One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on October 11, 2013, 01:18:04 AM

Title: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: one-eyed on October 11, 2013, 01:18:04 AM
Richmond are also expected to have compensation selections for the loss of Matt White and Luke McGuane, however uncertainty remains as to whether Richmond apply to have them bundled together for one pick that would be higher than as to what it would be for single selections per player.

Compensation selections will be allocated on Friday October 18th at the conclusion of the free agency period.

After the 18th, there is still one week remaining of the trade period and compensation selections can be traded between clubs.

https://www.facebook.com/AFLSeasonAndOffSeasonNews


So what are everybody's thoughts on what would be fair compo for losing both Whitey and McGuane?
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 11, 2013, 06:56:08 AM
Bundle them together and IMHO you have more chance of getting a 2nd rounder

Want a pick for each I reckon you get a 3rd or 4th round for each
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: eliminator on October 11, 2013, 06:59:07 AM
Bundle them
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: JVT on October 11, 2013, 07:09:14 AM
Bundle them together.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: bojangles17 on October 11, 2013, 07:30:38 AM
Meal deal please, always good value :thumbsup
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Smokey on October 11, 2013, 08:17:28 AM
Bundle them together and IMHO you have more chance of getting a 2nd rounder

Want a pick for each I reckon you get a 3rd or 4th round for each

x 2
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: dwaino on October 11, 2013, 08:21:58 AM
Bundle them together and IMHO you have more chance of getting a 2nd rounder

Want a pick for each I reckon you get a 3rd or 4th round for each

The blokes at the club probably have a solid idea on what to expect and reckon you're right about the second. Could be why we so easily handed over 28. So we pick up our man at the cost of a handful of draft positions. By that stage it's more often drafting for need so probably a good chance our target could still be on the table.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: tony_montana on October 11, 2013, 08:35:24 AM
Bundle them together and IMHO you have more chance of getting a 2nd rounder

Want a pick for each I reckon you get a 3rd or 4th round for each

The blokes at the club probably have a solid idea on what to expect and reckon you're right about the second. Could be why we so easily handed over 28. So we pick up our man at the cost of a handful of draft positions. By that stage it's more often drafting for need so probably a good chance our target could still be on the table.

I have no doubt that has occurred
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Rampstar on October 11, 2013, 09:50:29 AM
bundle and hope for the best
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: gerkin greg on October 11, 2013, 09:55:41 AM
Isn't there only a few bands of compo

1 middle first round (following your pick)
2 end first round
3 middle second round (following your pick)
4 end second round
5 third round

???

Whitey's contract length and $$$ should return a second rounder of some description on its own
McGuane likely bottom rung
We could bundle them and get the pick straight after the one we traded
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: JVT on October 11, 2013, 10:00:31 AM
Isn't there only a few bands of compo

1 middle first round (following your pick)
2 end first round
3 middle second round (following your pick)
4 end second round
5 third round

???

Whitey's contract length and $$$ should return a second rounder of some description on its own
McGuane likely bottom rung
We could bundle them and get the pick straight after the one we traded
The compo has 5 bands and they are:

•  1st round (following your pick)
•  end of 1st round
•  2nd round (following your pick)
•  end of 2nd round
•  3rd round (following your pick)

Not necessarily in the middle of the rounds, as it is tied to your finishing position. So for Hawthorn, their compo for Buddy will be a 1st round pick, but as they are Premiers it is effectively an end of 1st round pick anyway.

I'm not going to get my hopes up, but an end of 2nd round for the both would be a great result. If we get a 2nd round one (following our pick that was traded) then we have won the lottery.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: gerkin greg on October 11, 2013, 10:06:33 AM
Yeah that's what i said without saying it like that  ;D
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: JVT on October 11, 2013, 10:55:32 AM
Yeah that's what i said without saying it like that  ;D
Pretty much  :rollin
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 11, 2013, 11:27:41 AM
Yeah that's what i said without saying it like that  ;D
Pretty much  :rollin

Any chance you can say it all again both versions :rollin  :jump
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: RFC_Official on October 11, 2013, 12:16:37 PM
Bundle them together and IMHO you have more chance of getting a 2nd rounder

Want a pick for each I reckon you get a 3rd or 4th round for each

They will get added up if Luke goes and we don't bring in anyone.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Andyy on October 11, 2013, 01:18:19 PM
McGuane hasn't gone yet. Any news on the progress?
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: gerkin greg on October 11, 2013, 01:23:35 PM
McGuane hasn't gone yet. Any news on the progress?

he's a couple of k's past the big banana
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 11, 2013, 01:46:41 PM
McGuane hasn't gone yet. Any news on the progress?

 :pray
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: one-eyed on October 14, 2013, 03:54:49 AM
Free agency compensation selections are based on the net result of players coming and going from clubs.

