Why would they? Usually the homesick card is played, the club can't keep an unhappy, salary cap eating player, club releases player who then joins the NRL team.
Been happening for years. NRL teams transfer fees come out of their cap money does it not? Why pay when the target usually has a better than average chance of wriggling out for nowt?
In addition to any fee being counted on the salary cap, in the NRL the clubs have to pay an extra 50% of whatever tthe transfer fee is to the NRLs welfare fund - so a £200k fee becomes £300k. It's just not going to happen.
I'm still of the opinion we should let him go and move on - we're sorted with Parcell and ultimately this is a young blokes life that's being screwed up - albeit because of his own mistakes/decisions. Life is too short, and a rugby league players career is too short to waste time on arguements of 'principle', particularly when you consider he wanted to backflip only weeks after signing, and before he was due back. It hardly had a massive impact on Leeds (only the same as if he'd said he was leaving before the 1st Sept deadline).
Move on gracefully and play the 'better man' would be my approach - appreciate others will feel differently, but I think that's acting on emotion and pride rather than what's the best way to move forward.
In addition to any fee being counted on the salary cap, in the NRL the clubs have to pay an extra 50% of whatever tthe transfer fee is to the NRLs welfare fund - so a £200k fee becomes £300k. It's just not going to happen.
I'm still of the opinion we should let him go and move on - we're sorted with Parcell and ultimately this is a young blokes life that's being screwed up - albeit because of his own mistakes/decisions. Life is too short, and a rugby league players career is too short to waste time on arguements of 'principle', particularly when you consider he wanted to backflip only weeks after signing, and before he was due back. It hardly had a massive impact on Leeds (only the same as if he'd said he was leaving before the 1st Sept deadline).
Move on gracefully and play the 'better man' would be my approach - appreciate others will feel differently, but I think that's acting on emotion and pride rather than what's the best way to move forward.
I respect that stance, & actually agree with it all, if this was an isolated incident. The problem is the message it sends about contracts in general in RL. That is why Leeds, Castleford & the RFL must stand firm or effectively send out a joint press release that contracts are only valid as long as both parties agree that they are. Do you think Sam Ayoub would be inactive if Leeds decided, after September 1st 2016, that they didn't need Segayaro & terminated his contract?
I respect that stance, & actually agree with it all, if this was an isolated incident. The problem is the message it sends about contracts in general in RL. That is why Leeds, Castleford & the RFL must stand firm or effectively send out a joint press release that contracts are only valid as long as both parties agree that they are. Do you think Sam Ayoub would be inactive if Leeds decided, after September 1st 2016, that they didn't need Segayaro & terminated his contract?
Completely see that point of view on the wider issue of contracts in Super League, and of course Ayoub would kick off in those circumstances, but I would say the club is bigger than 1 player, and can afford the odd loss of a player who doesn't want to be here, certainly much more than a young bloke can afford to write of a seasons earnings.
I suppose ultimately I'm of he view that life is more important than rugby league - let him go and live the life he wants. Ultimately, we've got a replacement but are still holding a young bloke to task over a point of principle - doing this could have massive implications on his life - it's just not worth it in my opinion.
Completely see that point of view on the wider issue of contracts in Super League, and of course Ayoub would kick off in those circumstances, but I would say the club is bigger than 1 player, and can afford the odd loss of a player who doesn't want to be here, certainly much more than a young bloke can afford to write of a seasons earnings.
I suppose ultimately I'm of he view that life is more important than rugby league - let him go and live the life he wants. Ultimately, we've got a replacement but are still holding a young bloke to task over a point of principle - doing this could have massive implications on his life - it's just not worth it in my opinion.
The problem with this leftist stance is:
Joel Moon wants to move on with his life in London Callum Watkins wants to move on with his life in Salford Ryan Hall wants to move on with his life in Wigan Matt Parcell wants to move on with his life in Toronto.
Can you see the problem here with not enforcing the employment contract, total and utter anarchy with clubs and the paying supporter not knowing who plays for the clubs week in week out.
IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BE TIED TO A CLUB FOR 1, 2,3 YEARS THEN DON'T SIGN A CONTRACT.
Anyway remember what Chicko said, It's all about his happiness and that is more important than rugby and MONEY. Answer to that is if you wish to play in the next two seasons then take a pay cut and pay the transfer fee out of your new contract.
May be another way to stem the potential problem of contracts being effectively worthless, would to be to fine the club signing a player who was walking out on his contract?
Joel Moon wants to move on with his life in London Callum Watkins wants to move on with his life in Salford Ryan Hall wants to move on with his life in Wigan Matt Parcell wants to move on with his life in Toronto.
Can you see the problem here with not enforcing the employment contract, total and utter anarchy with clubs and the paying supporter not knowing who plays for the clubs week in week out.
IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BE TIED TO A CLUB FOR 1, 2,3 YEARS THEN DON'T SIGN A CONTRACT.
Anyway remember what Chicko said, It's all about his happiness and that is more important than rugby and MONEY. Answer to that is if you wish to play in the next two seasons then take a pay cut and pay the transfer fee out of your new contract.
May be another way to stem the potential problem of contracts being effectively worthless, would to be to fine the club signing a player who was walking out on his contract?
Or implement minimum transfer fees payable if the clubs can't agree. The transfer fee would depend on length of contract, status of player
Eg current international, regular first team player, bit player etc. There would be anomalies to overcome but it may set a standard.
There should however be fines for clubs enticing a player to breach his contract.
Completely see that point of view on the wider issue of contracts in Super League, and of course Ayoub would kick off in those circumstances, but I would say the club is bigger than 1 player, and can afford the odd loss of a player who doesn't want to be here, certainly much more than a young bloke can afford to write of a seasons earnings.
I suppose ultimately I'm of he view that life is more important than rugby league - let him go and live the life he wants. Ultimately, we've got a replacement but are still holding a young bloke to task over a point of principle - doing this could have massive implications on his life - it's just not worth it in my opinion.
The problem with this leftist stance is:
Joel Moon wants to move on with his life in London Callum Watkins wants to move on with his life in Salford Ryan Hall wants to move on with his life in Wigan Matt Parcell wants to move on with his life in Toronto.
Can you see the problem here with not enforcing the employment contract, total and utter anarchy with clubs and the paying supporter not knowing who plays for the clubs week in week out.
IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BE TIED TO A CLUB FOR 1, 2,3 YEARS THEN DON'T SIGN A CONTRACT.
Anyway remember what Chicko said, It's all about his happiness and that is more important than rugby and MONEY. Answer to that is if you wish to play in the next two seasons then take a pay cut and pay the transfer fee out of your new contract.
I get that whole point, though I feel there is a fundamental difference between someone walking out mid-contract or mid-season, to someone changing their mind on a contract within weeks and before they've actually began any of their contractual obligations.
Each case should be decided on merit, and in this instance I feel it would have been better to simply wash our hands of him. It's wasted time and effort for little value and I feel makes the club look like they lack compassion given the timescales of the wish to renege.
And, whilst it's the first time my views have ever been called lefty (something which I am far from), I do feel we should just let the bloke crack on with his life rather than making it difficult for no real gain.
Or implement minimum transfer fees payable if the clubs can't agree. The transfer fee would depend on length of contract, status of player
Eg current international, regular first team player, bit player etc. There would be anomalies to overcome but it may set a standard.
There should however be fines for clubs enticing a player to breach his contract.
I like the idea, to make it fairer and more consistent, I'd base it as a set percentage of the remaining value of the players contract. That way if the club have offered the security of a long term contract to the player, they get a larger pay out if he leaves early. Likewise if player is in his last year, it's a relatively low fee.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...
