Irwin may be axed, Dobson hard to keep

[Chachi]

I spoke with Don Furner about Dobson a few months ago (March), and he told me that Marc Herbert was a longer term prospect for the club.

Make of that what you will.

I read that as we are either looking at Zillman or Dobson to fill the number 7 jersey for at least the next 2-3 years.

Beyond Thurston and Prince there is a real shortage of quality halfbacks out there - especially young ones.

I'm reasonably confident we'll hang on to Dobson. There must be some attraction to sticking with a team full of your mates on the way up rather than jumping into a sh*tfight with the likes of Newcastle, Roosters, StGeorge, Canterbury or Cronulla.

 

[shear_joy9]

Seriously, had Dobson not had such big wraps on him from the ESL I doubt he would have started in first grade this year.

I really can't see him staying.
If he starts playing really well, MOTM displays, it will just get other clubs more hungry for him and reafirm his views of a top notch salary.

Alternatively if he plays bad, he'll be dropped.

 

[legend]

I think we need to give Dobson a little more time to get his a game together. Carney is close to 50 games and Terry Campese had been around a while as well so I think we are being grossly unfair to Dobson to expect miracles ten games into his NRL career.

Ideally, I'd love to see Campese at lock, Dobson at half and Carney at five eighth with Tongue and Withers rotating the hooking role like the Eels do with Marsh and Riddell.

 

[raidersforme]

Of the players we have released so far this season pre or during

Pamatangi (discipline) Contract breached no need to pay out saving $50k
Lomu (Medical) club said would if not picked up, Signed with bronco's saving $100 - $150k
* Irwin (Discipline) Won't need to pay contract breached saving $50k
Frawley (sh*te) bronco's signed, saving us $50k - $100k we would need to top up
* denotes pending decision.

So far by my calculations we have saved $200k to $300k.

Even if we only get 50% back from releasing Howell, Best, Rothery, and had to top up there contracts that would give us and extra $200k to $300k.

Williams not renewed will give us $75 - $150k.

Dobson upgraded to $150k Base incentived to $250k 3-4 year deal.

Hinchcliffe upgraded to $100 Incentived to $150k 3-4 year deal.

Junior Sau Upgraded to $100k Incentived to $150k 3-4 year deal.

That gives at least another $200k to be able to upgrade Goddwin and Milne By $50 to 100K each.

If i can work it out why can't management, But then again i don't know how close to limit we are, and maybe the money saved is only bringing us back under cap.

 

[legend]

We are working with absollutes and most contracts aren't structured that way with players receiveing more in some years than in others plus incentive payments to rep players etc.

I think the whole process is extremely complex and it takes a lot of juggling to make it all work.

 

[julian87]

FFS, keep Dobson, he is the best halfback we have seen in years. Dobson is miles ahead of the likes of McFadden and Drew, but lightyears ahead of f**king Marc Herbert, ffs.

 

[raidersforme]

NRL questions Canberra's consistency

By Josh Massoud
May 30, 2007
THE National Rugby League last night expressed concern at a wholesale "double standards" approach to player discipline after Canberra admitted their "investment" in Todd Carney had played in the 20 year old's favour.
Teammate Steve Irwin is likely to be cut adrift from the Raiders for his role in the alleged police pursuit 12 days ago.
Irwin was not charged over the chase, which police claim involved his car being driven by an unlicensed Carney.
In refusing to guarantee Irwin the same lifeline Carney now enjoys, Raiders officials last night prepared to be accused of double standards.
"Steve has just come to the club this year and he has not played any footy for us," Canberra CEO Simon Hawkins told The Daily Telegraph.
"On the other hand, we probably do feel we have invested in Todd. So, yes, it probably is a case of treating people differently and that could be perceived as double standards."
Hawkins' admission came after general manager Don Furner told The Canberra Times: "Sometimes there are double standards and sometimes there are different qualities of player. Sometimes exceptions are made for better players or players that have been at a club longer. That's a fact of life."
But the NRL does not want double standards to become a fact of life for all disciplinary decisions.
"If that's becoming a general policy then it's clearly problematic," NRL boss David Gallop said. "We certainly support clubs looking at issues on a case-by-case basis, but clubs also need to consider the need for consistency."