Last year when Port Adelaide lost two players as free agents - Danyle Pearce and Troy Chaplin - it was rewarded with two second-round compensation picks.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dockers-keeping-gumbleton-waiting-20131013-2vgsv.html

Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Smokey on October 14, 2013, 08:30:34 AM
You would reckon we are in with a chance at a second and third round pick or maybe an end of first round if we ask to combine them.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: JVT on October 14, 2013, 08:34:05 AM
You would reckon we are in with a chance at a second and third round pick or maybe an end of first round if we ask to combine them.
I think that's a little ambitious. Will be lucky to get an end of 2nd round for both.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: big tone on October 14, 2013, 08:40:59 AM
You would reckon we are in with a chance at a second and third round pick or maybe an end of first round if we ask to combine them.
But if you lived in the real world I'd say we would get a third rounder at best for them combined.
It makes me laugh at some posters over inflated opinions on our players as opposed to other clubs players.
Danyle Pearce is a much better player than White
Troy Chaplin is a much better player than McGaune
So how anyone thinks we will get a better selection than PA did last year is beyond me.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Andyy on October 14, 2013, 10:16:20 AM
If McGuane delists himself and goes to Brisbane as a delisted FA do we still get compo, or only if he leaves our list directly/not delisted?
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Loui Tufga on October 14, 2013, 10:35:39 AM
 :rollin
If McGuane delists himself and goes to Brisbane as a delisted FA do we still get compo, or only if he leaves our list directly/not delisted?

McGuane has to Friday to sign with Brisbane if we are to get anything for him.
After that he'll become a delisted free agent and we will get nothing at all for him.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Smokey on October 14, 2013, 12:54:05 PM
You would reckon we are in with a chance at a second and third round pick or maybe an end of first round if we ask to combine them.
But if you lived in the real world I'd say we would get a third rounder at best for them combined.
It makes me laugh at some posters over inflated opinions on our players as opposed to other clubs players.
Danyle Pearce is a much better player than White
Troy Chaplin is a much better player than McGaune
So how anyone thinks we will get a better selection than PA did last year is beyond me.

Thanks for giving me your opinion on who are the better footballers and for pointing out that your address does in fact include Earth, now I'll try and answer based on my original post.

1.  At no point did I say we would get a better selection than Port but I did say we might get a 2nd and a 3rd rounder or even a single 1st rounder if we combined them.  Last time I checked, 2 x 2nd rounders beats a 2nd and a 3rd and it is impossible to quantify the winner out of 1 x 1st vs 2 x 2nds until a few years in hindsight but I suppose the exalted ones who breathe the rarefied air of "reality" are more fortunate than most of us plebs.

2.  Compensation is based on 2 criteria:

COMPENSATION

A club that has a net loss of players transferring to/from other clubs as free agents in one transfer period is entitled to compensation via National Draft picks allocated by the AFL.

The compensation formula produces a points rating for players based on:

1. The new contract of the free agent;
2. The age of the free agent.

Draft picks are allocated to clubs based on the net total points for free agents lost and gained during the transfer period.

Draft picks will be allocated to one of five places:

•  1st round
•  end of 1st round
•  2nd round
•  end of 2nd round
•  3rd round

In applying the formula, an expert committee reviews the formula outcomes. The committee has the power to recommend alternative outcomes to GM – Football Operations where the formula produces a materially anomalous result.


http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/free-agency (http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/free-agency)

So based on the criteria, Port got their picks for 26 yr old Pearce's 3 yr contract and 26 yr old Chaplin's 4 year contract.  Our compensation will be based on 26 yr old White's 3yr contract and 26 yr old McGuane's contract if he receives one.  Given the poor form that Pearce had displayed in his last 2 seasons at Port and their reluctance to offer any more than a 2 year contract I doubt that his contract would be vastly superior to White's offer, especially based on White's good form in his latest season so I believe those 2 would almost cancel out.  McGuane will not get a contract as good as Chaplin and that is what I base my opinion in the eventual outcome on - a 2nd rounder for Chaplin vs a 3rd rounder for McGuane.  And then when I said a 1st rounder (and I meant end of 1st round) if combined, that is based on nothing else than it is impossible to combine 2nd round picks and improve without going to a 1st round pick.

So I'll stick by my opinion as I know it was based on reasonable assumptions and I'll politely decline your offer to join you in the "real world" if it involves having opinions grown solely from the soil of my own perceived superiority.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Coach on October 14, 2013, 03:22:33 PM
Pearcey was a required player and he was good in 2012. Kenny just couldn't match the coin and was sad to see him go.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: yellowandback on October 14, 2013, 03:34:20 PM
Based on that, can I assume that the value of the contract as well as the length will determine compensation?
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on October 14, 2013, 03:52:43 PM
:rollin
If McGuane delists himself and goes to Brisbane as a delisted FA do we still get compo, or only if he leaves our list directly/not delisted?

McGuane has to Friday to sign with Brisbane if we are to get anything for him.
After that he'll become a delisted free agent and we will get nothing at all for him.
We'll get nothing for him I suspect and maybe a third rounder for White.  My prediction.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Smokey on October 14, 2013, 04:23:59 PM
Based on that, can I assume that the value of the contract as well as the length will determine compensation?

