'Dogs sack absent Maitua - now he wants a payout

[Chachi]

Not if the player has recognised that the club is not the best place for him to be? He requested to be released to join the Cowpats - and they refused. Fair enough - they have that right. But then to sack him a few months later - and the NRL imposes a ban - how is that fair?

Lets say that Maitua recognised he had a problem that he couldn't solve with the Canterbury staff. He possibly saw a change of location away from the influences that damage him, and maybe under someone who could change his attitude, and help him turn it around. Brett Seymour at Cronulla comes to mind, as does Dan Tilse at Canberra. Why deny him that if you are not convinced that he would be worth the trouble of keeping?

BTW Dane Tilse was also deregistered for a year.

 

[Karmawave]

When was the last time a club breached contract conditions?

Brian Smith intentionally not selecting Kirk Reynoldson when he was 1 game away from activating an automatic 1 year extension of his contract ( even though the Knights had a bad injury toll ) is an example of how the teams can f*ck over players - even if that situation was settled out of court, it was still a crap way of doing things.

 

[typicalfan]

Not if the player has recognised that the club is not the best place for him to be? He requested to be released to join the Cowpats - and they refused. Fair enough - they have that right. But then to sack him a few months later - and the NRL imposes a ban - how is that fair?

Lets say that Maitua recognised he had a problem that he couldn't solve with the Canterbury staff. He possibly saw a change of location away from the influences that damage him, and maybe under someone who could change his attitude, and help him turn it around. Brett Seymour at Cronulla comes to mind, as does Dan Tilse at Canberra. Why deny him that if you are not convinced that he would be worth the trouble of keeping?

but this is a guy that got sacked for repeatedly being absent without notice, purposely breaching your contract in order to lose it or as a tactic to move to another club should be a no no, especially in the NRL. The other two examples didnt breach contract in order to move to another club. They did eventually move on but thats a different circumstance

 

[Chachi]

Brian Smith intentionally not selecting Kirk Reynoldson when he was 1 game away from activating an automatic 1 year extension of his contract ( even though the Knights had a bad injury toll ) is an example of how the teams can f*ck over players - even if that situation was settled out of court, it was still a crap way of doing things.

Yes that was a sh*tty way of using a contract, but unfortunately that was done well within the contract terms. Like the getout clause Neil Henry found to get out of his Raiders contract and go to the Cowboys.

If a player agrees to those terms in his contract he needs to be prepared for those terms to work against him as well as for him. If you're an ordinary player getting paid overs you should be even more worried.

 

[typicalfan]

The prime example of a side not meeting its contractual obligations was Mark Gasnier not receiving what his contract said, that invalidated the contract and allowed him to go to France.

 

[Chachi]

The prime example of a side not meeting its contractual obligations was Mark Gasnier not receiving what his contract said, that invalidated the contract and allowed him to go to France.

Good point - that's an interesting case. Wasn't that issue in relation to third party payments? Similar to the Matt Giteau one in Union I guess.

The only punishment for the club was losing its marquee player. It does highlight the grey area around third party agreements and what the club is liable for. I guess you could argue that Gasnier was originally signed under false pretences and the club could have been penalised further by the NRL, or the player could have sued?? The only reason that didn't happen was that Gasnier found higher paying employment elsewhere.

 

[typicalfan]

Good point - that's an interesting case. Wasn't that issue in relation to third party payments? Similar to the Matt Giteau one in Union I guess.

The only punishment for the club was losing its marquee player. It does highlight the grey area around third party agreements and what the club is liable for. I guess you could argue that Gasnier was originally signed under false pretences and the club could have been penalised further by the NRL, or the player could have sued?? The only reason that didn't happen was that Gasnier found higher paying employment elsewhere.

Mark Gasnier and i guess his manager were smart, they could have taken the Dragons to court perhaps but imo probably did what he did because the club had treated him well over the yearsand despite the deal had a bit of respect for the Dragons but it opened up a new opportunity and he took it. The club probably is a bit lucky they had Wayne Bennett coming to take the gloss off it a bit, surely if the only news in the offseason was the departure of Gaz, the issue would have been much much greater.

