MEDIA RELEASE re: Steve Turner

[TITAN1]

So...if turner fails to show at Titans on monday,does that mean he is automatically suspended for 3 years?
Any ideas people? :?

 

[Willow]

Not sure. I imagine that after Monday, the wheels will be set in motion which will inevitably result in Turner not being allowed to play in the NRL for three years.

Turner has pretty much painted himself into a corner.
Up until now, the Titans have been the mr nice guy, giving him time to see reason and saying there'll be no hard feelings etc. As recently as last week, the Gold Coast were trying to meet with Turner.
Looks like the gloves are about to come off.

 

[Dave Q]

He wont come.

He's made his bed.

Ive heard that his manager Riolo (trouble) isnt even talking about it. Maybe theres a rift?

Some of his people are telling him "everything will work out" That plenty of other teams let players slip through their grasps for various reasons. That time will heal all and maybe that since GC has started training without him, they will merrily roll along.

Trouble is for Turner, that the NRL are refusing to register him as a player for Melbourne. So he cant play for them. If he does run out, they suffer penalties.

I'm over my quiet stage in this matter. I tried to give them the benefit and then I see the damage they are inflicting onto you guys. Hes a key player and would have been extensively utilised in your plans. Theres no good in Carty saying that you will get along fine without him. You wont be as good a side I'm afraid. Nobody believes that, Searle doesnt and thats for sure.

I am very angry at Melbourne. They have shown absolutely no leadership in this matter at all. They should be packing his bags.

Melbourne should no longer be allowed to field a team in our competition.

I am going to boycott watching any and all of their matches TV or not until they stand up and provide a proper account of themselves. I will not buy their sponsors products either.

GC have shown all the good will in the world and they spit in your hands. Its a disgrace.

They can realease him from his contract with them I imagine. Just do it Melbourne. Get on with it or be off with you.

 

[Cloud9]

f**k the titans.
why can't they be as flexible as Melbourne.? We let fui fui moi moi reneg on his contract in similar situation.

Why let a player who clearly doesn't want to be the side put a drain on the rest of the team?

Wake up Searle and see the bigger picture. If Turner goes to the Gold Coast under duress, he will be a negative influence, sucking all the positive vibes out of the club.

This setting precedent excuse is complete myth and total bs. Did we see a anvalanche of players flipping on their contracts since Fui Fui Moi moi case? The answer is an unequivocal NO!

 

[El Diablo]

f**k the titans.
why can't they be as flexible as Melbourne.? We let fui fui moi moi reneg on his contract in similar situation.

MoiMoi never signed with the Storm. his manager forged his signature.

it is in no way similar

 

[Willow]

why can't they be as flexible as Melbourne.?

They signed a player who was already contracted to another club.
A gazumping no less.
And now they refuse to budge.
Hardly flexible.

 

[Willow]

`Out' offer to renegade Titan Steve Turner
Luke Turgeon
20Nov06
RENEGADE Titan Steve Turner has been offered a 'get out of the Gold Coast' clause after just one season if he is unhappy living on the glitter strip.
In a move designed to speed up negotiations with the winger, Titans chief executive Michael Searle said he put the deal on the table because he believes that once Turner finally makes it to the Coast the 22-year-old won't want to leave.
"What we have done as part of the negotiations is that I have offered to his manager that we would consider releasing him on October 31 if he didn't want to stay," said Searle. "It basically means there would be an out clause within 12 months if he was uncomfortable with the place.
"He has been saying that he is not comfortable coming here, but this shows that we are operating in good faith. We would like to think he would at least come here and experience it first.
"From our point of view, if he comes here and tries it and doesn't enjoy it, then he is free to go.
"If he wants to go back to Melbourne after that then good luck to him. I will drop him off at the airport if he wants.
"But I would be very surprised if he came here and didn't want to stay long term."
Turner verbally agreed to a three-year contract with the Titans in June before getting cold feet and re-signing with the Storm a month later.
The NRL has made it clear they will not register Turner's new contract with the Storm, believing he should honour his commitment to the Gold Coast.
As a result, Turner's only real options are to play for the Titans or sit out the next three seasons.
"If they do decide to go to court this dispute could be more than 12 months in the courts anyway," said Searle. "The 12-month offer shows the club is acting in good faith, the way it has done throughout the entire process.
"We are empathetic that he may be thinking twice about his decision but it doesn't remove the obligation to his original commitment.
"But that (the one-season deal) would only be if he came here.
"If he doesn't he is sitting on the sidelines for the next three years."
The news follows reports at the weekend that the Titans were offered the services of Queensland centre Adam Mogg and financial compensation in exchange for letting Turner remain in Melbourne. Turner's manager Dave Riolo did his best to broker the deal, which would have seen Mogg abandon plans to join English Super League club Catalans.
But the deal fell through when Melbourne would not meet the compensation criteria.
"The number of offers that were put to us for players to substitute were wide and varied," said Searle.
"The most likely one was Adam Mogg, but at the end of the day it wasn't an easy deal to achieve and Melbourne thought that the compensation request was too much for them."
http://www.gcbulletin.com.au/article/2006/11/20/1907_sports.html