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,21817590-23214,00.html

This massoud guy has a real hard one for bagging canberra. 30-6 mate we won

 

[Chachi]

If I was with an employer for 5 years I'd also like to be treated with different standards to someone who has been there for 6 months.

 

[Tokyo_Raider]

bullsh*t. Cutting Irwin and saving Carney is just plain WRONG.

 

[edabomb]

Was Irwin in the top 25? If he was then cutting him would free up a bit more cash for Dobbo.

 

[dubby]

I'm sure Irwin was not in the top 25.

I agree with Legend. Player payments are not a cut and dried figure every year. It is a juggling act that becomes very complicated and it is easy for clubs to breach the cap.

eg Last year when Shif and Mogg were selected for SOO their bonus put us over, and it happened in 2004 I think as well.

I really think that with the Knights all cashed up they might make a move on Dobbo, or the Sharks if they let Noddy go. Who knows, Souths may make a move as well?

 

[Chachi]

bullsh*t. Cutting Irwin and saving Carney is just plain WRONG.

Why?

I don't think we can argue that what Irwin did was worse than what Carney did, but if Irwin broke the clubs' code of conduct according to his contract then the club is entitled to do whatever they want with him. Just because the two players breached their contractural agreements in the same event it doesn't mean the club should be obligated to deal with them in the same way.

Do you know why Pamatangi was sacked earlier this season? I wonder if what he did was any worse than Carney...didn't see you complaining then.

If I spend $500,000 on a house and $50,000 on a caravan and I plan to live in the house I know which one I would maintain better.

From a moral perspective it sucks, but if it means we don't have 20,000 fans crying blue murder because we can't hold onto Dobson, then I'm sorry to say players like Irwin will always be a scapegoat.

Anyway, since when have lawyers had any moral standards? You clearly stated (ad nauseum) that Schifcofske had no moral obligation to stick with the club, so why the hell does the club have any moral obligation to stick with Irwin if he broke the rules? And if Irwin didn't break the rules I'm sure the club would be obligated to pay out a portion of his contract as per any other agreement. Nobody here even knows the full story.

 

[dubby]

Chachi, I think your last paragraph was a little off topic and the personal attack against TR was unneccessary and unlike you.

Take a breath mate, take a breath!

FFIW I agree with your post up until your "dig" at TR.

 

[Tokyo_Raider]

Why?

I don't think we can argue that what Irwin did was worse than what Carney did, but if Irwin broke the clubs' code of conduct according to his contract then the club is entitled to do whatever they want with him. Just because the two players breached their contractural agreements in the same event it doesn't mean the club should be obligated to deal with them in the same way.

Do you know why Pamatangi was sacked earlier this season? I wonder if what he did was any worse than Carney...didn't see you complaining then.

If I spend $500,000 on a house and $50,000 on a caravan and I plan to live in the house I know which one I would maintain better.

From a moral perspective it sucks, but if it means we don't have 20,000 fans crying blue murder because we can't hold onto Dobson, then I'm sorry to say players like Irwin will always be a scapegoat.

Anyway, since when have lawyers had any moral standards? You clearly stated (ad nauseum) that Schifcofske had no moral obligation to stick with the club, so why the hell does the club have any moral obligation to stick with Irwin if he broke the rules? And if Irwin didn't break the rules I'm sure the club would be obligated to pay out a portion of his contract as per any other agreement. Nobody here even knows the full story.

My objections are purely moral, but let's put a business spin on it. Canberra is trying to build a team. We accept that we can't recruit from outside...we get bugger all. We accept that we have to pay 'overs' to keep players here and away from stunning Penrith Beach. So, we have to build a group of players with loyalty to each other and to the club. And I think we're getting there. We have a good little group of local juniors supplemented by some older and wiser heads, and they are really coming together as a unit. I could easily imagine a future where people accept LESS to be part of a tight, winning team...much the same as the Broncos of the late 90's.

What message does it send then, if we sack a 'lesser light' for a much lesser offence than that for which we slapped a star player on the wrist? That we're a loyal unit...if you're a star? That we will back you...if you're good enough?

Surely we want to move AWAY from the situation as last year where people seemed to leave largely on a whim? And what better way to do that is to say 'we stick by you...we're in this together'. What better way to build disharmony that to apply rules with absolutely no consistency? But perhaps someone who likens players to caravans and houses just doesn't see it that way.

