One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on November 21, 2009, 07:44:45 AM
-
This isn't on the web so I scanned it in. From the Herald-Sun's confidential gossip column....
Shy Tigers
By Fiona Byrne, Alice Coster and Katherine Firkin
Sat 21 Nov 2009, Page 101
THEY might have been good at the bowling, but Richmond boys Jake King, Alex Rance, Daniel Jackson and the delisted Graham Polak were not such good sports when it came to promoting Thursday night's Variety/Ed Hardy charity bowling event.
The boys were the only celebrities who refused to be photographed -- a move that irritated at least one of the event organisers.
"The club doesn't like it,'' Polak explained.
"Yeah, but they're happy to enjoy the food and the drink,'' an organiser sneered.
-
Seems to be the norm these days for all clubs, not just the Tigers.
-
Perhaps the organizers should consult the celebrities they invite before the event. Seems like we're aiming for a pretty low profile this season after our players being everywhere last season. Not really fair that the guys should have comments made about them when they are just doing as their employer has asked.
-
Still, if it is a charity event, surely the penny would of dropped when invited, that they wanted them for their profile to help raise awareness/ funds and that by knocking back the photo op they had defeated much of the purpose. I would be dirty too, seems a bit stupid. Surely players supporting charity events = good press for the club. If it was for promoting products or something else, I understand the ban but charity?
-
Perhaps the organizers should consult the celebrities they invite before the event. Seems like we're aiming for a pretty low profile this season after our players being everywhere last season. Not really fair that the guys should have comments made about them when they are just doing as their employer has asked.
Agree.
Seems the 'new' employer has made some new rules, boys are only into the first weeks of a new regime. I wouldn't want to be flouting the rules either.
At least not till I saw the lie of the land so to speak. ;)
-
I have sympathy for the organisers on this. If the club wants to go about it this way then it should tell players not to attend at all, and just write out a cheque for a couple of grand and thats it. The bad press is worse than the amount of donation. On the other hand, whats wrong with say 1 photo?
-
I have sympathy for the organisers on this. If the club wants to go about it this way then it should tell players not to attend at all, and just write out a cheque for a couple of grand and thats it. The bad press is worse than the amount of donation. On the other hand, whats wrong with say 1 photo?
Nothing wrong with 1 photo.
-
Really,who gives a stuff ?
stuff the lot of them - fricken society media,leeches,pricks,scumsucking dogs.
-
Really,who gives a stuff ?
stuff the lot of them - fricken society media,leeches,pricks,scumsucking dogs.
Coming down again i see pal
-
Really,who gives a stuff ?
stuff the lot of them - fricken society media,leeches,pricks,scumsucking dogs.
tell us what you really think ;)
I love this guys posts!
-
Still, if it is a charity event, surely the penny would of dropped when invited, that they wanted them for their profile to help raise awareness/ funds and that by knocking back the photo op they had defeated much of the purpose. I would be dirty too, seems a bit stupid. Surely players supporting charity events = good press for the club. If it was for promoting products or something else, I understand the ban but charity?
I see your point Owl, but I still have sympathy for the players. Perhaps it is unfair of the club to ask the players not to be photographed. You can imagine the club saying "we don't want to see any of your faces in the papers unless we sanction it." I just feel it is unfair that the players get painted as uncaring because of a directive outside of their control. We know from past experience that our players are usually very generous. Should the players be refusing the invitation then?
-
Still, if it is a charity event, surely the penny would of dropped when invited, that they wanted them for their profile to help raise awareness/ funds and that by knocking back the photo op they had defeated much of the purpose. I would be dirty too, seems a bit stupid. Surely players supporting charity events = good press for the club. If it was for promoting products or something else, I understand the ban but charity?
I see your point Owl, but I still have sympathy for the players. Perhaps it is unfair of the club to ask the players not to be photographed. You can imagine the club saying "we don't want to see any of your faces in the papers unless we sanction it." I just feel it is unfair that the players get painted as uncaring because of a directive outside of their control. We know from past experience that our players are usually very generous. Should the players be refusing the invitation then?
Heya Rrofo :cheers
I just think it defeated the purpose of supporting a kids charity if your going to be an anonymous celeb is all. And they are big boys they can make their own considered decisions. Polak is currently delisted so his excuse seems a bit weak. With charity stuff, its all volunteer hours for faceless folks, who rarely get noticed, the celebs can blow in to 'raise the profile', reap the kudos for a few hours socialising with the eats put on for em etc and then take off, which is fine, so when this happens, it really does just take the cake.
