History for liberty_nz

Okay, i'll be a descenting voice here.


On Rudan the Mega-Judas...

1. Poaching: it is quite possible that none of this is poaching. Players that are coming out of contract are free to be directly approached with less than 6 months remaining on their contract (i.e. they don't have to tell Phoenix)

2. Managers do not have any of these restrictions imposed by football's governing bodies, something I know irritates clubs around the world and may perpetuate more of the manager merry-go-round you see.

3. It seems both Rudan and Phoenix had an 8 week notice period clause which they could action. While we may loath Tony Rallis, his job is to represent his clients. If he knew that Rudan may not be able to stick it out long term due to family, club support and personal issues, it seems sensible to make enquiries on his behalf.

4. Rudan claims not to have signed anything with another club (okay, i'll take him at his word). Under the employment contract agreements I have signed, you must not directly or indirectly conduct activities that may reasonably be considered to affect the employer or the ability of the employee to do their job. It is still quite possible that Rudan hasn't been doing this and it has been just been Rallis working with WU. Still, if Phoenix want to take things further this might be an avenue but it seems like we have bigger fish to fry with the license.

5. Maybe there is an 'understanding' and maybe there were conversations on whether Rudan would possibly be interested in 'if the role was offered' but I would not have thought the Phoenix could restrict these enquiries. It would seem reasonable for the Biutmens to ask 'what style might you play' and 'what players that are free for us to approach would you consider being suitable for this style'. There would be ways to do it at arms length and above board. And if nothing has been signed (like a pre-employment MOU) then the Bitumens are taking a hell of a risk it all blowing up.

6. Perhaps the Phoenix needed to have (or didn't have) a 'restraint of trade' type clause in the employment contract that prohibited Rudan from working for another A-League club if the 8 week clause was enacted by Rudan (i.e. still leaving overseas, national team and NPL level jobs open to Rudan). Whether this employment agreement would have held up in Australia would be interesting to know.

My own personal thoughts are that the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle of Rudan being "the biggest two face the league has ever seen, playing us for fools" and "a Messiah who misses his family and only wants to cuddle his kids at night".
In the past, the Nix have also demonstrated that they can operate within a moral grey area - remember WeeMac after CCM folded?
I just don't think it's worth getting all foamed up at the mouth about.

On Bitumens getting the extra cap, I thought this was due to established clubs being able to access items outside the cap such as "loyalty" payments outside the salary cap (I think the limit was $200K) and salary cap banking from previous seasons, which obviously the Bitumens cannot do.

On returning Aussies...
Ursan Gulum was also playing VPL this year and looked a liability for Adelaide when he last played A-League. As mentioned by Feverish, only really looks like Scott McDonald.

And agree with Mike above on Rudan/Japan.

Okay, i'll be a descenting voice here.


On Rudan the Mega-Judas...

1. Poaching: it is quite possible that none of this is poaching. Players that are coming out of contract are free to be directly approached with less than 6 months remaining on their contract (i.e. they don't have to tell Phoenix)

2. Managers do not have any of these restrictions imposed by football's governing bodies, something I know irritates clubs around the world and may perpetuate more of the manager merry-go-round you see.

3. It seems both Rudan and Phoenix had an 8 week notice period clause which they could action. While we may loath Tony Rallis, his job is to represent his clients. If he knew that Rudan may not be able to stick it out long term due to family, club support and personal issues, it seems sensible to make enquiries on his behalf.

4. Rudan claims not to have signed anything with another club (okay, i'll take him at his word). Under the employment contract agreements I have signed, you must not directly or indirectly conduct activities that may reasonably be considered to affect the employer or the ability of the employee to do their job. It is still quite possible that Rudan hasn't been doing this and it has been just been Rallis working with WU. Still, if Phoenix want to take things further this might be an avenue but it seems like we have bigger fish to fry with the license.

5. Maybe there is an 'understanding' and maybe there were conversations on whether Rudan would possibly be interested in 'if the role was offered' but I would not have thought the Phoenix could restrict these enquiries. It would seem reasonable for the Biutmens to ask 'what style might you play' and 'what players that are free for us to approach would you consider being suitable for this style'. There would be ways to do it at arms length and above board. And if nothing has been signed (like a pre-employment MOU) then the Bitumens are taking a hell of a risk it all blowing up.