Turner to meet with NRL
Written by: League news
20/11/2006

Defiant Melbourne winger Steve Turner will meet with NRL boss David Gallop on Wednesday to present his side of the story in the bitter tug-of-war for his services between the Gold Coast Titans and the Storm.

The NRL has sided with the Titans, who say they're willing to offer Turner a release after one season if he's unhappy on the Gold Coast. Gallop says he'll discuss the matter with Turner, Storm coach Craig Bellamy and club boss Brian Waldron but warns he won't be softening his stance.

Turner agreed to join the Titans on a three-year deal only to change his mind and re-sign with the Storm until the end of 2009.

http://www.leagueunlimited.com/article.asp?id=12527

Titans losing patience with recalcitrant Turner
Written by: League news
20/11/2006

Gold Coast Titans will withdraw their offer to release defiant Melbourne winger Steve Turner at the end of the 2007 season if he pursues legal action against the NRL club.

Turner will meet with NRL boss David Gallop in Sydney on Wednesday morning to plead his case in the bitter contractual dispute between Gold Coast and the Storm. Gold Coast managing director Michael Searle says he's losing patience with Turner and will fine the 22-year-old if he fails to show up at training on Monday.

The Titans are willing to offer the Penrith junior a release after one season if he's unhappy on the Gold Coast.

http://www.leagueunlimited.com/article.asp?ID=12529

 

[Surandy]

I am very angry at Melbourne. They have shown absolutely no leadership in this matter at all. They should be packing his bags.

Melbourne should no longer be allowed to field a team in our competition.

I am going to boycott watching any and all of their matches TV or not until they stand up and provide a proper account of themselves. I will not buy their sponsors products either.

GC have shown all the good will in the world and they spit in your hands. Its a disgrace.

They can realease him from his contract with them I imagine. Just do it Melbourne. Get on with it or be off with you.

Better not cheer for David Kidwell then. :crazy:

 

[Surandy]

How can Turner be a Titan's player? He is not a registered Titan's player according to the NRL, as no contract between Turner and the Titans has ever been lodged with them as per the NRL player contract rules.

 

[Willow]

Clutching at straws... almost a denial of what has happened over the last few months.

As far as the NRL are concerned, Turner's contract is with the Titans.
Gallop has pretty much stamped it on everyone's forehead.

 

[steaming stormer]

that may be true, but don't the NRL rules state that a contract must be lodged with the NRL within 7 days of said contract being signed? That obviously hasn't happened in this case, as the contract was never presented to Steve - only the verbal agreement was reached. That would void the verbal agreement.
I see both sides of the argument, but I am curious as to the response if it was any club other than the Titans involved - and for that matter if it was one of the big clubs, read Roosters/Dragons on the Melbourne end of things. Just a point to ponder

 

[El Diablo]

i believe it has been documented in the media that a contract was sent to Turner

 

[philstorm]

Can I just say, since when does a governing body side with one club? The NRL have already come out and said how, even if the Storm were to take it to court and win, they still may veto the contract with the Storm.