Yep.  The age of the player, and value and length of the new contract only, no regard is paid to prior contracts, performance, awards etc.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: big tone on October 14, 2013, 06:47:22 PM
You would reckon we are in with a chance at a second and third round pick or maybe an end of first round if we ask to combine them.
But if you lived in the real world I'd say we would get a third rounder at best for them combined.
It makes me laugh at some posters over inflated opinions on our players as opposed to other clubs players.
Danyle Pearce is a much better player than White
Troy Chaplin is a much better player than McGaune
So how anyone thinks we will get a better selection than PA did last year is beyond me.

Thanks for giving me your opinion on who are the better footballers and for pointing out that your address does in fact include Earth, now I'll try and answer based on my original post.

1.  At no point did I say we would get a better selection than Port but I did say we might get a 2nd and a 3rd rounder or even a single 1st rounder if we combined them.  Last time I checked, 2 x 2nd rounders beats a 2nd and a 3rd and it is impossible to quantify the winner out of 1 x 1st vs 2 x 2nds until a few years in hindsight but I suppose the exalted ones who breathe the rarefied air of "reality" are more fortunate than most of us plebs.

2.  Compensation is based on 2 criteria:

COMPENSATION

A club that has a net loss of players transferring to/from other clubs as free agents in one transfer period is entitled to compensation via National Draft picks allocated by the AFL.

The compensation formula produces a points rating for players based on:

1. The new contract of the free agent;
2. The age of the free agent.

Draft picks are allocated to clubs based on the net total points for free agents lost and gained during the transfer period.

Draft picks will be allocated to one of five places:

•  1st round
•  end of 1st round
•  2nd round
•  end of 2nd round
•  3rd round

In applying the formula, an expert committee reviews the formula outcomes. The committee has the power to recommend alternative outcomes to GM – Football Operations where the formula produces a materially anomalous result.


http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/free-agency (http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/free-agency)

So based on the criteria, Port got their picks for 26 yr old Pearce's 3 yr contract and 26 yr old Chaplin's 4 year contract.  Our compensation will be based on 26 yr old White's 3yr contract and 26 yr old McGuane's contract if he receives one.  Given the poor form that Pearce had displayed in his last 2 seasons at Port and their reluctance to offer any more than a 2 year contract I doubt that his contract would be vastly superior to White's offer, especially based on White's good form in his latest season so I believe those 2 would almost cancel out.  McGuane will not get a contract as good as Chaplin and that is what I base my opinion in the eventual outcome on - a 2nd rounder for Chaplin vs a 3rd rounder for McGuane.  And then when I said a 1st rounder (and I meant end of 1st round) if combined, that is based on nothing else than it is impossible to combine 2nd round picks and improve without going to a 1st round pick.

So I'll stick by my opinion as I know it was based on reasonable assumptions and I'll politely decline your offer to join you in the "real world" if it involves having opinions grown solely from the soil of my own perceived superiority.
Do you think the longer the post the more important it becomes? It doesn't!
How you think a second and third rounder combined becomes a first rounder is a reasonable assumption is beyond me and probably most people who can add. And trying to baffle people with long winded posts to try and sound smart is boring.
What's even more stupid is thinking White is worth a second round draft pick.
Nothing superior about my opinion just a little common sense.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 14, 2013, 08:21:19 PM
Think The White contract value will have a bit of influence on what we end up getting compo wise for White  ;D
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Stripes on October 15, 2013, 01:43:48 PM
My guess is a combined pick of early third or late second.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: tony_montana on October 15, 2013, 04:09:00 PM
looks like mcguane wont be signing with Brisbane before Fridays deadline which means we'll get sweet FA for him and just get compo for white
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: one-eyed on October 15, 2013, 05:26:38 PM
The Tigers are hopeful rather than expectant of a quality compensation pick as a replacement for the pair when those selections are allocated after the first period of free agency expires on Friday.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/richmond-set-to-trade-or-delist-small-forward-robin-nahas/story-fndv8t7m-1226740438268#mm-breached
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Yeahright on October 16, 2013, 10:19:07 AM

How you think a second and third rounder combined becomes a first rounder is a reasonable assumption is beyond me and probably most people who can add.

2+3=5 so we get a 5th rounder?
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Rampstar on October 17, 2013, 12:18:09 AM
1x3rd round draft pick is what we will get for White and McGuane I heard
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Loui Tufga on October 17, 2013, 12:32:10 AM
1x3rd round draft pick is what we will get for White and McGuane I heard

McGuane is out of the mix now so a 3rd rounder for White is about right I recon.........
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: one-eyed on October 17, 2013, 03:31:58 AM
Yep no compo for McGuane as the Lions will wait until after Friday when he becomes a delisted free agent.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Smokey on October 17, 2013, 08:56:14 AM
So why doesn't the club offer McGuane a small 1 year contract to force Brisbane's hand into taking him in the trade period?  Surely it's not going to matter to them when they sign him as I don't see what he will be offered would be dependant on any other signings?  If he becomes a delisted free agent doesn't he then have to enter the draft to be picked up, taking the risk (not much granted) that another club could take him?
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Penelope on October 17, 2013, 09:02:46 AM
nah, pretty sure there is another period where delisted free agents can be signed before the draft.

the risk in offering him a one year contract is he may accept it.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 17, 2013, 09:06:15 AM
So why doesn't the club offer McGuane a small 1 year contract to force Brisbane's hand into taking him in the trade period?  Surely it's not going to matter to them when they sign him as I don't see what he will be offered would be dependant on any other signings?  If he becomes a delisted free agent doesn't he then have to enter the draft to be picked up, taking the risk (not much granted) that another club could take him?