 

[Karmawave]

purposely breaching your contract in order to lose it or as a tactic to move to another club should be a no no, especially in the NRL.

There is no specific evidence that Maitua purposely attempted to get out of his contract by intentionally not showing up at all. Its only perception and speculation.

In fact the Bulldogs are quoted in these recent stories saying how great Reni has been in pre-season with his training and attitude.

I'd like to see the Bulldogs/NRL try that excuse when trying to deregister him in a court case after they wrapped him up about how great his training had been... :lol:

 

[Loudstrat]

That's a silly argument. When was the last time a club breached contract conditions?

I'd suggest the last time a club didn't have enough money to pay their players they got kicked out of the league - that club being Newtown. Or maybe it was the Gold Coast...hmmm...

It's not a silly argument at all. There are many examples of clubs, for example, dropping players as revenge for signing contracts elsewhere, which don't meet the 'develop their replacement' standards of credibility in argument. Such as Justin Hodges leaving Brisbane to join Easts, Canterbury dropping Dean Pay to Moorebank for joining the ARL, and then sacking Jarred McCracken - clearly the clubs best centre at the time.

Then there's the old "sell the contract" trick, where a player with a year to run finds his contract sold to another club, and to honour his end of the contract, has to move.

 

[Karmawave]

I'm still yet to see anyone come up with an answer as to why Arana Taumata can get sacked from 3 clubs before the age of 20, face charges for breaking a guys jaw, and yet can get a registered NRL contract with the Melbourne Storm for 2009 - yet Reni is facing 12 months banned from the NRL


:lol:

 

[Chachi]

I'm still yet to see anyone come up with an answer as to why Arana Taumata can get sacked from 3 clubs before the age of 20, face charges for breaking a guys jaw, and yet can get a registered NRL contract with the Melbourne Storm for 2009 - yet Reni is facing 12 months banned from the NRL


:lol:

There is no answer. It is terrible inconsistency.

 

[Chachi]

It's not a silly argument at all. There are many examples of clubs, for example, dropping players as revenge for signing contracts elsewhere, which don't meet the 'develop their replacement' standards of credibility in argument. Such as Justin Hodges leaving Brisbane to join Easts, Canterbury dropping Dean Pay to Moorebank for joining the ARL, and then sacking Jarred McCracken - clearly the clubs best centre at the time.

Then there's the old "sell the contract" trick, where a player with a year to run finds his contract sold to another club, and to honour his end of the contract, has to move.

Did those contracts stop the club from doing such things as dropping the player to a reserve grade comp? Same thing happened with Josh Hannay and Brett Seymour. Did the club stop paying those players?

I'm not commenting on the ethics of the matter - just whether or not the club is legally entitled to do what they have done. Just like they are legally entitled to sack a player for any breach of the code of conduct and the NRL is legally entitled to deregister them accordingly.

If a player feels the club is going to shaft him down the track he doesn't need to sign the contract and if a club has a track record of shafting players they won't do themselves any favours in the future either.

 

[Loudstrat]

Did those contracts stop the club from doing such things as dropping the player to a reserve grade comp? Same thing happened with Josh Hannay and Brett Seymour. Did the club stop paying those players?

Did the form of Hodges, Pay and Crackers drop? Did they breach their contract? What happened in those cases by the clubs WAS a breach of contract because they bullied those players for something that happened outside the contract. That is illegal under contract law.

I'm not commenting on the ethics of the matter - just whether or not the club is legally entitled to do what they have done. Just like they are legally entitled to sack a player for any breach of the code of conduct and the NRL is legally entitled to deregister them accordingly.

No. Because the players in question didn't do anything to warrant being dropped. The loophole for the clubs is that form is subjective - hence Brian picking brother Tony Smith in the run on side and leaving test lock Brad Mackay on the bench.

