Joey risks his future

[Misty Bee]

Is Webcke saying that? what a friggin tosser!

Is it my imagination of is all of the anti Johns bullsh*t coming out of Brisbane?

 

[Green Machine]

They did but before it got to that stage the ARL had to approve the deal. The NSWRL delegates were on holidays, so the QRL delegates approved it themselves. Then after that the clubs did, but they didn't have a choice because the ARL could kick them out if they didn't.

I thought Easts, Norths, Wests, Souths, Balmain, Parramatta, Manly, St George, Newcastle and Illawarra were the NSWRL in 1997

Exactly the rules don't say if you don't play 1 match you can't play the others. There doesn't need to be a rule to say that. You only need a rule if "you miss 1 test you miss them all". You don't have a rule saying "if you miss a 1 test you can still play others". If you have that rule, then you have rules for everything, like "If you drive a car you can still play tests" and "If you're gay you can still play tests", etc. You don't make rules for who can play because that will be 1,000,000,000 pages long, you make rules for those who can't play. There is no rule saying he can't.

And he's not a very legal person is he? He mentions that it is accepted that players in England can't play rep football, but it's not an official rule. That's why Langer coming back and Smith playing in 2003 happened. Now Webcke is a smart man which surprises me he doesn't realise this. They can't make a rule "If you play in a competition outside Australia you can't play rep football". If that was an official rule, then it'll be taken to court and the players will win on restraint of trade with the annoucement "They must be considered". Now officially the players in the EPL are considered but not good enough(even though they aren't considered). So it can't be a rule. (remember the ARL rule that if you wanted to play in the ARL tests you had to be signed with the ARL. Players who didn't sign with us and signed with SL could not be picked - well the SL Players took it to court and won saying that even though they weren't ARL players they had to be considered for ARL matches - then the ARL considered them and said they weren't good enough)

As a matter of fact I think even the "If you miss 1 test because you're playing elsewhere you miss them all" rule will even be a restraint of trade and Johns will win if he takes it to court saying they must consider him. So they won't be able to have it as a rule anyway.

Now you agree with Shane. By the way, the major Rugby League comp in England is not called EPL, it's called SUPER LEAGUE

 

[Green Machine]

Is Webcke saying that? what a friggin tosser!

Is it my imagination of is all of the anti Johns bullsh*t coming out of Brisbane?

No Misty, Shane is not,

 

[Misty Bee]

Gee, you have serious problems. Now you’re down on poor old Shane. Webcke declined to go on a tour. So what? He was not the first player to do that and he won’t be the last. 17 players were unavailable for the 2003 tour. George Piggins hated being away from home and wanted to come home on the 1975 tour. Terry Fahey and John Harvey decline to tour in 1978. Terry Fahey played a Test Match 2 years later. I can’t remember anyone holding it against him. Terry Lamb declined the 1982 tour and went on the 1986 tour.

So it's ok for all of those players, and not Johns?

 

[Misty Bee]

Super League Test team proudly wore the coat of arms on their jersey for the 1997 international season against the official New Zealand and Great Britain

Seeing as though they wre playing in an in house comp, and not an official test, did they have permission from the Australian Govt for using Australia's coat of arms?

 

[Misty Bee]

He hasnt done the hard yards to get him to the finals, its a completely undeserving situation

So you have a problem with him signing a contract on those grounds?

 

[Kiwi]

So you have a problem with him signing a contract on those grounds?

I personaling think there is nothing wrong with him doing that, good luck to him, myself and many others will never say he has earned an ESL title if they do win it though. The only problem I see people have here, is he expects special treatment, he expects to be able to tell the ARL when he is available because he wants to play a club game in the ESL.

 

[Misty Bee]

So you can't see a difference between a grand final and a normal club game?

If it was just a normal club game, I'd agree with you.

But it isn't.

I guess you are saying that Joey should let his contracted employers, his teammates and Warringtons fans down on their biggest day, possibly ever, to play a pool match in an international comp?