-
I knew Cuz refused photos because he and the Club couldn't trust what people would do with them (eg: photoshop). The other players don't seem to mind at training.
I would've thought a group shot with the charity organisers so they could put it in their newsletter or on the charity's website would be fairly harmless. A bit of an overkill on the Club's part to have a flat ban if this is true and we know the media can't help themselves when it comes to reporting about the Tiges especially when presenting the Club in a bad light. It must be a slow news day once again at the Herald-Sun.
-
Here's what it says on the RFC website......
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/player%20appearances/tabid/7664/default.aspx
RFC Player Appearances
Richmond Football Club players are available for a limited number of appearances each year. The Club will endeavour to accommodate as many requests as possible, however please note due to the vast amount of requests received and training commitments of players and coaches, many requests are unable to be fulfilled.
Richmond receive an overwhelming amount of requests for player appearances each year and it is important to remember not to focus your event around a player appearance, but upon meeting the guidelines, it should be approached as a possible element of your program.
Please consider the following guidelines before submitting your player appearance request:
- Player availability is from December to August only. Players are not available on CBA days off, match days or annual leave days.
- A clear role for player/s at the event is required.
- Players are not allowed to participate in athletic activities that may cause injury.
- Preference will be given to charitable, community based events.
- Preference for particular players will be taken into consideration, but will not be guaranteed.
- Appearances are generally scheduled for an hour.
- Players will wear Richmond polo shirts and casual pants, unless otherwise specified.
All requests must be submitted at least 4 weeks in advance.
Please note the submission does not guarantee a player appearance.
All requests will receive an email response within two weeks of request submission.
Richmond Football Club player appearance application form (http://www.richmondfc.com.au/Portals/0/Player%20Appearance%20Application%20Form.pdf)
-
Here's what it says on the RFC website......
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/player%20appearances/tabid/7664/default.aspx
RFC Player Appearances
Richmond Football Club players are available for a limited number of appearances each year. The Club will endeavour to accommodate as many requests as possible, however please note due to the vast amount of requests received and training commitments of players and coaches, many requests are unable to be fulfilled.
Richmond receive an overwhelming amount of requests for player appearances each year and it is important to remember not to focus your event around a player appearance, but upon meeting the guidelines, it should be approached as a possible element of your program.
Please consider the following guidelines before submitting your player appearance request:
- Player availability is from December to August only. Players are not available on CBA days off, match days or annual leave days.
- A clear role for player/s at the event is required.
- Players are not allowed to participate in athletic activities that may cause injury.
- Preference will be given to charitable, community based events.
- Preference for particular players will be taken into consideration, but will not be guaranteed.
- Appearances are generally scheduled for an hour.
- Players will wear Richmond polo shirts and casual pants, unless otherwise specified.
All requests must be submitted at least 4 weeks in advance.
Please note the submission does not guarantee a player appearance.
All requests will receive an email response within two weeks of request submission.
Richmond Football Club player appearance application form (http://www.richmondfc.com.au/Portals/0/Player%20Appearance%20Application%20Form.pdf)
What a load of crap.
I have known players to accept cash to visit schools on regular basis.
Word of advice to the players, DONT go to functions and eat and drink and refuse to have your photo taken. whats the point in turning up.
Can say there are too many""one way streets "" at punt road.
The response on the website is so laughable it aint funny.
Only appearances from Dec to August??? What about Sept ??Oh thats right we play finals every year ::)
-
I agree OWL, pointless having celebs there to raise the awereness if they cant be photographed but maybe this thing was organised before the new rules, hopefully now things are clear as to what the players can and cant do. From now on they can just say, thanks but no thanks, which seems a bit mean spirited IMHO
-
Surely the players interacted with other people who attended on the night (chatted, autographs etc..). Just because they declined a photo opportunity, doesn't mean they didn't participate in the spirit of the night. Just having their names in promotional material would have encouraged people to attend and donate towards the event.
-
Still, if it is a charity event, surely the penny would of dropped when invited, that they wanted them for their profile to help raise awareness/ funds and that by knocking back the photo op they had defeated much of the purpose. I would be dirty too, seems a bit stupid. Surely players supporting charity events = good press for the club. If it was for promoting products or something else, I understand the ban but charity?
