Eels Appoint Brad Arthur as Head Coach

[spiderdan]

meh, who knows if there is a late push or not. might just be someone jumping on the rumour mill for giggles. at least there's no quotes from anyone, suggesting it may just be a load of crap that was made up to get attention. the lack of quotes from sharp, the board or the candidates tells me they may have learned how to keep stuff where it belongs before the decision.

if it's true and there is a late push for arthur if what was posted a few days ago about sharp promising arthur the job then it may be a case that some of the board realised there may be legal repercussions if arthur isn't offered the job. but that's just me playing connect the dots with a bunch of moles.

 

[Fathead]

Maybe , just maybe the reports that Arthur was given a verbal contract by dopey to coach the eels and having that contract has not taken the cowboys job when offered.Perhaps he has now told dopey that he will be taking legal action and that has been conveyed to the board. Stranger things have happened and as we know with these idots running the show, it wouldn't surprise me in the least.
For those saying that nothing was signed, please be aware that a verbal contract whilst not having as much gravity as a fully signed contract is still a contract and is recognised in law as such.

 

[Fathead]

meh, who knows if there is a late push or not. might just be someone jumping on the rumour mill for giggles. at least there's no quotes from anyone, suggesting it may just be a load of crap that was made up to get attention. the lack of quotes from sharp, the board or the candidates tells me they may have learned how to keep stuff where it belongs before the decision.

if it's true and there is a late push for arthur if what was posted a few days ago about sharp promising arthur the job then it may be a case that some of the board realised there may be legal repercussions if arthur isn't offered the job. but that's just me playing connect the dots with a bunch of moles.

Spider, I think we were typing the same time and have the same thoughts !

 

[Joshuatheeel]

Maybe the board is worried about hoppa walking - did sharp get his media mates to publish the article in the telecrap yesterday to put pressure on other board members to reconsider Arthur ?

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

There is near zero prospect of a 'breach of contract' action being available to Arthur. If Sharpy did 'promise' Arthur that he was going to be offered the job, retracting that promise is NOT a breach of contract. The promise in itself does not constitute a contract (there's no 'consideration' for starters, there are no terms for Arthur to accept, and there's no suggestion that he 'accepted' anything anyway).

Now if Sharpy had said, 'on behalf of the PDRLC, I offer you employment as our head coach of the Eels, on the following terms X,Y,Z' AND ARthurs said 'Sure. I accept'. That would be a manifestly different case (though probably difficult to enforce).

 

[Bigfella]

There is a deal but the "only" thing to be sorted out is terms and conditions?

That's pretty much everything.

Keystone cops ride again.

 

[Fathead]

There is near zero prospect of a 'breach of contract' action being available to Arthur. If Sharpy did 'promise' Arthur that he was going to be offered the job, retracting that promise is NOT a breach of contract. The promise in itself does not constitute a contract (there's no 'consideration' for starters, there are no terms for Arthur to accept, and there's no suggestion that he 'accepted' anything anyway).

Now if Sharpy had said, 'on behalf of the PDRLC, I offer you employment as our head coach of the Eels, on the following terms X,Y,Z' AND ARthurs said 'Sure. I accept'. That would be a manifestly different case (though probably difficult to enforce).

Barry, just putting it out there. We don't know the 'terms' of any dealings between Sharp and Arthur. A promise in is purest sense is not a contract but any verbalisation , accepted by both parties as fact that causes Arthur to follow a course of action to his detriment COULD be cause for redress in a civil action. ( which is basically what you are alluding to in your second paragraph )
As you may be aware, anyone can bring proceedings for any wrongdoing against anyone if they feel they have been blighted. There are enough courts / administrative appeal committees etc to hear such a matter.
Any potential action against Sharp woud be a case against the eels, as Sharp is in a position to act for the eels. The may just be enough for the other directors to change this minds... Tenuous as this proposal may sound !