I thought governing bodies were meant to be neutral?

 

[Willow]

that may be true, but don't the NRL rules state that a contract must be lodged with the NRL within 7 days of said contract being signed? That obviously hasn't happened in this case, as the contract was never presented to Steve - only the verbal agreement was reached. That would void the verbal agreement.

As El said, the Titans said they sent the contract.

They have much than that though. They also have verbal and written agreements from Turner and his manager - by correspondence and in the public record.

Plus they have the NRL's total support.... which kind of sinks the 7 days lodgment theory. Sorry, but you're chasing old smoke.

I see both sides of the argument, but I am curious as to the response if it was any club other than the Titans involved - and for that matter if it was one of the big clubs, read Roosters/Dragons on the Melbourne end of things. Just a point to ponder

Are you trying to say that something dodgy is going on? Or that Melbourne are getting treated unfairly by the NRL?
Crikey... the NRL practically gave life to the Storm.

No player or club should think they can renege on a deal. This is not an anti-Storm or pro-Titans thing.

How would you feel if Turner wanted to come to the Gold Coast and the Titans said "sorry mate... we've changed our mind... and my girlfriend doesn't want you coming here."

I think you'll find that Turner could take them to the cleaners, and the NRL would be siding with the player.

Just a point to ponder?

For your information, other clubs have contracted players on agreement prior to the contract being formalised. I know of one Sydney club who re-signed a player just this year... a big name. They had an agreement and then everyone announced it the press. All done and dusted. The actual contract wasn't signed until some weeks later. It didnt matter because the agreement was well documented and therefore quite legally binding. The actual contract was a formality that was sorted out later.

Turner has reneged on a binding agreement.. no two ways about it.

 

[Willow]

Can I just say, since when does a governing body side with one club? The NRL have already come out and said how, even if the Storm were to take it to court and win, they still may veto the contract with the Storm.

I thought governing bodies were meant to be neutral?

The Storm are not the victims. And I don't think you understand that the NRL are obliged to make a decision on this.

The NRL are being neutral. They looked at the arguments on both sides and decided that Turner was contraced to the Titans.

Do you think the NRL should have sided with the Storm?

Read my previous post about who the NRL should side with if Turner was the one being shafted.

 

[philstorm]

The Storm are not the victims. And I don't think you understand that the NRL are obliged to make a decision on this.

The NRL are being neutral. They looked at the arguments on both sides and decided that Turner was contraced to the Titans.

Do you think the NRL should have sided with the Storm?

Read my previous post about who the NRL should side with if Turner was the one being shafted.

I never said that I thought the Storm were 'victims', nor did I say that I think the NRL should have sided with the Storm, I just say that I think it's somewhat misguided and frankly, stupid, for a governing body to take sides with a particular club, even with the possibility that the law courts may rule in favour of the other club.

 

[Willow]

LOL. So the NRL should butt out of the management the competition it runs?
Not very realistic Philly and if don't mind me saying, it smacks of desperation.

And I can't help but feel that this is playing the victim. Sorry, but that's the message.

Plus I never said you said the NRL should have sided with the Storm. I asked the question: Do you think the NRL should have sided with the Storm?
Yes or no?

They obviously had to decide one way or the other. You said yourself, they are the governing body.
The NRL register the contracts. They run the competition.

So who do they side with?

 

[philstorm]

LOL. So the NRL should butt out of the management the competition it runs?
Not very realistic Philly and if don't mind me saying, it smacks of desperation.

Should they butt out of management? No. Should they butt out of contract disputes? Yes.

And I can't help but feel that this is playing the victim. Sorry, but that's the message.

Not really, I dont know how you seem to be getting that impression seeing how you appear to be taking any arguement from Storm supporters to be either 'desperate' or a 'plea for sympathy'.

Plus I never said you said the NRL should have sided with the Storm. I asked the question: Do you think the NRL should have sided with the Storm?
Yes or no?

