Collingwood’s Dayne Beams has finally flown the coop, leaving the Magpie nest and flying north to join his brother Clay at the Lions.
The five-way deal involving Beams, as well as Mitch Clark, Heritier Lumumba, Levi Greenwood and Travis Varcoe, was brokered after Collingwood agreed to trade Beams for Jack Crisp, as well as draft picks 5 and 25.
It was clearly a relief for Beams – who had already showed signs of discontent by abstaining from the club’s Best-and-Fairest awards. Beams tweeted, “the decisions I’ve made are for what I think is best for myself, partner and family”.
As a contracted player, a premiership player, and a midfielder coming into the prime of his career, the Beams trade was always going to trouble, frustrate and perplex Collingwood. The retirements of several key players in the past two years compounded the Magpies’ desire to retain Beams, their 2012 Best-and-Fairest winner.
But Beams was in an unusual position. Unlike Ryan Griffen, he didn’t want to get out of the Melbourne football bubble. Unlike James Frawley, he didn’t want to chase Premiership success at another club.
Instead, Beams wanted to be traded to a Queensland club to be closer to his ill father.
In almost every workplace, employers and employees negotiate the terms of contracts. Employees will argue for higher salaries and employers, in turn, will carry the expectation that the terms of the contract will be honoured.
Invariably, though, contracts are broken. People change career paths, retire, have children, move overseas or move back home to be near their family. Like promises, contracts, it seems, were made to be broken.
AFL clubs are no strangers to this reality. Players have walked out on clubs and clubs, too, have agreed to release players before their contracts expire.
But the AFL workplace is also very unique because if clubs refuse to release or trade a contracted player – and that player refuses to play for that club – then the player will be left in limbo, with a choice to sit the season out or play on at their non-preferred side.
Throughout the trade period Collingwood, at times, appeared stubborn and impervious to the Lions’ trade bait, and for a while it appeared that Beams might have been a player in limbo.
This would have been an exceptionally bad look for the AFL and for Collingwood – no person should have to choose between moving back home to be with a sick parent and continuing to work in the same industry.
Collingwood have managed to look after their best interests – by securing the promising midfielder, Crisp, as well as two top 25 draft picks – and those of Beams and his family.
Hopefully the Bombers follow suit with Paddy Ryder, as the waters are even murkier in their scenario.
Collingwood did not abrogate their duty of care to Beams as a player. Collingwood nurtured his talent.
Beams tasted success with the club in 2010 and the club has decided let him go. From start to finish, Collingwood has had Beams’ best interests at heart.
The same cannot be said for Essendon, however. The players’ best interests, including that of Ryder, were all but decimated when the club engaged the work of Stephen Dank. And, unlike Collingwood who were willing to help out not only Beams but Beams’ family, Essendon put the health and welfare of Ryder’s unborn child at risk.
Paddy Ryder may be coming into the prime of his career. He is an agile ruckman whose ability to go forward and kick a goal is almost unparalleled in the AFL. But if Essendon retains him for these reasons, they are once again putting themselves first.
When players ‘want out’ for personal reasons, the decisions that clubs’ make are viewed through a different lens. Clubs must evaluate the needs of the individual, which is at odds with the ethos of doing what is best for the team.
Geelong were very quick to release Allen Christensen for personal reasons, contrasting with the predicaments of Beams and Ryder. However, the difference in the Christensen case is that we are yet to hear what his personal reasons for moving are.
I hazard a guess that another player or players at Geelong wanted Christensen gone. Why else would Geelong release him so quickly? Only time will tell.
As for Ryder, the clock continues to tick.
Essendon have two moves to make, but only one of them is right.
