What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Hayne signs with Gold Coast

The_Shield

Juniors
Messages
1,895
It means it needs to be within the same season if there is more than one season inside the Nov 1-June 30 period, which obviously there is not in the NRL. Why would players need a clearance before June 30, but not after? That's ludicrous.

All these people who want to re-interpret the rules. All players need a clearance when changing clubs. It doesn't matter if they played last season or the season before. Why is this so difficult for people to comprehend?

No you've got it wrong. The rule says nothing about multiple seasons in that timeframe. You've just added that to suit your argument. Also you must not have read my post because I never said he doesn't need a clearance. I'm saying he doesn't need it before June 30, he can get it after because it's a different season. If he had of played for for Parra between November and June then yes he would need it before June 30. The June 30 deadline applies to the same season. That's what the rule says
 
Messages
14,139
No you've got it wrong. The rule says nothing about multiple seasons in that timeframe. You've just added that to suit your argument. Also you must not have read my post because I never said he doesn't need a clearance. I'm saying he doesn't need it before June 30, he can get it after because it's a different season. If he had of played for for Parra between November and June then yes he would need it before June 30. The June 30 deadline applies to the same season. That's what the rule says
Nonsense. He needs a clearance regardless of when he plays. And that clearance can only be granted within the timeframe. Otherwise there is no point in having a timeframe at all and it would not be in the policy. It would just say a player needs a clearance and no timeframe would be given.
 

The_Shield

Juniors
Messages
1,895
The timeframe is for the same seasons. EG. Konrad Hurrell needed a clearance before June 30 because he played for the Warriors between November and June this season. Jarryd Hayne last played for the Eels 2 years ago so the June 30 deadline doesn't apply. That's my interpretation anyway
 
Messages
14,139
Obviously you need a clearance to play. But if you were allowed to get one any time the policy would not even have any kind of timeframe in it. It would just say, the player must be cleared.

And even if it was true that after June 30 constitutes a new season, somehow, this is not a new season. It's the same season. But that's not what it's about anyway.
 

SBD82

Coach
Messages
17,855
Because contracts don't dictate clearances. How could they? A player and a club can't just agree to circumvent the sport's rules and put it in a contract. The clearance system is defined in the policy. It requires the new club to seek the clearance from the old club in writing. Before June 30.

Is the clearance to play? Or to sign with the club?

If the clearance is to play a player could sign a contract with a club (potentially big money) and then have the clearance refused.

If the clearance is to sign with a new club the player would not have any legal affiliation with the club prior to gaining the clearance, so the club couldn't do it on their behalf, the player would need to represent themselves.

I'd have thought the player would seek the clearance from their old club, and then sign with the new club after gaining the clearance. Which would means that the clearance could be gained anytime after they leave a club, including having a clause inserted in the contract which grants release at the end of the contract.

Do you know differently? I'm obviously guessing.
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
It can't be true.

Imagine if a side had a blessed run. Lets say the raiders go through the season without any injuries but on the eve of the finals edrick lee rolls his ankle. It doesnt seem reasonable that the raiders couldnt replace him with a reserve grader
 
Messages
14,139
Is the clearance to play? Or to sign with the club?

If the clearance is to play a player could sign a contract with a club (potentially big money) and then have the clearance refused.

If the clearance is to sign with a new club the player would not have any legal affiliation with the club prior to gaining the clearance, so the club couldn't do it on their behalf, the player would need to represent themselves.

I'd have thought the player would seek the clearance from their old club, and then sign with the new club after gaining the clearance. Which would means that the clearance could be gained anytime after they leave a club, including having a clause inserted in the contract which grants release at the end of the contract.

Do you know differently? I'm obviously guessing.
The new club seeks the clearance. The signing of a contract could theoretically occur at any time. Parramatta can't have cleared him previously. He didn't have a club to go to previously. Clearances can't be refused without good cause. It's a formality in 95% of cases. It's not as if Hayne's clearance would or even could be denied. It's simply about the consistent application of the rules.
 

carcharias

Immortal
Messages
43,120
Cmon now
We all know the games is a farce

From the bullshit leg ups some teams get with free to air TV slots
To the hammering the media decide to drop on a different team each year.

Arguably The highest profile player in the game waltzing into an NRL owned team a month out from the finals should be no different.

Just sit back now and watch the fight over who can suck Hayne's dick the most
Will it be ch 9
Will it be the daily Tele
Will it be Greenberg
 
Messages
15,497
My understanding is that you need to have played a certain number of regular premiership games (probably five) in order to play finals?

If I remember correctly, that only applies to NSW Cup and Holden Cup, and covers the last 5 weeks or so of the season. It is designed to prevent teams who are in contention in the lower grades for the semis but are out of the hunt in first grade, dropping all their "star" players down to the lower grades. If I remember correctly the rule also provides that they either have to have played the majority of the games in that grade to be eligible, or played the last 5 games. It does not apply to first grade as far as I am aware.
 

The_Shield

Juniors
Messages
1,895
Question for all NSW fans. If Hayne hits form next year, and Tedesco continues his form. Who would you's rather be fullback?
 

Mr Angry

Not a Referee
Messages
51,816
Just sit back now and watch the fight over who can suck Hayne's dick the most
Will it be ch 9
Will it be the daily Tele
Will it be Greenberg
NRL 360 pointed out last night all of the Titans final matches are on Fox only, CH9 won't get to suck him off until the finals, if they make it.
 

carcharias

Immortal
Messages
43,120
NRL 360 pointed out last night all of the Titans final matches are on Fox only, CH9 won't get to suck him off until the finals, if they make it.
Imagine the finals then.
Remember that vomit fest they went on with when SBW came back ?
 
Messages
14,736
I heard Channel 9 are recording all of Jarryd's inner monologues to play on Sunday broadcast. Yes, I know, WT and Cowboys are the Sunday 9 game...but they'll be just airing them in the quiet moments.
 

SBD82

Coach
Messages
17,855
Question for all NSW fans. If Hayne hits form next year, and Tedesco continues his form. Who would you's rather be fullback?

It depends on a lot of things. But hayne has proven he can be a very good right centre option.

Normally I hate the way that NSW tries to squeeze players in their wrong positions, but hayne was a better right centre than any option we currently have.

Lot of water to go under the bridge between now and then though.
 

_Johnsy

Referee
Messages
28,368
Obviously you need a clearance to play. But if you were allowed to get one any time the policy would not even have any kind of timeframe in it. It would just say, the player must be cleared.

And even if it was true that after June 30 constitutes a new season, somehow, this is not a new season. It's the same season. But that's not what it's about anyway.
Why would he need a clearance, when he is not a registered NRL player?

He was released by his former club, therefore ending all contractual obligations he had previously agreed to.

The NRL has to ratify & register his "new" contract.

TBH I think you're reading to much into this "contractual" situation.
 

Timmah

LeagueUnlimited News Editor
Staff member
Messages
100,990
It depends on a lot of things. But hayne has proven he can be a very good right centre option.

Normally I hate the way that NSW tries to squeeze players in their wrong positions, but hayne was a better right centre than any option we currently have.

Lot of water to go under the bridge between now and then though.
Have to agree here. Hayne's a walk-up start but I'd prefer Tedesco be kept fullback. No issue with Jarryd playing centre or wing.
 

Danish

Referee
Messages
32,019
I heard Channel 9 are recording all of Jarryd's inner monologues to play on Sunday broadcast. Yes, I know, WT and Cowboys are the Sunday 9 game...but they'll be just airing them in the quiet moments.

The channel 9 coverage should just be a picture of Hayne watching the game on his couch, goggle box style
 

Latest posts

Top