try getting a deceased personal Super or Pension payout as well

ICAC have really dropped the ball

17 hours ago, Neil Crompton said:

I caught a piece on the news that stated that Zurich insurance are holding up the insurance payout to Gus. The statement said that the discussions were at a stalemate and we’re going nowhere. If true, I think that is disgusting by Zurich, and I certainly won’t be supporting them - club sponsor or not.

Has anyone else heard or know more about this?

We seem very quick to disbelieve the media when they claim to know about a player's keenness to leave the club. Why would we now decide that the media has this story correct? While it might be true, I recommend every story in the media, whether its favourable or not to our club's and our players' interests, be treated with caution. 

On 11/02/2025 at 13:34, Deestinga2 said:

Or how about if the AFL medically retire a player, the AFL pay out the contract. 

The AFL want these players not play for legal reasons down the track, then they should be responsible for any payout.

The player is then removed from the playing list, another player can be added through "Special Circumstances". Player wage is also removed from the clubs salary cap.

Medical retirement is the player's choice but ultimately the player is entitled to the money in their contract. They are effectively retiring due to a workplace injury and yes it should be counted within the cap. If a player retirement could mean their money then gets paid outside the cap there is nothing to stop a bigger club from offering a massively backended deal to players who then are awarded that money as their retirement fund outside the cap.