But they offered him a new contract before the end of the season and he knocked it back

No point in offering him a contract as he's decided he wants out. Besides we can offer but he needs to sign, clearly he isn't going to do that, so just let him go and we move on
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 17, 2013, 10:18:51 AM
the risk in offering him a one year contract is he may accept it.

*shudder*
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 01:29:19 AM
The free agency window closes at 2 pm on Friday.

The trading period has been held up in recent days by clubs waiting to confirm what picks they will receive as compensation for free agents. The decision on compensation for free agents will be revealed after the 2 pm free-agency deadline.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/bombers-and-saints-keen-to-entice-longer-20131017-2vpt9.html


So we'll find out later today what compo pick we'll be receiving in return for losing Matty White as a free agent.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 01:38:23 AM
Jon Ralph in the Herald-Sun reckons we'll only get pick 47 as compo  :P.


RICHMOND
Lost: Matthew White to Port Adelaide on a three-year deal at around $300,000 a season.
Gets: White is on modest cash and is 26, so Richmond will probably receive nothing, or at best a third-round pick, likely to be pick 47. Luke McGuane is going to Brisbane but hasn’t been signed as a free agent yet so they get nothing for him.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/afl-set-to-review-free-agency-rules-including-the-scrapping-of-compensation-picks/story-fnelctok-1226741954155


If Whitey is hardly worth anything then why are Port signing him up for 3 years  ::).
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Rampstar on October 18, 2013, 08:27:11 AM
Pick 47 is about right for White. He hasnt done much in his career IMHO.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: WA Tiger on October 18, 2013, 08:45:16 AM
What a complete cock up is this FA rubbish!!!!
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Stripes on October 18, 2013, 08:46:13 AM
What benefit does the Lions get for signing after Friday rather than before other than to screw us over?
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Smokey on October 18, 2013, 08:52:18 AM
What benefit does the Lions get for signing after Friday rather than before other than to screw us over?

None as far as I know, expect for the ability to not sign him until the last minute in November, keeping their options open.  Luke will look a bit silly if they pick someone else up in the interim and renege on their deal (if there is one on the table) because then he will have to nominate for the draft.
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 05:47:22 PM
Patrick Keane ‏@AFL_PKeane twitter:

AFL has determined free agency compensation selections for clubs at end of free agency period today and notified clubs late this afternoon.

Collingwood - Rd 1 compensation pick for loss of Dale Thomas.

Hawthorn - Rd 1 compensation pick for loss of Lance Franklin.

Melbourne - Rd 2 compensation pick, loss of Colin Sylvia.

St Kilda - Rd 2 compensation pick, loss of Nick Dal Santo.



Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 18, 2013, 05:49:03 PM
Eh?

Nothing for white?

 What  croc of crap
Title: No compo pick for Matty White :(
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 05:49:39 PM
Patrick Keane ‏@AFL_PKeane 8s

Richmond - No compensation for loss of M White,due to offer / player age.

Hawthorn - No compensation for loss of X Ellis,due to offer / age.


WTF?  :P
Title: Re: Compo pick(s)?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 18, 2013, 05:50:39 PM
AFL is a joke but this is beyond the joke bit  >:(

Cheating pig-dog scum fat pricks
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 06:06:42 PM
Matty White is still only 26. If he's that "old" then why did Port give him a 3-year contract!  ::)
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 18, 2013, 06:09:57 PM
Younger than farkering Sylvia
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: bojangles17 on October 18, 2013, 06:14:02 PM
what an absolute stuffen joke, Im bloody ropable over this I was expecting a r2 , at worst r3...talk about an injustice :banghead
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Smokey on October 18, 2013, 06:14:31 PM
You can't realistically be any younger than 26 to be a restricted free agent because you can't get drafted until you are almost 18.  It must work against you being younger but I would have thought it should work for you - the younger the player you lose, the more valuable he was because of potential years of service left.  He must have gone to Port for peanuts is all I can think because that doesn't fit with other compo picks in the past.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 18, 2013, 06:16:52 PM
o compensation for loss of M White,due to offer / player age.

