Id rather risk losing him for nothing.
Connors apparantly is very bullish and wants to push the issue so I reckon its off to court we go
Woah. He'd be taking us to court not the other way around. And I don't think the club would view it as a turd act.Essendon wouldn't want to take a player under contract to court. That'd be the highest turd act by the club. I get we want to keep him but he wants to go.
The media would though which might make the club shy.
We fark around with his health and well being (argument for) and we take him to court because he wants to leave ? Really ? This scenario he's in he wants a trade. What's the problem ? He's under contract yes , he can get traded , he can ask for one , its within. The rules.
Caddy asked for a trade. Gold Coast didn't trade him, He was forced to stay (and receive supplements from Dank coincidentally).
He would be taking us to court. He has a contract he wants to get out of, fark himWe fark around with his health and well being (argument for) and we take him to court because he wants to leave ? Really ? This scenario he's in he wants a trade. What's the problem ? He's under contract yes , he can get traded , he can ask for one , its within. The rules.Woah. He'd be taking us to court not the other way around. And I don't think the club would view it as a turd act.
Essendon wouldn't want to take a player under contract to court. That'd be the highest turd act by the club. I get we want to keep him but he wants to go.
The media would though which might make the club shy.
If we bend over again then we may as well just fold the joint up.
Sell the true Value Solar Centre, build a housing estate, give members a share & all find new sports to follow.
#FFS
LAWN BOWLS
Just when i was almost ready to forgive Wanganeen...........
In another 2 and a bit years it'll be 20 years since he left us. That's quite a grudge. Spose kicketts is longer
M\\The memory of those who left us burns deep. Barry Davis. fantastic player. equivalent to Wanganeen . Roger Merret. Really good CHF, and you know how hard they are to find. One good one in a generation.
Its **** equivalent to treason. Thats what footy is about. Wait a minute. If the AFL itself is ALL about money and deals now, why should players be any different. The tribal passion is dying, the passion for money is gaining ascendency.
i beg supporters to call the club and tell them not to give in...This is I keep harping on about contacting the club - I fear we will cave despite our initial strong position.He got picked up as 17 year old the club took care of him and loved him,i know this is really going to personally hurt people at the club,who treated him like a son.
he has really kicked efc in the guts.
Very disappointing on his part and his farkwit manager...oh well we are going to give port adelaide a guaranteed flag next year.
Unless we are appropriately compensated he stays. If we cave, it's open season. Can't afford to do that.
Agree with HM, not our job to make it easy for him.
Weak!
Email rob Kerr, Adrian dodoro, James hird. The pressure will be intense in media circles.
We need to continue to tell the club what the members and supporters want.
Don't accept unders in any circumstances. We need to stick fat.
E-mail Kochie
Hate to say it cause I love Paddy, but if he doesn’t want to be at Essendon and doesn’t get out he will be of no use to us. Couldn’t see another year like this year if he is not happy.
We have no respect, so why stop here. We're that far up shitcreek it doesn't matter what we do. I am for one, happy we're taking this stance if it's true. He's under contract, I'm sorry circumstances have changed but that's football. 43 other players are happy to not only see out their contract but re-sign. Don't expect the club to be a pushover. If we want respect, we should start demanding if from players and CEOs
If this goes to court I’m done.
Woah. He'd be taking us to court not the other way around. And I don't think the club would view it as a turd act.Essendon wouldn't want to take a player under contract to court. That'd be the highest turd act by the club. I get we want to keep him but he wants to go.
The media would though which might make the club shy.
We fark around with his health and well being (argument for) and we take him to court because he wants to leave ? Really ? This scenario he's in he wants a trade. What's the problem ? He's under contract yes , he can get traded , he can ask for one , its within. The rules.
Refusing to trade him is also within the rules
This is I keep harping on about contacting the club - I fear we will cave despite our initial strong position.
Unless we are appropriately compensated he stays. If we cave, it's open season. Can't afford to do that.
I hear you, willie.
This is the email I sent to the Club (separate messages to XC, AD and Paul Little).
I hope others also answer your call. They need to get the message we don't want to lose one of our best players for far less than he is worth.
***
Dear Xavier,
I have followed the Bombers for over fifty years, and my family has supported Essendon for five generations.
I am writing because I want to urge you not to trade Patrick Ryder unless we get a VERY good deal. As we all know, he is
still contracted to the Club, and contracts are still legally enforceable in Australia. Most of us believe, the "get out clause" that has been trumpeted in the media will not stand up in court.
We also know that his is a unique talent, one that the Club has nurtured for many years. Now that he is coming into his prime,
he should not be lost to the Club for less than he is worth. If he is a top 5 player at Essendon, he should be traded for a player who can come into the top 5 and help us; in addition, we should get a first round pick as a sweetener in view of the fact he is contracted and is on a front-loaded contract.
As a comparison, Brad Ottens was traded by Richmond for two first round draft picks. Bomber Thompson is a smart man and he realised the value of that trade as it helped them to win Premierships. Ryder would arguably be even more valuable to a club like Port Adelaide that needs a talent like his to reach the Grand Final and challenge for a flag.
After getting kicked from pillar to post the last two years by all and sundry, Essendon supporters I have spoken with think the Club needs to draw a line in the sand.
They need to do what Port itself did in the trade years ago when one of its player wanted to leave: unless we get an acceptable deal, make a strong statement to that player wanting to leave.
If we do not get at least a high first round pick PLUS a "gun" midfield player, enforce the contract. If he does not want to play for the Club, let him gather dust on the sidelines for two years.
Doing this will send a message to all those vultures circling the club looking to pick off our best players. Honestly, if we give in now, the club will be decimated. We have been bent over enough barrels in the last two years.