Danny D
Guest
Guys, I did use the term 'supplement regime' and not 'supplement saga' as you have tried to imply because, just like you have said above, the saga didn't commence until early Feb 2013. You are also correct in saying that up until then, the 'Darkest day in Australian sport', it was all legal and above board so Patrick Ryder had no reason to want out of Essendon. Well Paddy said it was the stress of the saga itself, the duration of which it has carried on that influenced his desicision in the end. This is what I think; It's not Essendon's fault that the under resourced Asada was tasked with 2 of the most complex investigations simultaneously and all hastily driven by the labor party's agenda at the time. It's not Essendon's fault the media constantly reported on false rumour, ennuendo & leaks from Asada and the AFL denying EFC the due process throughout the whole investigation. Now, not all players participated in the regime such as (but not limited to) D. Zaharakis and J. Winderlich (as reported by tabloids) so it seems players had a choice to participate or not. Zaharakis didn't like needles and whoever else didn't participate had their reasons but majority did participate and did so in confidence with the program and the football dept. at EFC. Now it's no secret that it was a blatantly poorly run program in terms of governance and accountability, similar to what was found to be the case at 11 other AFL clubs as concluded by an AFL commissioned survey. All supplement regimes lacked a single point of accountability I recall. So it seems this scenario could have happened to any club or perhaps even multiple clubs to put this into a different perspective. EFC HAS been held accountable for its lack of governance subsequently 'bringing the game into disrepute' and has been sanctioned with the biggest penalties in AFL's history. Now do we really think that the football department at Essendon would deliberately dupe & dope it's players? Really? James Hird would throw away his reputation as a club champion to orchestrate such a scandal? I'd think not. As an Essendon supporter, I will continue to defend the club, it's players and James Hird until they are proven guilty! Yes, the players have been issued with 'show-cause' notices but that is the first step in giving them the opportunity to have their say. In addition, if James Hird was completely guilty, he would not be still standing. Perhaps James knows in whose closets where many more skeletons may be hidden? It seems all he wants is due process which has been denied from day one and how he conducts himself with such calm & grace in the media face I have no idea. As far as EFC 'contemptuous behaviour' goes, I would not judge them so harshly from the outside. Relations have been broken, mended and broken again between the EFC and AFL with personnel from both sides falling on their swords from the fall out. Where is the same scrutiny on the AFL? Look at how they've handled this? Look how they've handled the Demons tanking situation, Adelaide's salary cap / Tippett situation, Sydney's trade ban? They are a seriously inept organisation that play by their own rules, then change them again! EFC has had 3 different board structures since the saga began so with this fact alone the club was always going to handle things differently under each structure taking into consideration it's relationship with the AFL at the time. It would only be just to give the club a break and reserve your harsh judgements for when the truth is finally out. Go Bombers!
JoshC
Guest
Couldn't agree with you more Paul D. The usual misinformation coming from the bombers and their supporters in saying Ryder signed his contract after the supplements saga however you are 100% correct in saying it was before the ASADA investigation. As for kicking them when they're down, if they actually had the guts to stand up and admit mistakes (genuinely), sack Hird, people would be a lot more sympathetic to their plight. Bombers were always going to trade Ryder they just put it on for show, which is understandable. There is no way they would have tested the grievance issue. Well actually who knows, they probably are that stupid. Either way I'm happy to see Ryder coming to Port. It is a very welcomed change from 2 years ago when we also had players wanting out with Pearce and Chaplin. Also signing Voss was a huge win for us as well. I would never say it's a shoe in or a certainity as Hawks and Sydney are great teams and Sydney will be super hungry next year however it is exciting to be a Port supporter at the moment. Happy for the lions as well, they're going to have an elite midfield very soon after they also had a mass walk out.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Ryder signed his contract in May 2012 – the supplements saga didn’t commence until February 2013, when ASADA first entered the scene. So your timeline doesn’t gel. I get what you’re saying – as of May 2012 Ryder had already had all the stuff shot up his arm by that point, but you’re overlooking that as of May 2012 the supplements they’d taken were still all totally legal and the players had no idea what sort of media juggernaught was headed their way. Danny D – sure, there is an element of kicking them when they’re down, but if you can’t acknowledge that Essendon’s contemptuous behaviour throughout this whole messy episode has largely brought this on themselves, then you’re just as partisan as the rest of us.