Cause he was not offered 9 years only 3?   :banghead
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 06:17:38 PM
Smokey, Port offered White 3-years on $300k p.a.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: big tone on October 18, 2013, 06:19:07 PM
Get a grip- Matt White couldn't even get a regular game in our starting 18 this year. And we still have some very average players doing so.
Age has nothing to do with it, he simply isn't much chop.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: big tone on October 18, 2013, 06:24:13 PM
You can't realistically be any younger than 26 to be a restricted free agent because you can't get drafted until you are almost 18.  It must work against you being younger but I would have thought it should work for you - the younger the player you lose, the more valuable he was because of potential years of service left.  He must have gone to Port for peanuts is all I can think because that doesn't fit with other compo picks in the past.
Smoke, you have been on fire in this thread!  :thumbsup
I wish you were doing the compo  for us for the White loss, we would have Boyd for sure.  :cheers
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 06:28:12 PM
Get a grip- Matt White couldn't even get a regular game in our starting 18 this year. And we still have some very average players doing so.
Age has nothing to do with it, he simply isn't much chop.
But the AFL said the reason was due White's age  :huh.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Smokey on October 18, 2013, 06:28:36 PM
Smokey, Port offered White 3-years on $300k p.a.

So age must have a much bigger impact than we think or else it just doesn't make sense.  What do you think Sylvia and Del Santo would be on at their new clubs?  Both signed 3 year deals and my guess would be Sylvia ~$450k per year and Del Santo maybe $550k.  Sylvia is 27 and Del Santo is 29 yet both are R2 compo picks so you would think they can't be too far apart in $$'s.  The more I think about it the more it just doesn't gel with the criteria the AFL use.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Muscles on October 18, 2013, 06:31:23 PM
So which pick did we end up paying for The Hampster?  It started out as Pick 28 ..... did it end up as 34-ish?

Still nothing to write home about ......
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Smokey on October 18, 2013, 06:32:11 PM
You can't realistically be any younger than 26 to be a restricted free agent because you can't get drafted until you are almost 18.  It must work against you being younger but I would have thought it should work for you - the younger the player you lose, the more valuable he was because of potential years of service left.  He must have gone to Port for peanuts is all I can think because that doesn't fit with other compo picks in the past.
Smoke, you have been on fire in this thread!  :thumbsup
I wish you were doing the compo  for us for the White loss, we would have Boyd for sure.  :cheers

Yeah, I got the pick wrong big time but I'm having a hard time reconciling it with what the AFL state as their criteria against all the picks handed out.  If it is as the say, based purely on value of the new contract and players age then they must put a much higher premium on the older age and I honestly thought it would be the other way around.  And it makes even less sense if that is the case when I can't see Sylvia being on the same money as Dal Santo plus Del Santo is 2 year older.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: big tone on October 18, 2013, 06:39:44 PM
You can't realistically be any younger than 26 to be a restricted free agent because you can't get drafted until you are almost 18.  It must work against you being younger but I would have thought it should work for you - the younger the player you lose, the more valuable he was because of potential years of service left.  He must have gone to Port for peanuts is all I can think because that doesn't fit with other compo picks in the past.
Smoke, you have been on fire in this thread!  :thumbsup
I wish you were doing the compo  for us for the White loss, we would have Boyd for sure.  :cheers

Yeah, I got the pick wrong big time but I'm having a hard time reconciling it with what the AFL state as their criteria against all the picks handed out.  If it is as the say, based purely on value of the new contract and players age then they must put a much higher premium on the older age and I honestly thought it would be the other way around.  And it makes even less sense if that is the case when I can't see Sylvia being on the same money as Dal Santo plus Del Santo is 2 year older.
Agreed, not much logic.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 06:55:59 PM
So which pick did we end up paying for The Hampster?  It started out as Pick 28 ..... did it end up as 34-ish?

Still nothing to write home about ......
It moved down 4 spots to pick 32.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Rampstar on October 18, 2013, 07:01:07 PM
just makes us giving away our pick for hampster even worse. In reality White and McGuane werent worth anything. Deep down we all knew that anyway.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: one-eyed on October 18, 2013, 07:03:28 PM
Smokey, Port offered White 3-years on $300k p.a.

So age must have a much bigger impact than we think or else it just doesn't make sense.  What do you think Sylvia and Del Santo would be on at their new clubs?  Both signed 3 year deals and my guess would be Sylvia ~$450k per year and Del Santo maybe $550k.  Sylvia is 27 and Del Santo is 29 yet both are R2 compo picks so you would think they can't be too far apart in $$'s.  The more I think about it the more it just doesn't gel with the criteria the AFL use.
My only guess Smokey is they really judged it on the criteria of games played and stats over their respective careers. The age argument used by the AFL makes no sense as White is the youngest.


