Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:13 pm  

AJC wrote:

I could only come up with 2 possibilities, firstly to trim the cap, secondly (and hopefully) to make room for a new signing. Over to you GH

If Leeds have reached any kind of settlement with the two players to cover the remainder due under their contracts, that will come off this year's salary cap. I wouldn't expect to see any additions to the squad for the rest of this season.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:45 pm  

As Burgess asked to be released from the remainder of his contract I doubt Hetherington will have paid him anything much for the priviledge.

Cross however, you would presume, will have been entitled to a settlement on the remainder of his deal (2011 and 2012) so on balance I agree that it's unlikely it will have provided any spare capacity for a signing this year without Leeds already had that space under the cap.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:49 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Cross however, you would presume, will have been entitled to a settlement on the remainder of his deal (2011 and 2012) so on balance I agree that it's unlikely it will have provided any spare capacity for a signing this year without Leeds already had that space under the cap.

What it does prove however is that Hetherington's "we're operating at the full cap" mantra is actually a crock of brown stuff, assuming Cross did receive a settlement. Leeds wouldn't have been able to pay him up if they were at full cap as any payment counts towards this year, rather than the year for which it was originally due IIRC.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 1:02 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

What it does prove however is that Hetherington's "we're operating at the full cap" mantra is actually a crock of brown stuff, assuming Cross did receive a settlement. Leeds wouldn't have been able to pay him up if they were at full cap as any payment counts towards this year, rather than the year for which it was originally due IIRC.

They would if it was settlement of this years salary. They wouldn't have paid any more (if that) if they were allowing him to become a free agent. Therefore his contract for current year wouldn't be exceeded.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 1:06 pm  

I also think there is a rule whereby a long-term injured player can come off the cap (I think i remember that being the case - isn't that how Bradford afforded Morley on an end of season contract a few years ago) in which case Senior may be off the cap.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 1:40 pm  

Wow, Biff and his mum made their mind up quckly on that Souths deal didn't they?

Let's re-visit my discussion with Gotcha eariler in the thread.....

I wrote:

We were in no position to "release Burgess", he was out of contract and had told us he was off to Aus. That has been widely predicted on here for about 18 months. It's a shame but no surprise.

Gotcha wrote:

Head in sand.

We were in as strong position we could have been to keep Burgess. We should have been speaking to him about a new deal at end of last season. He said himself at start of season that he was aiming for a new deal, so whether predicted for 18 months or not is irrelevant. He has been treated shockingly since then. The club don't even know he is off to Aus, so how has he told them? GH statement says "he has implied he maybe going to the NRL".

I wrote:

Nonsense. The lad was coming out of contract. He can go wherever he wants. We're in no stronger position than any other club. Luke held all the cards, not us.

Luke has expressed his desire to play in Aus for quite some time. It's no secret. He'd even be willing to play at a lower level. He may not actually get there but he's hardly committed to us long term is he?

Do you know anything at all about the Burgess brother's circumstances?

Luke was NEVER likely to stay with us, no matter what. He made no secret of his desire to be in Oz with his brothers.

Gotcha wrote:

I too would love to be in Aus, with or without my brother, it would be great. But my job is here and I don't have the time to upsticks.

I would also love to be where ever Cheryl Cole is, but again I don't think it would work.

People don't always get their desires, infact they very rarely do. Just because someone desires something does not mean it will happen.

There is not only me and me only in possession of these "absolute facts". Take it as a guarantee though, both existing UK brothers will not be in Aus next year unless their mum goes, no matter what the desires or rumours are.

I wrote:

Absolute poppycock.

I hate to do this to you, but I know you're talking BS so I have no choice.

Are you sure it was Luke Burgess you were talking to about this? Could you have mistaken him for someone else again?

Gotcha wrote:

Never mind, I'll just sit smugly in the knowldege that there is BS all over this thread, with your name all over it.

I'll leave it for others to decide who really had their hand in the sand about Burgess's intention to head off to the NRL.

[Wheels]

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 1:44 pm  

Lovely stuff that, lovely stuff.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 2:31 pm  

I wondered how long it would take that conversation to resurface

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 2:42 pm  

tad rhino wrote:

I wondered how long it would take that conversation to resurface

You can't expect adult behaviour tad. But regardless, to be fair to Gareth I was wrong on the contract, simple as that. But his mum was certainly under the impression he had not been offered one a few weeks back. Maybe misunderstanding on the fact that one was offered and then pulled away.

But unless I have missed something and Tom is also going, and the mum staying, then at least I was the one correct there. If that happens then he can gladly gloat.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Tue Jun 21, 2011 2:48 pm  

finglas wrote:

I also think there is a rule whereby a long-term injured player can come off the cap (I think i remember that being the case - isn't that how Bradford afforded Morley on an end of season contract a few years ago) in which case Senior may be off the cap.

I seem to remember that Bradford broke the cap rule in 2005 when they had morley on loan. May have the wrong year but i am pretty sure it was 2005