Danny D
Guest
I strongly disagree with your article Sarah and feel that your opinion has been strongly influenced by the bias in the current media landscape. Let's look at the facts here before we tar Essendon with the big evil brush yet again. 8 years ago Essendon took Ryder using their pick 7 in the draft. After investing several years of developing him, Ryder showed some reasonable consistency which was a glimpse of what was to come during the 2012 season. 2 years ago EFC honored Patrick Ryder with a four year contract making him one of the highest paid players at the club and which was pretty much the precedent for big end contracts before the record breaking 9 year Buddy deal or even the multi million, 5 year deal for Tom Boyd more recently. More importantly, this new contract was happily signed / agreed to by Ryder well after the supplement regime had concluded which made the grievance panel issue void. Fast forward to now, half way into his contract after coming off a career best season Patrick Ryder decides that he wants out of the 'toxic' environment at Essendon and the fish bowl that is Melbourne for high profile AFL players. What better way to go about it but to have his manager publicly announce it the night before EFC are set to play in a prelim final? To make matters even worse before EFC even get a chance to exercise this idea Ryder is 'wined and dined' at Port and to add further insult to injury, 'spontaneously' gather their indigenous players to parade their newly found culture & persuade Paddy to join the PAFC. So now, it seems Paddy only has one destination in mind and has seemed to not be so concerned about the fishbowl environment anymore. So if Paddy wants to go to Port it was always going to be simple, offer Essendon a fair deal in exchange for one of their best players and he goes. Looking at the currency of other trades this period, picks 17 and 37 was definitely 'unders' for a player of Ryder's calibre but yet again, Essendon are the big bad wolf. I would like to conclude by pointing out that your honorable and empathetic Collingwood with all of Beams' best interests at heart would not have agreed to the deal for 'unders' like EFC has and if it wasn't for Collingwood coming out much better off, Beams would be still there. It's frustrating when you look at the two scenarios and see that Beams clearly has a genuine reason to depart his football club (reasons bigger than football) whereas Ryder publicly stated that if the saga was over in 6 months he would of stayed at EFC. Essendon's image has been hugely damaged due to the ongoing supplement saga so is that what we do now - kick them while they're down and attack them when they're most vulnerable? Hardly honorable behavior by many posters on the roar and I find this article disgracefully on the bandwagon. Just out of curiosity Sarah, who do you barrack for?
Axle an the Guru
Guest
All I can say is Essendon must be pretty brittle to want Gwilt(a wooden spoon club reject) and Cooney who is well past his best,recruiting blokes like this won't help them make the 8 let alone top 4.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Silent, like most hypocrites.
Nonu
Guest
Magpies had to be dragged to the table - contrast this when Jolly wanted to return to Melbourne from the Swans and the Swans did the deal... McGuire whinged when Buddy went to the Swans and said he should have gone to weaker melb club - Where did Jolly go?? nothing about what the player wants - suddenly Greenwood goes to Maggies and Frawley goes to Hawks - where are you now Eddie about the weaker clubs??
JW
Guest
They have probably also deliberately gone after experienced players rather than draft picks so that if the 20-odd players currently on their list who were involved in the drugs saga are suspended for a decent amount of time, then they aren't left with a side of kids being slaughtered every week. They were definitely reluctant to take the draft picks from Port, and then on traded one for Cooney.
Brian
Guest
The Bombers seem convinced their list is premiership material. That they have to strike with Watson, Goddard etc near their peak. That's why Chapman, Gwilt & possibly Cooney. I have not seen the results that lead to this thinking but I can only guess they are putting recent results down to the supplements saga and believe they are top 4 if they can get that monkey off their back.
themadchatter
Guest
If Ryder originally wanted to go to Brisbane then his mind would have been made up and he wouldn't speak to any other clubs. He couldn't be as valuable at Brisbane as he will be at Port Adelaide. The Power now have the players required to go that one step further. Not saying Port is guaranteed to win the grand final but with Ryder their chances have slightly increased
buzzard
Guest
I'm not an Essendon fan but good on them for digging their heels in and trying to get better picks for Ryder. He originally wanted to go to Brisbane which I think by now the Bombers would have let him go but Ryder then changed his mind and opted for Port. He still has 2 years left on his contract. Why give him an easy ride to Port who are premiership contenders. I bet 16 other clubs will be hoping Ryder doesn't get to Port as well.
Andrew
Guest
Id laugh if he went to grievance tribunal and gets released for nothing. Would serve Essendon right. Worst club to trade with because their demands are always ridiculous and over the top.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Well said. The arrogance and contempt from Essendon throughout this whole messy episode would be astonishing, if it weren't just more of what they've always shown at trade time. Ryder must be filthy at them.
Steve M
Guest
Good article, well done.
Macca
Guest
According to the AFL live trades site Essendon in prepared to accept 17 and 37 for Ryder as long as they can get Cooney for 37. Firstly I am not sure why the Bombers would want Cooney that badly and secondly north have already offer Kieran Harper, Pick 36 and exchange of later picks for Cooney so what chance do they have of the Bulldogs accepting pick 37.