Anthony Griffin

[TheFrog]

No, that’s not what happened with the bulldogs.

The issue there was they agreed to a contract extension, but the contract was never signed. So Haslers argument was that given both parties had a agreed to an extension it effectively took Hasler off the market. Thus depriving him of the opportunity to look for alternative employment.

If Hasler had of signed a contract with specific clauses that weren’t met, that’s a totally different issue.

They tried to get out of paying him saying it was merely a "heads of agreement" but the court didn't wear it.

I don't really know how NRL coach contracts are structured, but if they are structured in such a way that the coach can be sacked at any time with a "minimal payout" then I think better managers are needed.

 

[betcats]

They tried to get out of paying him saying it was merely a "heads of agreement" but the court didn't wear it.

I don't really know how NRL coach contracts are structured, but if they are structured in such a way that the coach can be sacked at any time with a "minimal payout" then I think better managers are needed.

It’s a contract, it can be structured just about anyway you can think of as long as all parties agree.

 

[TheFrog]

It’s a contract, it can be structured just about anyway you can think of as long as all parties agree.

Of course, but would you agree to a minimal payout for being summarily dismissed after meeting all performance targets? I mean surely a 65% win rate for the year meets performance targets. Maybe Ivan bore the brunt of a clause like this in 2015, who knows?

 

[unKwn]

forgot to mention it but the other day Gould was asked on twitter which side will be most improved in 2019. he said panthers. interpret that any way you like

 

[betcats]

Of course, but would you agree to a minimal payout for being summarily dismissed after meeting all performance targets? I mean surely a 65% win rate for the year meets performance targets. Maybe Ivan bore the brunt of a clause like this in 2015, who knows?

Me personally no. But if they are offering a higher base salary or bigger bonuses than I can see how someone might agree to it.

 

[OldPanther]

 

[TheFrog]

Me personally no. But if they are offering a higher base salary or bigger bonuses than I can see how someone might agree to it.

As an NRL coach? Where the previous incumbent was shown the door at a minute's notice? You'd have to be mad.

 

[betcats]

As an NRL coach? Where the previous incumbent was showed the door at a minute's notice? You'd have to be mad.

Mad or confident. Or desperate for more money in the short term.

 

[herbert henry1908]

They tried to get out of paying him saying it was merely a "heads of agreement" but the court didn't wear it.

I don't really know how NRL coach contracts are structured, but if they are structured in such a way that the coach can be sacked at any time with a "minimal payout" then I think better managers are needed.

Yes but that’s not the same situation as I’m proposing.

Performance clauses wouldn’t be unusual in an NRL coaches contract I would’ve thought.

 

[OldPanther]

Because nothing happened and it is all bullshit.

So they are lying?

 

[TheFrog]

Performance clauses wouldn’t be unusual in an NRL coaches contract I would’ve thought.

I'm sure this so. But if they involve achievements greater than anyone has ever before achieved in the role, there can only be one outcome.

What do you think would be a reasonable performance goal for this season below which the club could terminate the coach with a minimal payout, that would have reasonably applied to Griffin when renewing his contract last off-season?

 

[TheFrog]

So they are lying?

Who is they?

 

[tripster]

So they are lying?

I can’t rule out that it isn’t bona fide. Plenty of people make shit up online simply because they like the drama. An equally likely explanation is that it is Chinese whispers gone mad.

We are being asked to believe third hand hearsay as if it is the truth, when it doesn’t reconcile with facts that we do know and can verify.

 

[OldPanther]

Who is they?

Two people have confirmed it in this thread so far. @Panther_Daz and the other one I don't remember who(said they knew but didn't say)

Edit: the other was @The Realist

 

[betcats]

I can’t rule out that it isn’t bona fide. Plenty of people make shit up online simply because they like the drama. An equally likely explanation is that it is Chinese whispers gone mad.

We are being asked to believe third hand hearsay as if it is the truth.

No one asked you to believe it.

 

[herbert henry1908]

 

[herbert henry1908]

I'm sure this so. But if they involve achievements greater than anyone has ever before achieved in the role, there can only be one outcome.

What do you think would be a reasonable performance goal for this season below which the club could terminate the coach with a minimal payout, that would have reasonably applied to Griffin when renewing his contract last off-season?

What’s reasonable isn’t the issue, but what’s agreed upon by two parties is.

 

[Timmah]

 

[TheFrog]

Two people have confirmed it in this thread so far. @Panther_Daz and the other one I don't remember who(said they knew but didn't say)

No I don't think Daz is making it up. He knows someone in the club and he's been alerted that something is going on. If you've got the board present and they are being asked to consider an outlay of over a million dollars more or less on the spot, where the same thing happened previously, I'd expect they'd look for ways to avoid that outcome, like getting the lads to kiss and make up if that's what it is.

 

[betcats]

So if Daz was right about the meeting then there’s obviously an issue even if hook survives.

I’d say the whole “hooks going nowhere” line is done and dusted.