Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:29 am  

Cas have now instructed Nick Randall QC with the backing of the RFL: http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-8255758 Looks like Sale are arguing that Denny has 'retired' from RL, giving them a freebie. No wonder the RFL are backing this - has such huge implications if players are allowed to do this.

Cas have now instructed Nick Randall QC with the backing of the RFL: http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-8255758 Looks like Sale are arguing that Denny has 'retired' from RL, giving them a freebie. No wonder the RFL are backing this - has such huge implications if players are allowed to do this.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:48 am  

The loss to Cas is the cost of replacing a record-breaking winger. There is clearly a quantifiable loss. Good luck to Cas, and Denny has been stupid and greedy.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:10 pm  

Hate to say it but I feel for Cas on this one, it's a dirty trick whichever way you look at it - hope it breaks the bloke tbh and I also hope Cas never allow him to represent them again. I know it's difficult to sideline an asset like this but a line has to be drawn.

We did it last year (lesser degree of talent I accept) with Tim Smith and Kevin Lock and it worked out rather well.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 2:27 pm  

I think Denny Solomona will be a worried man. If all is as it seems, he has clearly breached his contract. This has led to a financial loss to Castleford Tigers. The club can pursue him as an individual for this financial loss (which will be significant).
He will need a lot of money for legal costs (ten of thousands), and a massive amount if he loses (hundreds of thousands). I don't expect Sale will be willing to foot the bill for a player who has never played RU. Indeed, paying his legal costs will likely count on their salary cap.
Castleford may take action against Sale, but they are a more difficult proposition and can afford top lawyers too. Solomona as an individual is an easy target.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:25 pm  

nottinghamtiger wrote:

This has led to a financial loss to Castleford Tigers.

How much and from what sources?

Falling season ticket sales? It would be very easy for a lawyer to imply signing a player with a known history for homophobic behaviour (which he was banned for) may impact this - meaning you can't claim this is a source of financial loss is due to Solomona's actions.
Sponsorship and commercial deals? Again, the above arguments apply, along with the obvious economic arguments that this year will be weaker than last year. Of course, there would be more feedback on this front, so its the best hope.
Shirt sales? I am starting to struggle now, and I am not sure how I would even begin proving a link, other than for some of the worlds biggest footballers.

Unfortunately for Castleford, the only claims that would easily be proved is breach of contract - which would be valued at the cost of the contract. He had 2 years left, so it won't be an embarrassing sum, but it will hardly be the megabucks that Cas were being offered prior to him walking out either.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:39 pm  

This whole sorry tale reminds me of the Martin Offiah saga... dummy spitting & toy throwing at its sickening worst.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:46 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

He had 2 years left, so it won't be an embarrassing sum, but it will hardly be the megabucks that Cas were being offered prior to him walking out either.

What were Cas Tigers offered prior to him walking away ?

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:50 pm  

I'm all for player welfare and clubs honouring contracts but with Sandow and now Solomona it shows that some players don't feel they need to reciprocate it.

As a Salford supporter I've seen my club done over a couple of times by selfish individuals such as Australian Hudson Smith being released early from a contract on grounds on home sickness only for him to sign for Bradford Bulls on a free days after. I also recall us signing Schuster from Newcastle Knights only for him to change his mind weeks after putting pen to paper. The big question is are contracts more favoured to players than the clubs and do they need to be looked at to protect the welfare of the clubs as well? Where does this leave Warrington and Castleford now? If they would have known a few months back they would of had more time to find suitable replacements.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:59 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

How much and from what sources?

Falling season ticket sales? It would be very easy for a lawyer to imply signing a player with a known history for homophobic behaviour (which he was banned for) may impact this - meaning you can't claim this is a source of financial loss is due to Solomona's actions.
Sponsorship and commercial deals? Again, the above arguments apply, along with the obvious economic arguments that this year will be weaker than last year. Of course, there would be more feedback on this front, so its the best hope.
Shirt sales? I am starting to struggle now, and I am not sure how I would even begin proving a link, other than for some of the worlds biggest footballers.

Unfortunately for Castleford, the only claims that would easily be proved is breach of contract - which would be valued at the cost of the contract. He had 2 years left, so it won't be an embarrassing sum, but it will hardly be the megabucks that Cas were being offered prior to him walking out either.

It is not an easy process.
However, there is an ace in the pack. Castleford received three offers for Solomona, which will clearly give an indication of his value to an employment tribunal. The fact that Castleford rejected them show they believe him to have a higher value than the offers made, but there is concrete evidence that he was a financial asset to the club that has been lost through his breach of contract.
Another element of financial loss is the increase in his salary when he signed a new deal in 2015. This would not have been offered without him agreeing to extend his contract to 2018, which he has now breached (it seems). Castleford have every right to claim the increase in salary should be considered a financial loss in these circumstances.
As you say, sponsorship is harder to put a value on. The club could claim the loss of direct player sponsorship (each individual player is sponsored per season) using last year's figures and the fact that Castleford had a sponsor agreed for Solomona next year for a higher price, which the club will now lose. Other than that, it's more or less impossible to put a price on the financial gains an individual player brings to the club.
If Solomona is found in breach of contract, I would imagine Castleford will claim for costs. This will be another substantial amount if Castleford are awarded these.
In his position, I would be worried. I doubt he has the finances to cover the money that Castleford may be seeking.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 4:03 pm  

nottinghamtiger wrote:

It is not an easy process.
However, there is an ace in the pack. Castleford received three offers for Solomona, which will clearly give an indication of his value to an employment tribunal. The fact that Castleford rejected them show they believe him to have a higher value than the offers made, but there is concrete evidence that he was a financial asset to the club that has been lost through his breach of contract.
Another element of financial loss is the increase in his salary when he signed a new deal in 2015. This would not have been offered without him agreeing to extend his contract to 2018, which he has now breached (it seems). Castleford have every right to claim the increase in salary should be considered a financial loss in these circumstances.
As you say, sponsorship is harder to put a value on. The club could claim the loss of direct player sponsorship (each individual player is sponsored per season) using last year's figures and the fact that Castleford had a sponsor agreed for Solomona next year for a higher price, which the club will now lose. Other than that, it's more or less impossible to put a price on the financial gains an individual player brings to the club.
If Solomona is found in breach of contract, I would imagine Castleford will claim for costs. This will be another substantial amount if Castleford are awarded these.
In his position, I would be worried. I doubt he has the finances to cover the money that Castleford may be seeking.

I think both Warrington and Castleford need to make an example of these mercenaries to deter other players from doing the same in the future.