But anyway, and as I said, my objections are moral. It sends a shocking message and I don't believe it's the correct thing to do.

As for the comment about lawyers and ethical standards, a. Cheap, cliched shot. Some of the most ethical people I know are lawyers. b. I am not a lawyer.

As for the ad nauseum dig....oh puh-lease. I think we can find some better examples on here of that, can't we?

 

[Lime_Green]

I agree with T_R here.

Aside from the obvious morality issue the club is already getting some seriously bad press over Furner's "double standards" comments. Not good from a marketing perspective, not good at all.

It's worth noting though that today management said this wasn't the first time Irwin has been in trouble at the club. There have been a series of incidents since he arrived, apparently.

Put together with his sacking by the Broncos for alcohol related issues and I'm starting to wonder if management might have the right idea after all.

 

[canberra_raiders2k2]

this is what i feared when everyone was parading around here saying i need to quit saying "carney needs to go".

We look like fools now, without a doubt this is the lamest thing ive seen happen to the raiders. we have a potential star and a well an unknown, the star messes up but stays the unknown calls for a ride and may be sacked.

Yep all is good....

 

[Chachi]

My objections are purely moral, but let's put a business spin on it. Canberra is trying to build a team. We accept that we can't recruit from outside...we get bugger all. We accept that we have to pay 'overs' to keep players here and away from stunning Penrith Beach. So, we have to build a group of players with loyalty to each other and to the club. And I think we're getting there. We have a good little group of local juniors supplemented by some older and wiser heads, and they are really coming together as a unit. I could easily imagine a future where people accept LESS to be part of a tight, winning team...much the same as the Broncos of the late 90's.

What message does it send then, if we sack a 'lesser light' for a much lesser offence than that for which we slapped a star player on the wrist? That we're a loyal unit...if you're a star? That we will back you...if you're good enough?

Surely we want to move AWAY from the situation as last year where people seemed to leave largely on a whim? And what better way to do that is to say 'we stick by you...we're in this together'. What better way to build disharmony that to apply rules with absolutely no consistency? But perhaps someone who likens players to caravans and houses just doesn't see it that way.

But anyway, and as I said, my objections are moral. It sends a shocking message and I don't believe it's the correct thing to do.

As for the comment about lawyers and ethical standards, a. Cheap, cliched shot. Some of the most ethical people I know are lawyers. b. I am not a lawyer.

As for the ad nauseum dig....oh puh-lease. I think we can find some better examples on here of that, can't we?

OK T_R, I apologise for the misguided lawyer jibe. Not to mention it was indeed a cheap cliche. (I was going to say something about supporting the sharks but I didn't ;-) )

I guess my main point is we don't know the full story, and as our Lime_Green friend has pointed out I think there could be more to the Irwin situation than we know about (I know he's had other alcohol related issues before arriving here).

I do agree we need to set up a "family club" atmosphere here. The support the boys are showing each other up until now is reflected on the park. Happy clubs are usually winning clubs and that HAS to be attractive to any young footballer looking at his options.

However I still think longer serving players deserve to be treated with more leniency in times like this. It is a reward for loyalty and past performance. This does not necessarily mean we have two standards per se.

At the end of the day (another cheap cliche) I also think it's unfair for us to keep Irwin over Dobson if it comes down to that. Nasty, but true - and unfortunately we're in the business of winning football games here, not Oprah Winfrey awards.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

I'd be concerned that sacking Irwin might create some disharmony among the squad itself. I'm sure Irwin has made good mates with alot of the players down here and for the club to cast him away for his role in the incident may create some bitter feelings towards club management. I know if someone I worked with was sacked because it was convenient I'd be pissed at management.

Not to mention it's just not right.

 

[Chachi]

this is what i feared when everyone was parading around here saying i need to quit saying "carney needs to go".

We look like fools now, without a doubt this is the lamest thing ive seen happen to the raiders. we have a potential star and a well an unknown, the star messes up but stays the unknown calls for a ride and may be sacked.

Yep all is good....

Don't worry dude, this is storm in a teacup compared with what's going on with the Bulldogs and Knights right now. Our situation will hardly rate a mention beyond this week.

 

[raiders fan forever]

Ill be mega p*ssed if we let Dobbo go