MEDIA RELEASE re: Steve Turner

[El Diablo]

Searle stated that Waldron actually rang and congratulated him on getting Turner

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20816488-2722,00.html

"On June 7, he rang to congratulate me on signing Steve Turner. Later he signed the kid with the full knowledge that he had come to an agreement with us."

 

[cyberdj]

There have been sexual assault allegations against Melbourne Storm players. Do you want to talk about that?

I would, but as a previous post (referring to other allegations of sexual assault) was removed, when it never even stated any particular club (and it could of been a few different clubs), I would not dare to upset the powers-that-be.

In August, Turner was on the radio saying how much he was looking forward to playing on the Gold Coast. 24 hours later, Turner announced he had signed with the Storm (no mention of compassionate grounds). The Storm and Turner knew exactly what was going on.

And are you 100% certain that his statement was live? How easy is it for a media outlet to use excerpts from an interview, say 3 months prior?

And again, a contract doesn't require a signature to be legally binding. It is naive to think otherwise. If it can proven that the agreement took place (which it can in this case), then a contract has been made.

Yes I agree an agreement took place, so now he's tied to them regardless that the written contract may of had a clause slipped in that he would not agree to once he'd had a chance to read it? Now obviously there doesn't appear to be, but what if? Say the Titans stuck a clause in to the contract that he must get Man of the Match, in at least half of the games he plays in or lose half his annual salary. And don't tell me that kind of sneaky thing doesn't happen, I live in the real world...
And if the paper contract was sent to Turner the day after the agreement, why was it still not signed three months later? Either his management is incompetent, or there were details in the contract that were deemed unacceptable to Turner, which according to your post, he will just have to live with because he agreed to sign with them. Because he agreed, the Titans can do what they like, they could take a couple of zero's off of the remuneration figures, they could make him play in pink boots. All it will take to make the 'contract' null and void is one little thing that Turner's lawyer can say (and prove) is unfair.

 

[El Diablo]

lol

it's now a media conspiracy :crazy:

 

[Willow]

lol. Its like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

I would, but as a previous post (referring to other allegations of sexual assault) was removed, when it never even stated any particular club (and it could of been a few different clubs), I would not dare to upset the powers-that-be.

Oh I'm sure you can discuss it without being a lad. Give it a go...

Tell me how you can deride other clubs because of assault allegations, but can excuse the Melbourne Storm when they have been subjected to similar allegations...?

And talking of allegations against players, who's your favourite AFL club?

 

[cyberdj]

Tell me how you can deride other clubs because of assault allegations, but can excuse the Melbourne Storm when they have been subjected to similar allegations...?

And talking of allegations against players, who's your favourite AFL club?

I don't excuse Melbourne Storm, they could of been one of the clubs I didn't specifically refer to. And if the Storm were to be removed from the competition (not that I'd want it to happen) it should be for the far worse crime of sexual assault, not a contract dispute. The point is A CONTRACT DISPUTE IS NOT A GOOD ENOUGH REASON TO REMOVE A CLUB FROM THE COMPETITION.

AFL? No thanks... I'd rather watch a Country Aussie Rules football match where they have some passion, allow a decent hip and shoulder, and the occassional punch on.

Go ahead make your comments about trainwrecks etc, unless you have access to all the information on the issue, (and I find that highly unlikely) your basing your opinions on the information that is fed to you by the media outlets (and everyone of them has an agenda), and the information distributed by the organisations involved. The complete facts aren't out in the public domain, and probably never will. It's far too easy these days to manipulate the truth (not by lying but by not highlighting facts that don't help your cause) for your own gain, ie the Children Overboard issue a few years back.
In my experience it is NEVER Black or White, it's various shades of grey.

 

[Willow]

I don't excuse Melbourne Storm, they could of been one of the clubs I didn't specifically refer to.

Sounds like you were excluding Melbourne when you said:
I'd rather have a team in the comp that tries to sign someone (albiet a little underhandedly), than a club that allows it players to take part in 'alleged' gang rapes and then 'help' cover it up.

Looks like you have one rule for other clubs, but a different rule for Melbourne.

Perhaps yo just forgot that Melbourne have been under scrutiny as well.

Go ahead make your comments about trainwrecks

Thanks, I will.
We've had a few whacky Storm apologists, and you're looking like joining those most likely to go off the rails.

unless you have access to all the information on the issue, (and I find that highly unlikely) your basing your opinions on the information that is fed to you by the media outlets (and everyone of them has an agenda), and the information distributed by the organisations involved.

LOL.
There it is again... its all a conspiracy. Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Lets get this straight...
You're saying Turner was misrepresented by the media? That he never spoke on the radio when reported?

He has spoken to the media on numerous occasions since June, and continues to do so. Has someone switched the tapes?

What do you think of Turner's pleas for compassion? Has he been misrepresented there as well?

The complete facts aren't out in the public domain, and probably never will.

I know that, and I've heard more than what the media has said. But obligations dictate that we stick to the reported facts.

It's far too easy these days to manipulate the truth (not by lying but by not highlighting facts that don't help your cause) for your own gain, ie the Children Overboard issue a few years back.

