Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Sun Nov 27, 2016 10:52 pm  

I would hope that for the good of the sport of RL Cas & the RFL join forces to legally challenge this move by Sale & Denny, financially & technically, using everything at their disposal.

I find it hard to believe that with the alleged evidence previously mentioned that there hasn't been some interference/incitement/tapping up by Sale & if the connection can be made by mere onlookers/fans then highly paid lawyers should be able to prove without doubt a breach of contract by Denny &/or some sort of charge against Sale.

I hope there isn't a law against overuse of slash/marks ?

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 1:19 pm  

bentleberry wrote:

and nothing worse than what RL has done to RU in the past.

RU can have no complaints about RL's past behaviour.

If their players were amateur, as they loftily claimed, they'd have no contract to break. Hypocritical toe-rags.

[Jimmythecuckoo]

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 2:27 pm  

I am still amazed he was on £40k pa at Cas.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:42 pm  

Sale Sharks' head coach truly taking the mickey here:

"There are no governing body registrations between the sports," added Diamond.

"It is just like someone coming from another sport to rugby union, whether it be football or basketball and I don't understand what the furore is about."

If this is the case, then what's to stop every rugby league player retiring and jumping ship? What a shambles - Sale should be ashamed of themselves. Cas are not a rich club - I hope this legal battle doesn't do us more harm than good.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:43 pm  

bentleberry wrote:

If he has "retired" as reported then there's very little Cas will be able to do other than chase him for a couple of months worth of salary which would cover the time he should be at the club running his notice down. Sale have been somewhat immoral but it doesn't appear to be illegal what they've done and nothing worse than what RL has done to RU in the past.

Cas may be posturing now saying that they don't agree with it, but faced with the prospect of an expensive court case they likely gain very little from, they'll cut their losses and agree to his release just as other clubs have done before

As with any standard period contact, there is no "notice" to be worked....technically, without prior agreement of an early release, his notice period would run until the end of the contract.

As there is no agreement between the RFL and RFU, there isnt alot Cas can do to stop his registration. They can however, take it to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, what that would achieve....i dont know. It might not be worth it in the end.

For me, if I was Cas, I would take the case to court regardless...more for principle than anything, Sale will expect it to get dropped because its "little old Cas who cant afford a brass bean"

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:44 pm  

Jimmythecuckoo wrote:

I am still amazed he was on £40k pa at Cas.

I wouldn't believe everything you read, he signed a new contract last year, my guess would be he will be on a fair bit more than that now.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 6:46 pm  

BD wrote:

Sale Sharks' head coach truly taking the mickey here:

"There are no governing body registrations between the sports," added Diamond.

"It is just like someone coming from another sport to rugby union, whether it be football or basketball and I don't understand what the furore is about."

If this is the case, then what's to stop every rugby league player retiring and jumping ship? What a shambles - Sale should be ashamed of themselves. Cas are not a rich club - I hope this legal battle doesn't do us more harm than good.

Yep what a pillock.

It's not a registration issue, it's a contractual issue. Sale/Solomona have to buy him out of his contract with Cas. End of. There is no alternative to this and the fact Solomona, Sandow and Segeyaro are all trying it at the same time makes it a bigger issue than each individual case. The RFL needs to defend the sport.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:01 pm  

Trying to avoid posting too much on this issue as I'm so biased. However, trying to take an objective view.
1. As long as Sale haven't slipped up, it will be difficult to prove they have induced him to breach his contract.
2. The player has breached his contract. This is dealt with at an Employment Tribunal. Castleford should make a claim against the player as an individual and seek to recover their financial loss. If an ET find the player to be in breach of contract, they should be able to make a judgement on the financial loss suffered by Castleford using information such as previous transfer fees paid, the value of the offers Castleford turned down for the player and the loss of direct player sponsorship. ETs make far more complicated financial decisions than is required in this case.
3. Taking joint action against the player and Sale Sharks may be counter-productive. In this case, the player and Sale would be joint respondents, allowing the full financial weight of Sale to be used to defend the case. If Castleford only name the player as the respondent, any financial assistance given by Sale to defend a personal claim against him should be counted in their salary cap. It also means Castleford are likely to come up against much stiffer opposition in the form of Sale's legal team. Making the claim against the player only encourages puts more pressure on Sale and the player to come to an agreement with Castleford.
4. No ET in the land will accept this 'retirement' response. Given his age, his earning potential and his his immediate re-employment he has not retired.
5. Regardless of the above, his retirement is still a breach of contract. To retire, notice period still has to be given (unless this is due to illness). He hasn't done this, so legally it's still a breach of contract.

In summary, I don't think there is anything Castleford can do to prevent the player from gaining new employment. All that can be done through ET is claiming back the financial loss Castleford have suffered due to the player's breach of contract.
There is the option of lodging a dispute with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, but I have no idea how that works and what their powers are.

I also wonder if the player is being used by his agent and Sale as a test-case, and the player isn't intelligent enough to realise it.
If they get away with it, it lines his agent's pockets and gets Sale a free player.
If they don't, it's the player who is likely to be sued for breach of contract.
It seems like a no-lose situation for his agent and Sale, but a very risky one for the player.

One thing is for sure: all RU clubs will be interested in the outcome. If this is allowed to happen, it's an open market on RL players.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:13 pm  

Agree with all that. Though I think Sale have slipped up as wasn't he pictured in Sale gear at their ground?

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:16 pm  

Him wrote:

Agree with all that. Though I think Sale have slipped up as wasn't he pictured in Sale gear at their ground?

Perhaps. And they parked one of their vehicles on his drive. However, we are inferring from that they they were inducing him to breach his existing contract. All they need to say is that they were holding discussions about him joining them at the end of his Castleford contract in 2018 and not inducing him to breach it before then. It's unlikely but possible, which is all the ET needs to hear to have doubts and side with the respondent.