 

[Kiwi]

So you can't see a difference between a grand final and a normal club game?

If it was just a normal club game, I'd agree with you.

But it isn't.

I guess you are saying that Joey should let his contracted employers, his teammates and Warringtons fans down on their biggest day, possibly ever, to play a pool match in an international comp?

IF Johns had played the entire year in the ESL, ESL players were selected on a regular basis to play for Australia ( which I think they should ), and we still had this scheduling on the test match I'd agree with you 100% and would expect the ARL to grant the request.

But he hasn't been playing ESL all year, ESL players are not selected to play tests for australia as a general rule ( yes I know Smith was, but he shouldn't have been ), and Joey knew he risked not playing for Australia for the entire tri - nations yet still signed making his choice of ESL over a Test.

No I don't think Johns should let Warrington and their fans down by not playing, he made the commitment to them and should live up to that. But he also made that commitment after knowing there was a clash and after knowing it could rule him out of the tri nations. He made his choice and know shouldn't expect things to change to suit his choice.

 

[Razor]

I thought Easts, Norths, Wests, Souths, Balmain, Parramatta, Manly, St George, Newcastle and Illawarra were the NSWRL in 1997

They were clubs, but the ARL board has delegates. 2 from NSWRL, 2 from the QRL. The decision was made by the 2 QRL people only, because the NSWRL board were on holidays.

Super League Test team proudly wore the coat of arms on their jersey for the 1997 international season against the official New Zealand and Great Britain

Actually I'm 99% sure it wasn't the coat of arms. It was a fake coat of arms with different animals.

Gee, you have serious problems. Now you’re down on poor old Shane. Webcke declined to go on a tour. So what? He was not the first player to do that and he won’t be the last. 17 players were unavailable for the 2003 tour. George Piggins hated being away from home and wanted to come home on the 1975 tour. Terry Fahey and John Harvey decline to tour in 1978. Terry Fahey played a Test Match 2 years later. I can’t remember anyone holding it against him. Terry Lamb declined the 1982 tour and went on the 1986 tour.

So why are you saying it's okay for those players, but it's not okay for Johns

No Misty, Shane is not,

Yes he is. I quote

"If you play in the Australian competition you must be available for all rep games or none"

"You can't allow players to pick and choose when they play for Australia unless it has to do with very important personal circumstances or injury reasons"

"It would be a very very dangerous precedent should the ARL allow Joey to miss the first Tri Nations game"

"The ARL would open up another grey area that would create another minefield in the future if they even consider letting Joey play in the English Grand Final"

"Now I know someone is going to bring up my situation in 2001 when I elected not to tour Britain ... I'd like to think that was a very different situation"

he expects to be able to tell the ARL when he is available because he wants to play a club game in the ESL.

And refusing permission will open a door that players will exploit. All Johns will do is say that he is injured. Then there won't be a problem

 

[Kiwi]

And refusing permission will open a door that players will exploit. All Johns will do is say that he is injured. Then there won't be a problem

Actually there will be a problem when he doesn't show up for training with the test team due to an injury which allows him to play the same weekend for warrington. All the ARL need do is request he attend a medical.

 

[Misty Bee]

IF Johns had played the entire year in the ESL, ESL players were selected on a regular basis to play for Australia ( which I think they should ), and we still had this scheduling on the test match I'd agree with you 100% and would expect the ARL to grant the request.

Joey may end up playing not too many more games for Newcastle than for Warrington. I really don't see the time thing as relevent - what's relevent is a contractual obligation that may clash with a Tri Nations game.

I guess you are saying that if Johns played for Warrington in the first ESL game, he should be exemp, but iff he missed the first game and started only with the second, he's a money grabbing arsewipe who should be banned fromplaynig for Australia ever again?

But he hasn't been playing ESL all year, ESL players are not selected to play tests for australia as a general rule ( yes I know Smith was, but he shouldn't have been ), and Joey knew he risked not playing for Australia for the entire tri - nations yet still signed making his choice of ESL over a Test.

