Rothfield: Cronk was going to sign with Eels last Wednesday

[Prop Forward]

Just reading his blog today and someone asked him about the two signings he mentioned last week...he replied:

I hionestly thought they were going to sign Cooper Cronk last Wednesday. The deal was “over the line” and was worth much more than Cronk’s on in Melbourne. But Storm got legal advice and refused to grant him a release. Sorry, I honestly thought it was almost a done deal.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...can_the_roosters_go_all_the_way/#commentsmore

 

[Kornstar]

Just when I thought I couldn't hate them any more.......

I know they have a right to say no but considering they screwed him out of 2 premiership rings and didn't pay him the amount of the others, the right thing to do would be to let him go and earn more money if he wants to!!!

 

[eel01s]

Maybe Cronk's wife/girlfriend/significant other should have landed a job in Sydney's west, specifically in the second CBD of Sydney, Parramatta.

Or maybe he shoud have participated in the audit, and used the media to say how he didn't want to be associated with the Storm anymore. Then he would have been granted a release.

Why would the Storm need to get legal advice??? (Unless Cronk was threatening to end his deal)

 

[born an eel]

this is exactly why the NRL should not do anything to accommodate them in getting their playing roster together for next year.

 

[sam54no]

As far as I'm concerned, if he wanted to be here he'd be here. All this talk about him coming and then not coming is rubbish.

I'd rather have someone who's old but is going to give 100% then some guy who's head is somewhere else.

Cronk is good, but 500k a year?? The other players around him make him look better than he is. Even Brett Finch looks like a great player in their side.

 

[TheRam]

That answers one signing but who is the other?

 

[Prop Forward]

That answers one signing but who is the other?

He is still blogging now, go ask.

 

[Gronk]

As far as I'm concerned, if he wanted to be here he'd be here. All this talk about him coming and then not coming is rubbish.

I'd rather have someone who's old but is going to give 100% then some guy who's head is somewhere else.

Cronk is good, but 500k a year?? The other players around him make him look better than he is. Even Brett Finch looks like a great player in their side.

My reading between the lines is the opposite. Cooper Cronk sought a release and was denied. IIRC his contract with the Storm is good until 2013. Without Storm's consent, you can't make that go away.

 

[hineyrulz]

Just when I thought I couldn't hate them any more.......

I know they have a right to say no but considering they screwed him out of 2 premiership rings and didn't pay him the amount of the others, the right thing to do would be to let him go and earn more money if he wants to!!!

Why should they have any rights???? Every player on that roster were obtained illegally. If another club was able to pay overs for a certain player they should have been allowed to go. But with the News puppet in charge that never was going to happen......

 

[TheRam]

He is still blogging now, go ask.

Mate I wouldn't contribute to that pri*ks site with your signon.

 

[sam54no]

That's interesting. I don't know why they wouldn't wanna free up some cash then. They could keep Inglis, and maybe another.

 

[cv8z]

Surely if contracts are illegal in the eyes of the nrl then they should be null and void and made to start over again but legally?

 

[Suitman]

Surely if contracts are illegal in the eyes of the nil then they should be null and void and made to start over again but legally?

Some players signed two contracts. One legal, one illegal.
The legal one stands, apparantly.

Suity

 

[NorthShoreEel]

The second signature is me - Im on my way down to the club now to see Ossie.

Would anyone like to come and take photo's?

I am replacing Caylo (twice).

Twice- because I am twice his size.:lol:

 

[forward pass]

Some players signed two contracts. One legal, one illegal.
The legal one stands, apparantly.

Suity

Surely they both stand?? Even though one may be against the NRL salary cap rules - it is still a legal document and needs to be honoured.

It is only 'illegal' to the NRL - not to Common Law.

 

[Tizzun]

According to Skeepe Cronk toured Canberra's facilities last Thursday http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showpost.php?p=6793222&postcount=1052, it may be possible Storm management has told him they will only release him to a team that is not Parra... Dennis burned many bridges between Parra and Melbourne...

 

[Suitman]

Surely they both stand?? Even though one may be against the NRL salary cap rules - it is still a legal document and needs to be honoured.

It is only 'illegal' to the NRL - not to Common Law.

I suppose it depends how the common law would decide whether a contract is valid under the rules of a governing body.

Suity

 

[DeanPay98]

I actually think Parramatta should sue the Storm for breach of contract over the 2009 Grand Final. Effectively by dint of their NRL contract the Storm is in a multipartite contract with all the other teams in the NRL. There is a precedent for this - either that or we should refuse to host the Storm at Parramatta for the next two seasons even if it means losing 2 competition points.

 

[Eels Dude]

Some players signed two contracts. One legal, one illegal.
The legal one stands, apparantly.

Suity

You'd think it would only be illegal under NRL laws... the illegal contract is between the club and the player and that would have to be legally binding.

 

[cv8z]

That's interesting. I don't know why they wouldn't wanna free up some cash then. They could keep Inglis, and maybe another.

Look how hard it is to get a decent halfback, backs are easier to find
and prob inglis is on way more than cronk so the saving would be more significant is inglis was released one would imagine