White -      16 games in 2013 at 12.6 disposals. Career: 105 games at 12.3 disp. ( 8 years)

Sylvia -      19 games in 2013 at 19.4 disposals. Career: 157 games at 17.2 disp. (10 years)

Dal Santo - 22 games in 2013 at 24.8 disposals. Career: 260 games at 22.5 disp. (12 years)
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Rampstar on October 18, 2013, 07:08:52 PM
Richmond needs to guarantee itself a decent pick in the first round. This year could be a disaster draft and trade wise. Club needs to try and upgrade its pick in the first round next week and get itself into the top 10. We could very well end up getting no good players in this years trade and draft effort.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: wayne on October 18, 2013, 07:22:52 PM
Haha age? Why not just tell the truth, he is a fringe player and not worth compo. How can he be too old when it is his 1st year eligible for FA?
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Hard Roar Tiger on October 18, 2013, 08:32:20 PM
just makes us giving away our pick for hampster even worse. In reality White and McGuane werent worth anything. Deep down we all knew that anyway.

Can't argue with that
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Rampstar on October 18, 2013, 09:00:01 PM
just makes us giving away our pick for hampster even worse. In reality White and McGuane werent worth anything. Deep down we all knew that anyway.

Can't argue with that

you never agree with me on anything you been on the pee tonight or something HRT?
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Hard Roar Tiger on October 18, 2013, 09:26:11 PM
If we are honest, White and McGuane are team mascots. White was the best in comp at running to the interchange bench but that won't help with an compo pick.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Rampstar on October 18, 2013, 09:32:59 PM
If we are honest, White and McGuane are team mascots. White was the best in comp at running to the interchange bench but that won't help with an compo pick.

thats actually pretty right but on our forums the supporters are going ape droppings because the AFL didnt give us a pick. to be honest I think the club also expected a pick and thats why they gave our 2nd rounder to carlton.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Francois Jackson on October 18, 2013, 09:36:57 PM
If we are honest, White and McGuane are team mascots. White was the best in comp at running to the interchange bench but that won't help with an compo pick.

thats actually pretty right but on our forums the supporters are going ape droppings because the AFL didnt give us a pick. to be honest I think the club also expected a pick and thats why they gave our 2nd rounder to carlton.

posted this exact thing elsewhere Ramps.

I think we scored an own goal too and completely shot ourselves in the foot.



Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: torch on October 18, 2013, 10:21:10 PM
just makes us giving away our pick for hampster even worse. In reality White and McGuane werent worth anything. Deep down we all knew that anyway.

Yes but White is worth something.

We have shot ourselves!
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Coach on October 18, 2013, 11:11:20 PM
This is brilliant reading. is it too late to package Edwards & Grigg for Ablett.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Rampstar on October 18, 2013, 11:16:02 PM
This is brilliant reading. is it too late to package Edwards & Grigg for Ablett.

It is great reading indeed!
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Loui Tufga on October 18, 2013, 11:17:45 PM
It's absolute stuffing rubbish!!!!
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: dwaino on October 18, 2013, 11:47:17 PM
Compo should be scrapped altogether IMO. Not fair everyone else shuffles along at least a spot because a player wants to play in different colours.

Feel a bit ripped that we didn't even get a token pick for White though when everyone else got something.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Andyy on October 19, 2013, 12:34:55 AM
I thought a third rounder would have been fair.

Scrap this compo IMO. Anybody leaving under FA has been there long enough to give good service anyway.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 19, 2013, 09:01:22 AM
Compo should be scrapped altogether IMO. Not fair everyone else shuffles along at least a spot because a player wants to play in different colours.

Feel a bit ripped that we didn't even get a token pick for White though when everyone else got something.

Absolutely agree

How the work out who gets what is baffling to say the least, coupled with the fact that they just plonk the pick where a clubs sits in the draft is laughable to.

And BTW I wouldn't think Compared to what White was probably on at the RFc that his deal at Port is "peanuts"

The only peanuts in this discussion are the brain sizes of the those at HQS making these bizarre decisions  ;D
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Rampstar on October 19, 2013, 09:06:55 AM
Compo should be scrapped altogether IMO. Not fair everyone else shuffles along at least a spot because a player wants to play in different colours.

Feel a bit ripped that we didn't even get a token pick for White though when everyone else got something.

Absolutely agree

How the work out who gets what is baffling to say the least, coupled with the fact that they just plonk the pick where a clubs sits in the draft is laughable to.

And BTW I wouldn't think Compared to what White was probably on at the RFc that his deal at Port is "peanuts"

The only peanuts in this discussion are the brain sizes of the those at HQS making these bizarre decisions  ;D

White has always been an average player. Most of us have wanted him to be delisted every year for the last 5 or 6 years at least. He wasnt worth anything and thats what we got. Nuffin!
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 19, 2013, 09:11:26 AM
Compo should be scrapped altogether IMO. Not fair everyone else shuffles along at least a spot because a player wants to play in different colours.

Feel a bit ripped that we didn't even get a token pick for White though when everyone else got something.

Absolutely agree

How the work out who gets what is baffling to say the least, coupled with the fact that they just plonk the pick where a clubs sits in the draft is laughable to.

And BTW I wouldn't think Compared to what White was probably on at the RFc that his deal at Port is "peanuts"

The only peanuts in this discussion are the brain sizes of the those at HQS making these bizarre decisions  ;D

White has always been an average player. Most of us have wanted him to be delisted every year for the last 5 or 6 years at least. He wasnt worth anything and thats what we got. Nuffin!