There is no rule banning the selection of ESL players for Australia. Just because it isn't generally done doesn't mean there is a rule. Smith proved that. So may Jamie Lyon.

Johns was not risking the ENTIRE tri-nations by signing the deal - only 1 game. Certain elements are now trying to make him miss the tour. However, Johns has signed, and there is no rule that he has to miss all of the tri nations if he played in the ESL GF for Warrington.

No I don't think Johns should let Warrington and their fans down by not playing, he made the commitment to them and should live up to that. But he also made that commitment after knowing there was a clash and after knowing it could rule him out of the tri nations. He made his choice and know shouldn't expect things to change to suit his choice.

He expects nothing to change. He will only miss 1 tri nations game because of bodgey scheduling.

 

[Misty Bee]

Actually there will be a problem when he doesn't show up for training with the test team due to an injury which allows him to play the same weekend for warrington. All the ARL need do is request he attend a medical.

The ARL can't blame Joey if he did. Remember Jim Dymock - ruled unfit by Parramatta for club games, but ruled fit for Origin because NSW needed him? He had an injury that would take a week to get over, so when he played for NSW, he couldn't back up for parramatta. The Eels - the mob paying his wages - lost him for 3 games becaue of that.

 

[salivor]

Saying that Johns will just be fullfilling contractual obligations is a cop out. When Joey signed this contract the dates for the ESL Grand Final and the first Tri Nations match were already set in place with an obvious scheduling conflict. As soon as he put pen to paper he was prepared to forgo playing for his country for a club match if the Wolves made it to that point, simple as that.

It's not something that I'm particuarly going to get my panties in a twist about but the international game is already rapidly losing any credibility or relevance and sometimes it takes a high profile example to reverse a worrying trend of club football being put above tests.

 

[Twizzle]

pretty hard to claim loyalty to a club that he hasn't even played for yet

 

[Green Machine]

They were clubs, but the ARL board has delegates. 2 from NSWRL, 2 from the QRL. The decision was made by the 2 QRL people only, because the NSWRL board were on holidays.

What decision? Packer and New Ltd cut deal before the 1997 season. Optus, News Ltd, Telstra and PBL gave their blessing to peace talks. Ian Frickberg and Neil Whitaker worked out a deal. At the end of 1998, the majority of Sydney/NSWRL/ARL Clubs voted in favour of that deal to create 14 team NRL.

Actually I'm 99% sure it wasn't the coat of arms. It was a fake coat of arms with different animals.

What are you trying to tell me, it was a koala and cockatoo?

So why are you saying it's okay for those players, but it's not okay for Johns.

You’re a complete idiot. I have never said anything against Andrew Johns going to play for Warrington.

Yes he is. I quote

"If you play in the Australian competition you must be available for all rep games or none"

"You can't allow players to pick and choose when they play for Australia unless it has to do with very important personal circumstances or injury reasons"

"It would be a very very dangerous precedent should the ARL allow Joey to miss the first Tri Nations game"

"The ARL would open up another grey area that would create another minefield in the future if they even consider letting Joey play in the English Grand Final"

"Now I know someone is going to bring up my situation in 2001 when I elected not to tour Britain ... I'd like to think that was a very different situation"

Misty was quoting all that crap you brought up about restraint of trade and court action that you suggested Andrew Johns may use, which was never mentioned in the article. Quote me the bit where it says he should be BANNED for life.

And refusing permission will open a door that players will exploit. All Johns will do is say that he is injured. Then there won't be a problem

Why are you putting someone else’s quote forward without their name? Is it to try and make out I said it?

 

[Razor]

What decision? Packer and New Ltd cut deal before the 1997 season.

And Packer isn't the ARL

You’re a complete idiot. I have never said anything against Andrew Johns going to play for Warrington.

No but you said if he misses 1 test he has to miss them all. Yet the other players you mentioned missed 1 test for a non-injury reason and played later tests and you don't have a problem with it.

Quote me the bit where it says he should be BANNED for life.