If no club wants to pay what is fair, and he still does not want to play for us, let him sit on the sidelines for the next two years of his contract. Most likely it will not come to that: we can deal next year with those clubs who do get the message.
Like a great many other long-time Essendon supporters, I will be very disappointed if Ryder is traded away for less than his real value.
PLEASE, stand your ground over this trade and do not settle for less than at least one top 5 player plus a first round pick.
Sincerely,
Albert_Thurgood
be worth fark all thenHate to say it cause I love Paddy, but if he doesn't want to be at Essendon and doesn't get out he will be of no use to us. Couldn't see another year like this year if he is not happy.
Nice work A_T. Next time just send it to Noonan for some grammatical corrections and it'll be all good.
Woah. He'd be taking us to court not the other way around. And I don't think the club would view it as a turd act.Essendon wouldn't want to take a player under contract to court. That'd be the highest turd act by the club. I get we want to keep him but he wants to go.
The media would though which might make the club shy.
We fark around with his health and well being (argument for) and we take him to court because he wants to leave ? Really ? This scenario he's in he wants a trade. What's the problem ? He's under contract yes , he can get traded , he can ask for one , its within. The rules.
Yes that would be the media's take. And a good reason that the club would not want a court case. And maybe we owe it to Paddy morally to do what he wants.
But my main point is that is:
1. Scenario: We do not trade Ryder. Maybe it's because we claim we didn't get a good enough deal. Maybe it's because we just flat outright refused to trade him. Doesn't matter which.
2. Ryder has a choice, either stay with the club or take the club to court to contest the contract.
I'm not a lawyer but I can't see any circumstances under which the Essendon Football Club would be taking Ryder to court. The EFC would not be contesting the contract between EFC and Ryder. It would be Ryder contesting the contract between EFC and Ryder.
You've now twice said it would be EFC taking Ryder to court.
It probably makes absolutely no difference to your argument, which is a very strong argument.
Maybe I'm a nit picker, but it annoys me as much as people saying that we fired Dean Robinson.
Nice work A_T. Next time just send it to Noonan for some grammatical corrections and it'll be all good.
Thanks Toms. I see now there was one typo, but I can find no grammatical errors.
Yes that would be the media's take. And a good reason that the club would not want a court case. And maybe we owe it to Paddy morally to do what he wants.
We fark around with his health and well being (argument for) and we take him to court because he wants to leave ? Really ? This scenario he's in he wants a trade. What's the problem ? He's under contract yes , he can get traded , he can ask for one , its within. The rules.Woah. He'd be taking us to court not the other way around. And I don't think the club would view it as a turd act.Essendon wouldn't want to take a player under contract to court. That'd be the highest turd act by the club. I get we want to keep him but he wants to go.
The media would though which might make the club shy.
But my main point is that is:
1. Scenario: We do not trade Ryder. Maybe it's because we claim we didn't get a good enough deal. Maybe it's because we just flat outright refused to trade him. Doesn't matter which.
2. Ryder has a choice, either stay with the club or take the club to court to contest the contract.
I'm not a lawyer but I can't see any circumstances under which the Essendon Football Club would be taking Ryder to court. The EFC would not be contesting the contract between EFC and Ryder. It would be Ryder contesting the contract between EFC and Ryder.
You've now twice said it would be EFC taking Ryder to court.
It probably makes absolutely no difference to your argument, which is a very strong argument.
Maybe I'm a nit picker, but it annoys me as much as people saying that we fired Dean Robinson.
I get your point but an reading (or misread ) some people think we'd take paddy to court not the other way around. my bad
If this goes to court I'm done.
If this doesn't go to court I'm done.
Hate to say it cause I love Paddy, but if he doesn't want to be at Essendon and doesn't get out he will be of no use to us. Couldn't see another year like this year if he is not happy.
According to his interview ( Channel 7) he has had issues for some time ??? In spite of that he played very well. Some players forget issues when they go on the field. Others are badly effected .
If this goes to court I'm done.
Okay, so my legal opinion is worth less that of Chris Kaias. But surely the chance of Ryder's contract going to court is Buckley's and Nunn.
Either we trade him to a top 4 rival (I think we can make top 4 next year) and get lots of delicious booty. Or we trade him to a team that won't make finals in the next two years for some steak knives, a second round pick, whatever.
Win Win!!! (okay, so overall the situation is a loss, from this point on it could be considered a win)
Yes that would be the media's take. And a good reason that the club would not want a court case. And maybe we owe it to Paddy morally to do what he wants.
We fark around with his health and well being (argument for) and we take him to court because he wants to leave ? Really ? This scenario he's in he wants a trade. What's the problem ? He's under contract yes , he can get traded , he can ask for one , its within. The rules.
Woah. He'd be taking us to court not the other way around. And I don't think the club would view it as a turd act.Essendon wouldn't want to take a player under contract to court. That'd be the highest turd act by the club. I get we want to keep him but he wants to go.
The media would though which might make the club shy.
But my main point is that is:
1. Scenario: We do not trade Ryder. Maybe it's because we claim we didn't get a good enough deal. Maybe it's because we just flat outright refused to trade him. Doesn't matter which.
2. Ryder has a choice, either stay with the club or take the club to court to contest the contract.
I'm not a lawyer but I can't see any circumstances under which the Essendon Football Club would be taking Ryder to court. The EFC would not be contesting the contract between EFC and Ryder. It would be Ryder contesting the contract between EFC and Ryder.
You've now twice said it would be EFC taking Ryder to court.
It probably makes absolutely no difference to your argument, which is a very strong argument.
Maybe I'm a nit picker, but it annoys me as much as people saying that we fired Dean Robinson.
I get your point but an reading (or misread ) some people think we'd take paddy to court not the other way around. my bad
Turns of phrase can be contagious. Yes I'm sure I've read the exact same thing many times in this thread previously.