Fair enough ramps but the entire compo system is a joke.

C'wood gets a better pick for Thomas than the hawks do for Franklin because the pies finished lower is a joke. That Melb got 2 compo picks for Scully granted under a different rule makes it even more laughable

If the comp wants true FA (warts and all) then the compo system goes and clubs all of them suffer the pain of what Free Agency in other sports is like
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: TigerMonk on October 19, 2013, 09:19:26 AM
This is Peggy's 1st blunder as being President if she lets the AFL rob us of a compo pick when other clubs are getting compo picks for lost players. Free Agency will be scraped after this year cause its robbing clubs.  :banghead Richmond always get raped
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Owl on October 19, 2013, 09:28:39 AM
Oh they knew what they were doing alright.  Keeping us down, helping the cheating clubs like Melbourne and Carltank up, and of course their darlings the Magpies.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: bojangles17 on October 19, 2013, 09:47:38 AM
This is Peggy's 1st blunder as being President if she lets the AFL rob us of a compo pick when other clubs are getting compo picks for lost players. Free Agency will be scraped after this year cause its robbing clubs.  :banghead Richmond always get raped

has sweet stuff all to do with the Prez my friend. if anything Benny g would have read the riot act on hearing the news...we have bigger fish to fry and aint going to lose our poo over this. my mail is the league considers us that much of an emerging threat that any further assistance may be improper. an im inclined to agree :cheers
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Rampstar on October 19, 2013, 10:23:08 AM
Compo should be scrapped altogether IMO. Not fair everyone else shuffles along at least a spot because a player wants to play in different colours.

Feel a bit ripped that we didn't even get a token pick for White though when everyone else got something.

Absolutely agree

How the work out who gets what is baffling to say the least, coupled with the fact that they just plonk the pick where a clubs sits in the draft is laughable to.

And BTW I wouldn't think Compared to what White was probably on at the RFc that his deal at Port is "peanuts"

The only peanuts in this discussion are the brain sizes of the those at HQS making these bizarre decisions  ;D

White has always been an average player. Most of us have wanted him to be delisted every year for the last 5 or 6 years at least. He wasnt worth anything and thats what we got. Nuffin!

Fair enough ramps but the entire compo system is a joke.

C'wood gets a better pick for Thomas than the hawks do for Franklin because the pies finished lower is a joke. That Melb got 2 compo picks for Scully granted under a different rule makes it even more laughable

If the comp wants true FA (warts and all) then the compo system goes and clubs all of them suffer the pain of what Free Agency in other sports is like

Of course its a joke and its a joke because its a double dip. Example Scully. Melbourne got Scully- they tanked to get him and Trengove. Anyway Scully was going downhill at a rate of knots and certainly not performing as a top 10 should. GWS get stupid and sign Scully on free agency. Melbourne from having a first shot at getting a good player and stuffing up then get compo - 2 picks for Scully. In effect Melbourne have had 3 rolls of the dice. Of course its a joke. Goddard leaves St Kilda, Goddard was a star for St Kilda for many years, he leaves maybe with3  or 4 years left in his Career- St Kilda having used him up for years then St Kilda gets another top pick in the draft for Goddard - in effect the chance to get another quality 10 year player when Goddard would have been out of the system in 3 or so years at St Kilda instead they get another roll of the dice the whole  thing is a farce.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: tony_montana on October 19, 2013, 10:24:03 AM
[conspiracy hat]Reckon they used us as guinea pigs to gauge the fan reaction for no compo in the afl as of next season. They know tiger supporters are an emotional bunch, so if there is going to be a fan revolt it would be us, and even if they poo on us we are loyal so no damage[/conspiracy hat]
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Gigantor on October 19, 2013, 10:34:24 AM
Richmond went hard and early and got the man they wanted.As for compo picks ,gotta a gut feeling Tiges knew they would get twiddly twit
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 19, 2013, 10:36:04 AM
[conspiracy hat]Reckon they used us as guinea pigs to gauge the fan reaction for no compo in the afl as of next season. They know tiger supporters are an emotional bunch, so if there is going to be a fan revolt it would be us, and even if they poo on us we are loyal so no damage[/conspiracy hat]

what are the channels of reporting our displeasure?

cow poo at AFL house?

what else is a realistic option?

start a petition?

death threats to vlad?

there is no way for richmond fans to report anger  :banghead :banghead
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Smokey on October 19, 2013, 10:46:50 AM

what are the channels of reporting our displeasure?

cow poo at AFL house?

Chicken is an old fave and has always got a reaction when used in the past.