6. Perhaps the Phoenix needed to have (or didn't have) a 'restraint of trade' type clause in the employment contract that prohibited Rudan from working for another A-League club if the 8 week clause was enacted by Rudan (i.e. still leaving overseas, national team and NPL level jobs open to Rudan). Whether this employment agreement would have held up in Australia would be interesting to know.

My own personal thoughts are that the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle of Rudan being "the biggest two face the league has ever seen, playing us for fools" and "a Messiah who misses his family and only wants to cuddle his kids at night".
In the past, the Nix have also demonstrated that they can operate within a moral grey area - remember WeeMac after CCM folded?
I just don't think it's worth getting all foamed up at the mouth about.

On Bitumens getting the extra cap, I thought this was due to established clubs being able to access items outside the cap such as "loyalty" payments outside the salary cap (I think the limit was $200K) and salary cap banking from previous seasons, which obviously the Bitumens cannot do.

On returning Aussies...
Ursan Gulum was also playing VPL this year and looked a liability for Adelaide when he last played A-League. As mentioned by Feverish, only reallu looks like Scott McDonald.

And agree with Mike above on Rudan/Japan.

Okay, i'll be a descenting voice here.


On Rudan the Mega-Judas...

1. Poaching: it is quite possible that none of this is poaching. Players that are coming out of contract are free to be directly approached with less than 6 months remaining on their contract (i.e. they don't have to tell Phoenix)

2. Managers do not have any of these restrictions imposed by football's governing bodies, something I know irritates clubs around the world and may perpetuate more of the manager merry-go-round you see.

3. It seems both Rudan and Phoenix had an 8 week notice period clause which they could action. While we may loath Tony Rallis, his job is to represent his clients. If he knew that Rudan may not be able to stick it out long term due to family and personal issues, it seems sensible to make enquiries on his behalf.

4. Rudan claims not to have signed anything with another club (okay, i'll take him at his word). Under the employment contract agreements I have signed, you must not directly or indirectly conduct activities that may reasonably be considered to affect the employer or the ability of the employee to do their job. It is still quite possible that Rudan hasn't been doing this and it has been just been Rallis working with WU. Still, if Phoenix want to take things further this might be an avenue but it seems like we have bigger fish to fry with the license.

5. Maybe there is an 'understanding' and maybe there were conversations on whether Rudan would possibly be interested in 'if the role was offered' but I would not have thought the Phoenix could restrict these enquiries. It would seem reasonable for the Biutmens to ask 'what style might you play' and 'what players that are free for us to approach would you consider being suitable for this style'. There would be ways to do it at arms length and above board. And if nothing has been signed (like a pre-employment MOU) then the Bitumens are taking a hell of a risk it all blowing up.

6. Perhaps the Phoenix needed to have (or didn't have) a 'restraint of trade' type clause in the employment contract that prohibited Rudan from working for another A-League club if the 8 week clause was enacted by Rudan (i.e. still leaving overseas, national team and NPL level jobs open to Rudan). Whether this employment agreement would have held up in Australia would be interesting to know.

My own personal thoughts are that the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle of Rudan being "the biggest two face the league has ever seen, playing us for fools" and "a Messiah who misses his family and only wants to cuddle his kids at night".
In the past, the Nix have also demonstrated that they can operate within a moral grey area - remember WeeMac after CCM folded?
I just don't think it's worth getting all foamed up at the mouth about.

On Bitumens getting the extra cap, I thought this was due to established clubs being able to access items outside the cap such as "loyalty" payments outside the salary cap (I think the limit was $200K) and salary cap banking from previous seasons, which obviously the Bitumens cannot do.

On returning Aussies...
Ursan Gulum was also playing VPL this year and looked a liability for Adelaide when he last played A-League. As mentioned by Feverish, only reallu looks like Scott McDonald.

And agree with Mike above on Rudan/Japan.