I see your point Owl, but I still have sympathy for the players. Perhaps it is unfair of the club to ask the players not to be photographed. You can imagine the club saying "we don't want to see any of your faces in the papers unless we sanction it." I just feel it is unfair that the players get painted as uncaring because of a directive outside of their control. We know from past experience that our players are usually very generous. Should the players be refusing the invitation then?
Heya Rrofo :cheers
I just think it defeated the purpose of supporting a kids charity if your going to be an anonymous celeb is all. And they are big boys they can make their own considered decisions. Polak is currently delisted so his excuse seems a bit weak. With charity stuff, its all volunteer hours for faceless folks, who rarely get noticed, the celebs can blow in to 'raise the profile', reap the kudos for a few hours socialising with the eats put on for em etc and then take off, which is fine, so when this happens, it really does just take the cake.
:) Hey Owl,
I agree, but I am willing to bet the players may be a bit unsure of themselves at the moment. This is complete speculation but I would be surprised if players like Kingy and Polak had any mean intentions when they declined the photo op. I'm sure that once the players get used to what's expected from them and feel a bit more comfortable with their new boss, situations like this will not occur. We have never been a club that was mingy when it came to player's time and charities.
-
Some good points, when in doubt...say no is always a safe option. Im sure they would of signed a few things and hobnobbed a bit too as Tiga said. Im still trying to work out what the hell your post is about though confessed lol your foil hat come loose? just joshin ya :thumbsup
-
LOL just maybe the club is getting a bit of"attitude" ...which in a way might be welcome
-
They're worried about them being photoshopped so they will only allow photos in the footy season
Makes a lot of sense :nope
The policy is mean spirited, up there with having a $200 a head or whatever function for guernsey presentations.
They have no idea :banghead
-
They're worried about them being photoshopped so they will only allow photos in the footy season
Makes a lot of sense :nope
The policy is mean spirited, up there with having a $200 a head or whatever function for guernsey presentations.
They have no idea :banghead
Whats the world coming too ?? Me and Froars agreeing.
Might be a sign of the times. :thumbsup
-
Really,who gives a eff ?
eff the lot of them - fricken society media,leeches,pricks,scumsucking dogs.
Coming down again i see pal
his a moron expect nothing else Daniel ;D
-
All brought on by people making profit on Ebay & other sites ;D
-
All brought on by people making profit on Ebay & other sites ;D
The players in question are normal human beings like the rest of us.
No harm in Jake King, Daniel Jackson having there photos taken.
If they were to go on Ebay, they would have to give the purchases a cash senstive to buy the photos anyway.
Can just see in now, Jordon McMahon on someones lounge wall. :lol
Talking about Jordon , seen him at the races , intersting character, he is alot taller then you think
-
jack i try not to think of jordy at all..lol
-
All brought on by people making profit on Ebay & other sites ;D
How could 1 photo be of any value, especially if it hasnt been signed. I think its just stupid to be honest.
-
All brought on by people making profit on Ebay & other sites ;D
RFC players' photos are worth jack shiit on eBay
As Jack would say, FACT!
-
Does not matter how much the photos are worth. It is just a photo.
What happens on days like the Good Friday RCH Appeal?
-
I dunno every time the missus spots a picture of Cousins, I have to take a broom to her, its like dragging the cat away from a moth its got cornered. I think they would sell.
-
I dunno every time the missus spots a picture of Cousins, I have to take a broom to her, its like dragging the cat away from a moth its got cornered. I think they would sell.
:lol :lol :lol
-
They're worried about them being photoshopped so they will only allow photos in the footy season
And photoshopped badly in the case of the Herald-Sun lol.
-
All brought on by people making profit on Ebay & other sites ;D
The players in question are normal human beings like the rest of us.
No harm in Jake King, Daniel Jackson having there photos taken.
If they were to go on Ebay, they would have to give the purchases a cash senstive to buy the photos anyway.
Can just see in now, Jordon McMahon on someones lounge wall. :lol
Talking about Jordon , seen him at the races , intersting character, he is alot taller then you think
You made my day what a laugh McMahon on someones wall :rollin
-
I dunno every time the missus spots a picture of Cousins, I have to take a broom to her, its like dragging the cat away from a moth its got cornered. I think they would sell.
hahaha this topic is full of funnies :thumbsup
-
All brought on by people making profit on Ebay & other sites ;D
RFC players' photos are worth jack shiit on eBay
As Jack would say, FACT!
thats right cause the clubs put a stop to it
only problem is it affects the real supporters & the kids
Greed has ruined football started by the AFL