Bulldogs Terminate the Contract of Ryan Tandy

[Berkeley_Eagle]

Bulldogs Terminate the Contract of Ryan Tandy

The Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs Rugby League Club has terminated the contract of Ryan Tandy, effective immediately.

The Club made the decision to terminate the contract of employment of Mr Tandy following a show cause hearing before the Board on Wednesday 16 March 2011, which Mr Tandy attended with his lawyer.

“The purpose of the show cause hearing was to determine whether Mr Tandy had placed a bet in relation to the Bulldogs game against the Gold Coast Titans on 18 June 2010, in which he played for the Club” Bulldogs Chief Executive Todd Greenberg said.

“Mr Tandy declined to answer the Club's question concerning this issue, based on legal advice.

“The Club formed the view that it was untenable for Mr Tandy to remain employed by the Club, and continue to be paid his salary, in circumstances where he was refusing to provide information about a matter that is wholly within his knowledge and relates to duties which he expressly owes to the Club.

“It is important to note that the action taken by the Club today is distinct and separate from the serious criminal charges that Mr Tandy is facing.

“Mr Tandy is of course entitled to the presumption of innocence in relation to those charges.”

 

[swoop]

Sign him up if he gets off.

 

[bob dylan]

Glad I dont get sacked every time I back a loser.

 

[MadMarcus]

I must say that if Tandy is guilty there is no question that he should be rubbed out of the game for life, but on principle I don't agree with the Dogs handling of this at all.  Tandy should sue the socks off them.

Guilty or innocent, he should not be entitled to remain silent on the matter until it is heard in Court.  If he were to do otherwise he would run the risk of prejudicing his defence.

This makes

It is important to note that the action taken by the Club today is distinct and separate from the serious criminal charges that Mr Tandy is facing.

This has the stench of Gallop all over it...

 

[DSM5]

He'd be a good pickup.  He's huge and would fit in our front row.  

 

[Duff]

Funny how it happened after they found out they don't need any more forwards. I wonder if they would've done it if they looked thin in the front row last Monday?

 

[swoop]

According to an article Tandy was on only 170k per season at the dogs, if he gets off we should go after him. Actually the club should speak to him now.

 

[Andrew..]

We may as well use the fact that we are already least liked club and invite Tandy over for a run.

 

[Central Coast Eagle]

According to an article Tandy was on only 170k per season at the dogs, if he gets off we should go after him. Actually the club should speak to him now.

LMAO, do you REALLY think the NRL would register the contract even IF Manly were interested in signing him?

 

[willstyles]

Are you lot serious? Tandy? Even ignoring the obvious drawback of signing him, he's hardly good enough to chase after. I'd much rather give a chance to one of our younger guys than spend money on Tandy who is aging, in obvious trouble and to be honest has never really been very good.

 

[swoop]

[quote author=swoop link=topic=186921.msg324570#msg324570 date=1300492509]
According to an article Tandy was on only 170k per season at the dogs, if he gets off we should go after him. Actually the club should speak to him now.

LMAO, do you REALLY think the NRL would register the contract even IF Manly were interested in signing him?
[/quote]

If he's found not guilty why not?

 

[willstyles]

Because he's ordinary?

 

[swoop]

Are you lot serious? Tandy? Even ignoring the obvious drawback of signing him, he's hardly good enough to chase after. I'd much rather give a chance to one of our younger guys than spend money on Tandy who is aging, in obvious trouble and to be honest has never really been very good.

Did you watch any 2010 games, he was one of the form props. And if he gets off and can sign him reasonably cheap, he'd be very handy. We could call him handy Tandy.

 

[MadMarcus]

If he's found not guilty why not?

I heard he got kicked out of a bar once.  Gallop would surely step in and not allow his contract to be registered. We can't have people like that in the NRL.

Nothing to do with the allegations of course...

 

[willstyles]

[quote author=willstyles link=topic=186921.msg324581#msg324581 date=1300496069]
Are you lot serious? Tandy? Even ignoring the obvious drawback of signing him, he's hardly good enough to chase after. I'd much rather give a chance to one of our younger guys than spend money on Tandy who is aging, in obvious trouble and to be honest has never really been very good.

Did you watch any 2010 games, he was one of the form props. And if he gets off and can sign him reasonably cheap, he'd be very handy. We could call him handy Tandy.
[/quote]

I caught a couple of games, yeah. Tandy is no loss for the Bulldogs at all and I'd be surprised if any club was dumb enough to pick him up. I really would. He would be (at best) fourth in our current prop rotation, and I'd daresay within a year one or two of our young guys would offer more than him as well. He really isn't that good. To say he was one of the form props last year is comical. At Melbourne he would've been their third best (being Tolman and White, and probably Lima as well for that matter, and definitely Blair, although he is more of a backrower).

 

[DSM5]

Will, I saw Tandy tear into us last year for our home loss to the Dogs.  To say he's not up to our current front row is just wrong.  He hit our line with the ferocity we all would love to see in any of our front rowers now.  You really can't be serious if you rate Joe, Lazy George and Princess in front of him.  Anyway a moot point as Gallop will prejudge and ban him. 

 

[swoop]

[quote author=swoop link=topic=186921.msg324592#msg324592 date=1300497173]
[quote author=willstyles link=topic=186921.msg324581#msg324581 date=1300496069]
Are you lot serious? Tandy? Even ignoring the obvious drawback of signing him, he's hardly good enough to chase after. I'd much rather give a chance to one of our younger guys than spend money on Tandy who is aging, in obvious trouble and to be honest has never really been very good.

Did you watch any 2010 games, he was one of the form props. And if he gets off and can sign him reasonably cheap, he'd be very handy. We could call him handy Tandy.
[/quote]

I caught a couple of games, yeah. Tandy is no loss for the Bulldogs at all and I'd be surprised if any club was dumb enough to pick him up. I really would. He would be (at best) fourth in our current prop rotation, and I'd daresay within a year one or two of our young guys would offer more than him as well. He really isn't that good. To say he was one of the form props last year is comical. At Melbourne he would've been their third best (being Tolman and White, and probably Lima as well for that matter, and definitely Blair, although he is more of a backrower).
[/quote]

You are kidding. Brett White is a pussy, Blair is being chased by clubs at a 500k per year pricetag who I  think is over-rated, Lima was struggling with injuries before he went to the UK. Tandy played well towards the end of season 2009 when at the storm. The dogs picked him up cheap and he was one of the best props going around last year, he also has a great offload.

 

[eagles2win]

He won't be playing again (well in Australia anyway).

Heard something last Friday

 

[bones]

Any club who signed Tandy would be taking a major gamble.

 

[ManlyBacker]

RYAN Tandy is planning to sue Canterbury for unfair dismissal, and will argue his sacking may have been invalid because the entire Bulldogs board did not appear at Wednesday's show-cause hearing.

More @ http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/tandy-to-sue-bulldogs/story-e6frexnr-1226024635674