If a player feels the club is going to shaft him down the track he doesn't need to sign the contract and if a club has a track record of shafting players they won't do themselves any favours in the future either.

True. However, unless the player is Nostradamus, owns a crystal ball or borrowed Doc Brown's Delorian time machine to advance into the future to check things out, how the hell would they know what their club is going to behave like in the future?

 

[Canard]

Did the form of Hodges, Pay and Crackers drop? Did they breach their contract? What happened in those cases by the clubs WAS a breach of contract because they bullied those players for something that happened outside the contract. That is illegal under contract law.

I doubt its "illegal", maybe "immoral" or "unethical", but there would be nothing in most players contracts saying that the were "guaranteed" selection in the first team.

As long as the club kept paying the player the monies he was due by the contract, I think in the eyes of the law it would be fine.

 

[Loudstrat]

Read the post again. I said the illegality is due to the bullying into/about signing a contract with the club. Hence -illegal.

And another thing - do you think the NRL will deregister Ricky Stuart?

 

[Chachi]

Did the form of Hodges, Pay and Crackers drop? Did they breach their contract? What happened in those cases by the clubs WAS a breach of contract because they bullied those players for something that happened outside the contract. That is illegal under contract law.?

You could argue that when a player decides his future is elsewhere then his club may also have the right to decide that its future is best served by bringing in people who will be part of their future. It's a call the club has the right to make and I think you would find that it is almost impossible to call it "illegal" within the context of a sport organisation.

It has even less substance than saying the ARL/NSWRL/QRL "bullies" players to stay in Australia rather than going to the ESL by putting in place 'policy' that prevents those players from playing Origin or Test football - unlike every other country that selects its international players with no reference to where they are playing.

Do you support that sort of bullying behaviour? It could be seen as outrageous!

No. Because the players in question didn't do anything to warrant being dropped. The loophole for the clubs is that form is subjective - hence Brian picking brother Tony Smith in the run on side and leaving test lock Brad Mackay on the bench.?

Exactly. Form is subjective therefore you cannot call it illegal. If it is illegal then why on earth has it never been successfully challenged in a court of law? Immoral or unethical perhaps, but not illegal.

True. However, unless the player is Nostradamus, owns a crystal ball or borrowed Doc Brown's Delorian time machine to advance into the future to check things out, how the hell would they know what their club is going to behave like in the future?

My point is that if a club starts doing this sort of thing on a regular basis you would think they will build a less than positive reputation which may harm future recruiting attempts. It's a two way street.

In any case, it's becoming clear that there is more to this Maitua case than just missing a training session.

 

[typicalfan]

There is no specific evidence that Maitua purposely attempted to get out of his contract by intentionally not showing up at all. Its only perception and speculation.

In fact the Bulldogs are quoted in these recent stories saying how great Reni has been in pre-season with his training and attitude.

I'd like to see the Bulldogs/NRL try that excuse when trying to deregister him in a court case after they wrapped him up about how great his training had been... :lol:

but Reni has a history and yes it is perception and speculation but it wouldnt take a lot to draw a bow between his attempted release months prior and his absent without notice.

 

[Pass the Ball]

but Reni has a history and yes it is perception and speculation but it wouldnt take a lot to draw a bow between his attempted release months prior and his absent without notice.

Drawing bows is not so solid in a court room..

He has breached the BULLDOGS CODE OF CONDUCT not the NRL's...

Fair enough for the Dogs to sack him, but they will now have to tackle him running it hard at them next year in different colours...

Yes, he backed Greenberg into a corner with very little option...

C'est la vie....

 

[Pass the Ball]

but Reni has a history and yes it is perception and speculation but it wouldnt take a lot to draw a bow between his attempted release months prior and his absent without notice.

Double post...

 

[typicalfan]

well i dont agree with him being deregistered either really. If it were to mean greater consistency then so be it, however if we are just relying on individual teams and their rules, then the inconsistency will come from some teams being stricter than others, it will probably encourage teams to keep their stars on their books while the lower rank cattle who the teams would blink twice before sacking, feel the heat.