 :whistle
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: DCrane on October 19, 2013, 11:14:10 AM
what are the channels of reporting our displeasure?

cow poo at AFL house?

what else is a realistic option?

start a petition?

death threats to vlad?

there is no way for richmond fans to report anger  :banghead :banghead

It's too late for that, the cause has already been lost.
The club needs to learn how to play the PR better, the press line should have been along the lines of being 'devastated' at the loss of White, an 'integral' player to our 5th placed side, but we will 'do our best' with the compensation given to us by the AFL. 3 or 4 days of consecutive press releases and a pumping this message out in every door stop interview. We will be getting compensation for Matthew White. This is where Hawthorn missed out with Buddy, they were too nice about it all and ended up with pick 19.
If you create hope amongst your own supporters, you can hijack the AFL into favourable decisions, this is how Collingwood get given 1st round picks and get to write their own fixture every year.     
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Francois Jackson on October 19, 2013, 12:05:20 PM
what are the channels of reporting our displeasure?

cow poo at AFL house?

what else is a realistic option?

start a petition?

death threats to vlad?

there is no way for richmond fans to report anger  :banghead :banghead

It's too late for that, the cause has already been lost.
The club needs to learn how to play the PR better, the press line should have been along the lines of being 'devastated' at the loss of White, an 'integral' player to our 5th placed side, but we will 'do our best' with the compensation given to us by the AFL. 3 or 4 days of consecutive press releases and a pumping this message out in every door stop interview. We will be getting compensation for Matthew White. This is where Hawthorn missed out with Buddy, they were too nice about it all and ended up with pick 19.
If you create hope amongst your own supporters, you can hijack the AFL into favourable decisions, this is how Collingwood get given 1st round picks and get to write their own fixture every year.   

Here here

U forgot about their away strip that they decide not the AFL

They do create their own luck though. I mean Dawes, Wellingham what spuds

The RFC create their own problems and it doesn't get any bigger that they believed they would get a second rounder for those 2.

Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 19, 2013, 12:14:05 PM
what are the channels of reporting our displeasure?

cow poo at AFL house?

what else is a realistic option?

start a petition?

death threats to vlad?

there is no way for richmond fans to report anger  :banghead :banghead

It's too late for that, the cause has already been lost.
The club needs to learn how to play the PR better, the press line should have been along the lines of being 'devastated' at the loss of White, an 'integral' player to our 5th placed side, but we will 'do our best' with the compensation given to us by the AFL. 3 or 4 days of consecutive press releases and a pumping this message out in every door stop interview. We will be getting compensation for Matthew White. This is where Hawthorn missed out with Buddy, they were too nice about it all and ended up with pick 19.
If you create hope amongst your own supporters, you can hijack the AFL into favourable decisions, this is how Collingwood get given 1st round picks and get to write their own fixture every year.   

Why should the club have to resort to this?

Why is the playing field notlevel without the requirement of a properganda department?

Really - do we require human rights lawyers and spin doctor for a bloody third round pick for a best 22 player  :banghead

Who signed athree year contract with a top 8 side
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: tony_montana on October 19, 2013, 12:17:02 PM
what are the channels of reporting our displeasure?

cow poo at AFL house?

what else is a realistic option?

start a petition?

death threats to vlad?

there is no way for richmond fans to report anger  :banghead :banghead

It's too late for that, the cause has already been lost.
The club needs to learn how to play the PR better, the press line should have been along the lines of being 'devastated' at the loss of White, an 'integral' player to our 5th placed side, but we will 'do our best' with the compensation given to us by the AFL. 3 or 4 days of consecutive press releases and a pumping this message out in every door stop interview. We will be getting compensation for Matthew White. This is where Hawthorn missed out with Buddy, they were too nice about it all and ended up with pick 19.
If you create hope amongst your own supporters, you can hijack the AFL into favourable decisions, this is how Collingwood get given 1st round picks and get to write their own fixture every year.   

That's a really good point. Got to get the propaganda machine in full swing, the AFL operates on perception above substance. Help nudge the call in our favour.

Look at the pies - adams for Shaw. Shaw has been an agrader no doubt, but has been exposed this season and has 2-3 years of top standard footy left max, Adams is an elite young talent who is already performing and is expected to have another 10+ years of elite performances. Yet nearly everyday I saw media reports stating a straight swap for Shaw and Adams would be reasonable and fair, no doubt thaqt has come from the pies sources to every journo on the books! Subsequently that perception has become the industry agreed value amongst the 'scribes'
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 19, 2013, 12:42:28 PM
This is Peggy's 1st blunder as being President if she lets the AFL rob us of a compo pick when other clubs are getting compo picks for lost players. Free Agency will be scraped after this year cause its robbing clubs.  :banghead

Has got nothing to do with the prez how our footy dept trades. We are not the first club not to get compo picks

Secondly, free agency isn't going anywhere because the AFLPA now demands it. Personally I hate it and i am against it but it's here now and it ain't going anywhere

What will go and should go is this farcical compo system.
Title: Re: Richmond receives no compo for losing Matthew White [updated]
Post by: TigerMonk on October 20, 2013, 07:08:59 AM
lol at you people who think the President is not the most important player in the club. Have a look around at the strings other Presidents pull. Other strong clubs don't get walked over by the AFL. l stated it wrong above as it was meant to be compo picks abolished as you stated WP.