No, I dont think they should side with the Storm. I agree morally that they should side with the Titans, but I think that, if this matter goes to court, that should be the be all and end all.

They obviously had to decide one way or the other. You said yourself, they are the governing body.

As I said, you cant really argue that morally (and probably technically too), the Titans are in the right. But if this matter goes to court, the NRL cant very well go against the verdict of a law court. I think they are setting themselves up for a nasty precedent if this matter goes to court, the Storm somehow win - yet the NRL decide to get involved and not heed the verdict of the court?

So who do they side with?

They side with whoever wins in court. ;-)

 

[Willow]

Should they butt out of management? No. Should they butt out of contract disputes? Yes.

But they register the contracts. so how can they butt out of any disputes?

It was OK for the Storm to want the NRL involved when they thought the contract hadn't been lodged in time.

You can't have it both ways.

Moreover, Turner this week has approached the NRL, apparently to seek a solution. Do the NRL tell Turner to bugger off? I mean according to you, they should butt out of this dispute.

You're putting forward an odd argument Philly.

Not really, I dont know how you seem to be getting that impression seeing how you appear to be taking any arguement from Storm supporters to be either 'desperate' or a 'plea for sympathy'.

Any..as in I've got it in for Storm supporters? LOL.
I think you'll find that's an exaggeration. But hey, I'm sure someone will take that to heart too.

Some Storm supporters are being rational about it, but others are carrying on like pork chops, like this wouldn't happen to any other club - and that the NRL are being really really unfair to the poor Storm, and dragging poor Steve Turner away from his homeland, his love, and his passion. A human tragedy. LOL. The stuff of soapies. Surely I jest? Unfortunately, that what some people think. Takes all kinds I guess.
There's a number of posts where Storm supporters are playing the victim. The Storm website was also playing it up... with all those heart-tugging Herald headlines. An official website that looked more like tabloid gossip mag. Do you want to revisit all that?
Or do think no one on the Storm side are playing the victim card?

No, I dont think they should side with the Storm. I agree morally that they should side with the Titans, but I think that, if this matter goes to court, that should be the be all and end all.

It hasn't gone to court yet. They can't can't butt out of something which hasn't happened. And besides, they'll be part of any court proceedings.. despite what you say.

All the NRL can do is talk on behalf of the competition which they control. If they say they will not register the Turner/Storm contract, then Turner and the Storm (my presumption) will have to sue the NRL. Do the NRL keep butting out... even when they are being taken to court themselves?

In any case, in the majority of disputes, they are sorted out prior to it going to court. Presumably this is the hope and aim of all parties in this matter. People try to avoid court as they are long and expensive affairs.

Your argument is that the NRL should butt out and leave the Titans the Storm to duke it out. If that happened, then it would almost certainly go to court and the NRL would cop flak for not intervening.

But you're also saying that the NRL are right in siding with Titans. But you think they should butt out at the same time... and misrepresenting the words. 'governing body' along the way. You seem to be contradicting yourself, and quite frankly, I have no idea what you base your argument on.

As I said, you cant really argue that morally (and probably technically too), the Titans are in the right. But if this matter goes to court, the NRL cant very well go against the verdict of a law court. I think they are setting themselves up for a nasty precedent if this matter goes to court, the Storm somehow win - yet the NRL decide to get involved and not heed the verdict of the court?

If it went to court, the Storm wouldn't win. so its a moot point. With respect, your argument seems to be slipping into hypotheticals and guesswork. But OK, we'll entertain the notion.

Are you asking me if the NRL are law abiding? The NRL have to obey the law like any organisation, but they can also appeal the decision. That's their right within the law.

It could drag on for a long time with Turner's future remaining in limbo, and all negotiations outside of those legal boundaries being suspended.

Talking about nasty precedents (real, not imagine), the main concern is that a player thinks he can walk away from a legally binding contract.

They side with whoever wins in court. ;-)

I would be surprised if it got to court.

 

[0neye]

Judge Oneye says let the homo go
-_$