 

[strider]

i'm sure our defense in court could simply be "we are the parramatta eels - we have no f**king clue what we are doing - so clearly it's stupid to believe anything we say" .... problem solved

 

[Avenger]

Stagger and Mits are the last people you would want to see on any Parra board :lol: if they were Kearney would still be the coach and luke burt would be our fullback over Jarryd Hayne - need people with better talent evaluation and people who can make the hard decisions with displaying commonsense.

I think yourself and newmanj are the only people on this forum who could seriously be board members and successful at it.

Thanks RJ but you would be surprised at how level headed my mate Stags is. We have long discussions about Parra and he makes very good points and is loyal as they come. Delboy has more credentials than I have dude, I'm just more of a show off. ;-)

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Sorry, wasn't replying to your post specifically, Fathead (that sounds terrible....you need a different name). Was referring to the numerous scattered posts on the topic, and the implicit assumption in a number of them that promising to do something, and then not doing it necessarily constituted a breach of contract.

Whatever Sharpy might have said to Arthur, Arthur would have been aware that a formal offer would have to be forthcoming, and that would have to be ratified by the Board. And precisely what damages / harm Arthur has suffered in this period I'm not too sure....disappointment doesn't cut it, but I guess it could conceivably affect his position at Manly and ability to apply for other positions.

 

[Fathead]

i'm sure our defense in court could simply be "we are the parramatta eels - we have no f**king clue what we are doing - so clearly it's stupid to believe anything we say" .... problem solved

Classic ... And so true

 

[Kornstar]

Do these idiots realise they need to sell memberships soon????

Regardless of whether media reports are true, surely finalising this ASAP is the best option?

If simple morons (according to Poupou) on a forum know this, why can't the board?

 

[Fathead]

Sorry, wasn't replying to your post specifically, Fathead (that sounds terrible....you need a different name). Was referring to the numerous scattered posts on the topic, and the implicit assumption in a number of them that promising to do something, and then not doing it necessarily constituted a breach of contract.

Whatever Sharpy might have said to Arthur, Arthur would have been aware that a formal offer would have to be forthcoming, and that would have to be ratified by the Board. And precisely what damages / harm Arthur has suffered in this period I'm not too sure....disappointment doesn't cut it, but I guess it could conceivably affect his position at Manly and ability to apply for other positions.

So true... And fathead is an apt name for my melon, believe me !

 

[Gary Gutful]

Don't sell yourself short, Fathead.

 

[Stagger eel]

Do these idiots realise they need to sell memberships soon????

Regardless of whether media reports are true, surely finalising this ASAP is the best option?

If simple morons (according to Poupou) on a forum know this, why can't the board?

Speaking off, was told we no longer have a me
Membership manager... Lol

Getting better by the minute..

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Do these idiots realise they need to sell memberships soon????

Regardless of whether media reports are true, surely finalising this ASAP is the best option?

If simple morons (according to Poupou) on a forum know this, why can't the board?

I think getting the right coaching structure and people is more important than any short term desire to sell memberships.

 

[Jodeci]

This is a pretty stupid question but I'll ask it, if there are only 5 board members, how are these idiots making decisions on behalf of the members?

 

[Kornstar]

Speaking off, was told we no longer have a me
Membership manager... Lol

Getting better by the minute..

So the October renewal will most definitely be a thing of the past from now on i guess. I've had no contact from the club and i ticked the automatic renewal thing last year.

We are an embarrassment from top to bottom, front to back & side to side!!!!

I think getting the right coaching structure and people is more important than any short term desire to sell memberships.

If they have made a decision as has been suggested, surely announcing it would be the most beneficial action?

Announcing the coach (if the decision has been made) has nothing to do with the structure because some new coaches may not have that in place straight away, so they should wait till January when the new coach finalises everything?

 

[Stagger eel]

This is a pretty stupid question but I'll ask it, if there are only 5 board members, how are these idiots making decisions on behalf of the members?

Are you talking about the fact that the 5 man board are unconstitutional?

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

This is a pretty stupid question but I'll ask it, if there are only 5 board members, how are these idiots making decisions on behalf of the members?

Surely you could ask the same question if there were 50, or 500 board members? Or am I missing the point?