All those quotes. And the fact he brings his own situation up then says "but that was different" even tells you what he means without the others

Why are you putting someone else’s quote forward without their name? Is it to try and make out I said it?

I never mentioned your name ANYWHERE in the post.

 

[Green Machine]

And Packer isn't the ARL.

What do you think you’re funny by cutting part of a quote and using part it. Please tell me what deal the QRL deal cut with News Ltd that sticked the ARL?

No but you said if he misses 1 test he has to miss them all. Yet the other players you mentioned missed 1 test for a non-injury reason and played later tests and you don't have a problem with it.

The players I mention missed competed tours not single games. Terry Fahey, John Harvey and Terry Lamb missed Kangaroo Tours. If Johns makes the Super League Grand Final and who ever plays halfback for Australia in the first game plays well, should be retained as they do usually do, if the player goes OK. If Johns doesn’t make the Super League Grand final and he is fit, he should be first one picked for Australia. I think all players who are picked in the first game who play well should be rewarded with selection in the second game. If the halfback who is selected in the first game has a shocker I see no problem with Johns replacing him.

All those quotes. And the fact he brings his own situation up then says "but that was different" even tells you what he means without the others.

Type the whole article out and let everyone judge what Shane said, because I didn’t take it as meaning BANNED for life.

I never mentioned your name ANYWHERE in the post.

Exactly. What is your purpose in taking the names off quotes and mixing them with other people quotes,

 

[Razor]

What do you think you’re funny by cutting part of a quote and using part it. Please tell me what deal the QRL deal cut with News Ltd that sticked the ARL?

For the merger to happen the following had to happen

- The ARL sponsors and broadcasters had to approve
- The ARL had to approve
- The ARL clubs had to approve

The sponsors and broadcasters did. The ARL did(although the NSWRL delegates were not present at the meeting, so the decision was made by the QRL delegates only). Then 10 of the clubs agreed.

The players I mention missed competed tours not single games. Terry Fahey, John Harvey and Terry Lamb missed Kangaroo Tours. If Johns makes the Super League Grand Final and who ever plays halfback for Australia in the first game plays well, should be retained as they do usually do, if the player goes OK.

So whenever Australia plays a match 1 week after the Grand Final and leaves most of the Grand Final players out, then those players shouldn't come back into the team because the other players went okay?

Type the whole article out and let everyone judge what Shane said, because I didn’t take it as meaning BANNED for life.

That is called copyright infringment. I don't want to get sued. If you want to get sued, then you type it out, or get the others to buy a copy.

Exactly. What is your purpose in taking the names off quotes and mixing them with other people quotes,

Instead of posting 3-4 different posts I reply to everything in one post. I never take names of quotes, I just don't add names. I don't click on "post reply" I always use quick reply and add the quote marks in.

 

[Green Machine]

For the merger to happen the following had to happen

- The ARL sponsors and broadcasters had to approve
- The ARL had to approve
- The ARL clubs had to approve

The sponsors and broadcasters did. The ARL did(although the NSWRL delegates were not present at the meeting, so the decision was made by the QRL delegates only). Then 10 of the clubs agreed.

So what was the problem? 8 out 10 NSWRL clubs agreed to the joint venture. I’m sure if there would have been a problem earlier, they would have told Neil Whitaker to stop negotiations

So whenever Australia plays a match 1 week after the Grand Final and leaves most of the Grand Final players out, then those players shouldn't come back into the team because the other players went okay?.

Why do you think “able” players from the NRL Grand Final would not be selected in the Tri Series first game? Considering the NRL Grand Final is two week prior on the 2 Oct and the Test is on the 15 Oct?

That is called copyright infringment. I don't want to get sued. If you want to get sued, then you type it out, or get the others to buy a copy.

Or better, misrepresent what is in the article

Instead of posting 3-4 different posts I reply to everything in one post. I never take names of quotes, I just don't add names. I don't click on "post reply" I always use quick reply and add the quote marks in.

That enough for me on this topic. I got to get back to the footy