I knew it was something, used to be half? And half for veterans?its not 1/2 his salary, its $80k towards any rookie's salary.
If it was 1/2 the rookie's salary we would have Dusty, Jack, Tommy et al on rookie list
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Clubs delistings
- Thread starter tigertim
- Start date
And Ben Buckley expects Kangas to be a top 4 side in 2-3 years.He’s not on planet earth.
Good question. Maybe keeping our options open and seeing who other clubs let go. Might have our eye out for a delisted free agent?
Agreed, they thought Benny The Chief had rocks in his head.
But he had Richmond and its sleepy masses at his command.
Buckleys got 14 nannas 3 Cats and a Sheepdog that no longer gives a F@#$.
Outrageous expectations from North especially considering they have to build near half a list, they play their games in a Tuppaware box and have no real outstanding corporate appeal.
Gonna be a real hard for them the next few years.
Last edited:
I know it must have been a late decision but I think the club has it right. We are not over burdened with talls but have plenty of youngsters for mids and half backs. Garth is handy in the backline and Ben has come from a long way back to improve himself with versatility and could feature at AFL next year whereas Eggs has maybe been overtaken by others never and drew the short straw thanks to reduced lists
Last edited:
Only last night that the AFL announced that players can go direct to the rookie list. ie Miller
I wonder, with the lateness of this decision, the ramifications of some of the already delisted players may have been able to be rookies at their existing clubs.
You’d reckon any reputable organisation would have had this sorted and given clubs ample notice
Clubs have signalled their intentions to re-rookie a number of delisted players, e.g. Gleeson & Clarke at Essendon. I'm sure the clubs would've received notice that this rule change was a possibility and will be given leeway to re-sign them as rookies if they want to.
No, thats not correct, he is contracted till end of 2021
On the 20/06/2015 he signed a 4 year deal (till Oct 2019) then on 12/07/2018 he signed a further 2 year extension - till Oct 2021
Rance re-signs
Richmond co-vice captain, Alex Rance has re-committed to the Club for a further two years.www.richmondfc.com.au
Richmond star Alex Rance signs contract extension to keep him at club until end of 2021
Locked in! Tigers superstar signs new dealwww.foxsports.com.au
“Rance re-signs”
I was skimming down this thread looking for list changes and that headline gave me a heart attack!
No I didnt say that, common knowledge that we came to an agreement with him for 2020.
We still haven't delisted him though
I think its more the terminology that i struggle with. Rance doesnt get delisted
Due to the fact that list lodgments are required, means that players whom do not have contract ie. Rance retired and is not offered a contract rather than delisted, just not added to new list when lodged as retired...
My understanding in a normal year most contracts are until early/mid Oct. If they are out of contract they are effectively not offered a new contract and will not be included in new list lodgments. So from Oct to Dec its about list management, players retire, are delisted, rookied etc...
You could say this is being delisted and i understand we are being pedantic but i think there is a difference? Retiring, changing your contract and pay out amount isnt being delisted?, its just not being included into the New list lodgements for players under contracts for next season ahead.
For Rance, he would actually need to be offered a new contract and sign to be added onto the list to be lodged.
Edited; to make more sense
Last edited:
