Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 4:06 pm  

theredshed wrote:

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.

Warrington have a harder job in proving financial loss as nobody was offering money for Sandow.
They can claim loss of direct sponsorship, but other than that I think they are pretty much powerless.
The RFL need to make examples of players who are found to be in breach of contract by preventing them returning to RFL competitions.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 4:14 pm  

nottinghamtiger wrote:

The RFL need to make examples of players who are found to be in breach of contract by preventing them returning to RFL competitions.

I think it would have to be a worldwide ban from the sport at any level. Additionally the International sports governing body could make it mandatory in all new player contracts for 'breach of contract' players to pay the club the sum of his remaining contract, as a penalty compensation payment.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 5:23 pm  

The difficulty is that sport is professional.
So just like any other employee they are free to walk out on any terms of employment, just like any other employee.

The difference is that if I walk out on my job tomorrow getting a reference in future will be tricky.
Sports stars use their talent as their reference so this is not an issue for them.

The difference is sport whilst professional still markets itself by club loyalty and local-ism.

There are solutions but in a competitive market place they can still be busted by competitors.

i.e. Any wages offered 50% could be held in trust upon completion of a contract, a bit like bankers bonuses some of which are now paid based on performance 2 - 3 years later, to stop short term thinking.

However, this would need to be agreed across all SL clubs and as soon as one says they will only with hold 40% or 30% it becomes a race to the bottom.
Also clubs with more money could still offer to compensate any player for the loss of the end of contract bonus. So it would be a deterant but not a silver bullet.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:23 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.

The value of the transfer fee, Merchandising and ticket sales. Leeds claimed £3.2m for Harris.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:30 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

The difficulty is that sport is professional.
So just like any other employee they are free to walk out on any terms of employment, just like any other employee.

The difference is that if I walk out on my job tomorrow getting a reference in future will be tricky.
Sports stars use their talent as their reference so this is not an issue for them.

The difference is sport whilst professional still markets itself by club loyalty and local-ism.

There are solutions but in a competitive market place they can still be busted by competitors.

i.e. Any wages offered 50% could be held in trust upon completion of a contract, a bit like bankers bonuses some of which are now paid based on performance 2 - 3 years later, to stop short term thinking.

However, this would need to be agreed across all SL clubs and as soon as one says they will only with hold 40% or 30% it becomes a race to the bottom.
Also clubs with more money could still offer to compensate any player for the loss of the end of contract bonus. So it would be a deterant but not a silver bullet.

But you aren't free to walk out on the terms of your contract. Your contract likely contains the terms for ending it for both parties. But if you don't follow those terms you are liable, similarly if your employer doesn't follow the terms for ending the contract they would be liable.

Without intending to be insulting, most people aren't important enough to an important enough business for those terms to be anything other than the standard 4 weeks notice and even if you broke them its not really worth taking action for, but if you were the CEO of Tesco, or an executive at Goldman Sachs however, your terms will be a lot more complex and they would almost certainly be problems for you if simply sent your resignation to Joanne in HR and then rocked up a month later at Asda or JPMC

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:03 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

The value of the transfer fee, Merchandising and ticket sales. Leeds claimed £3.2m for Harris.

Shouldn't this post be on the Bradford in Administration thread?

It must be bitter / sweet knowing your club's actions helped with Bradford's demise.

Winning the Harris battle yet losing your favorite games of the year.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Fri Nov 25, 2016 9:27 am  

The Devil's Advocate wrote:

Shouldn't this post be on the Bradford in Administration thread?

It must be bitter / sweet knowing your club's actions helped with Bradford's demise.

Winning the Harris battle yet losing your favorite games of the year.

If you keep reaching this much, you might just start grasping those straws.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Sat Nov 26, 2016 2:00 pm  

We still dont know who Cas are taking to court, is it Solomona, his agent or Sale my guess is Cas would only get a big payoff if they take Sale to court and win.
It was 7 November when I did some digging and read inside sources at Sale saying Solomona's signing was imminent,but I've heard nothing since.
Have they tried to distanced themselves from Solomona,or did Sale contact Cas saying they are now going to sign him as hes retired from league but were willing to compansate Cas a measly sum?

This top QC must think Cas can win but against who?
I think Cas are going after everyone.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:04 pm  

mrpurfect wrote:

We still dont know who Cas are taking to court, is it Solomona, his agent or Sale my guess is Cas would only get a big payoff if they take Sale to court and win.
It was 7 November when I did some digging and read inside sources at Sale saying Solomona's signing was imminent,but I've heard nothing since.
Have they tried to distanced themselves from Solomona,or did Sale contact Cas saying they are now going to sign him as hes retired from league but were willing to compansate Cas a measly sum?

This top QC must think Cas can win but against who?
I think Cas are going after everyone.

I would imagine it would be mostly against Sale. It's pretty similar to the Harris case and you would imagine would end up with the same result.

Sale really dropped one with taking photos of him at their place. Its hard to see how they could be found anything other than guilty of inducing or assisting Solomona in breaking his contract.
If they've any sense they'll offer Cas a transfer fee equivalent to the highest Cas were offered elsewhere to avoid court.

Re: Denny Solomona speculation & implications : Sun Nov 27, 2016 4:26 pm  

Sale sharks argument will be he retired from RL and chose to play another sport and there is no agreement between league and union to honour each others bans.
Remember all those union converts from when union was amateur all were given bans by the RFU and we ignored them so apart from banning from league can't see anything other than Cas accepting an undisclosed fee.