Comparing it to Children Overboard? :lol:
Someone should think of the children and I'm glad you're here to remind us.

And yes, the media can be a dirty business... especially when they don't say what you want to hear.

In my experience it is NEVER Black or White, it's various shades of grey.

OK... so you do think Turner has been misrepresented in the media and its a big conspiracy.

Can you give specific instances when this has happened?
Or is it right across the board?

 

[cyberdj]

OK... so you do think Turner has been misrepresented in the media and its a big conspiracy.

Go back and read my previous posts in full, I never stated that 'Turner has been misrepresented in the media and its a big conspiracy'. I suggested it was possible due to the media having it's own agenda. Some people believe whatever they see on TV or in the papers, I was trying to highlight the fact that the media outlets sometimes only use half-truths and then portray that as 100% fact.

As for your other comments, I used an example to highlight my argument.
(Why would I choose an example where 1 player had one allegation against them [that I know of] when I could use an example where multiple players had multiple allegations against them, it is much more effective for my argument). Just like the media, I tried to put my spin on things, just like you do by picking bits and pieces from posts and just commenting on those little sections. Forgoing the true intent of the original post to put your spin on things.

I'm not a Melbourne apologist, I love my team, I want them to do well, I expect them to do almost anything (I draw the line at Tonya Harding type instances) to achieve that.

There are so many variables to this issue, and (maybe not for you with your firmly held opinion) I wanted to highlight to others that it may not be exactly as the media has stated, even though it is probably very close.

 

[cyberdj]

Comparing it to Children Overboard?
Someone should think of the children and I'm glad you're here to remind us.

There you go with picking things out and trying to make something of nothing, I didn't compare this issue to the Children Overboard, I was making a point about how a story can be portrayed incorrectly by the media/government.

 

[Willow]

Trying to interpret your meanings is a task in itself.

Go back and read my previous posts in full, I never stated that 'Turner has been misrepresented in the media and its a big conspiracy'. I suggested it was possible due to the media having it's own agenda.

LOL. Semantics... the last refuge.

It was you who is of the view that a radio report was re-hashed to make it sound live.
Your words:
And are you 100% certain that his statement was live? How easy is it for a media outlet to use excerpts from an interview, say 3 months prior?
- cyberdj 29/11/2006

So, do you still believe this is the case?
Yes or no.

And try and answer without the side stepping

Some people believe whatever they see on TV or in the papers, I was trying to highlight the fact that the media outlets sometimes only use half-truths and then portray that as 100% fact.

You make it sound like some new revelation. Maybe it is for you... I don't know.

Look, Turner is no slouch when it comes to crying to the media (he has contradicted himself as well). He seems pretty happy to join in the PR war.

Perhaps you should refer your concerns to the Melbourne Storm's website and its tabloid headlines, for a while there it looked more like Womens Weekly.

Unless offcourse your righteousness only extends to questioning those reports you don't agree with.

But to the crux of the issue...

Turner said he wanted to play on the Gold Coast and agreed to terms.
He then did a backflip. The Storm management got in his ear.
When the Titans said they wouldn't grant a release, the sob stories started.

Thems the facts.

Blame it on the media if you like, but there is no denying that Turner (and the Storm) has decided, late in the piece, to try and get out of an agreement. Thereby stuffing people around and turning the negotiations into a media circus.

As for your other comments, I used an example to highlight my argument.
(Why would I choose an example where 1 player had one allegation against them [that I know of] when I could use an example where multiple players had multiple allegations against them, it is much more effective for my argument). Just like the media, I tried to put my spin on things, just like you do by picking bits and pieces from posts and just commenting on those little sections. Forgoing the true intent of the original post to put your spin on things.

lol. You probably believe that too.
I'm just asking the question. You're avoiding that question.

As for picking pieces from posts, I address all your 'points'. You're far more selective in your replies.

I'm not a Melbourne apologist, I love my team, I want them to do well, I expect them to do almost anything (I draw the line at Tonya Harding type instances) to achieve that.

You're allowed to be a one-eyed supporter. Don't be shy about it.
(*wonders why he bought up Tonya Harding*)

There are so many variables to this issue, and (maybe not for you with your firmly held opinion) I wanted to highlight to others that it may not be exactly as the media has stated, even though it is probably very close.

Well thanks for sharing your wisdom.

I can assure you that even us morons can be quite adept at reading between the lines of media reports, with or without your assistance, and despite your own very apparent preconceptions.

 

[cyberdj]

It was you who is of the view that a radio report was re-hashed to make it sound live.
Your words:
And are you 100% certain that his statement was live? How easy is it for a media outlet to use excerpts from an interview, say 3 months prior?
- cyberdj 29/11/2006

So, do you still believe this is the case?
Yes or no.

And try and answer without the side stepping

In all probabilities, it probably was live, but I don't know with 100% accuracy, therefore I wouldn't use it as the crux of my argument without definite proof that it is FACT.

Look, Turner is no slouch when it comes to crying to the media (he has contradicted himself as well). He seems pretty happy to join in the PR war.

I don't deny that...

Perhaps you should refer your concerns to the Melbourne Storm's website and its tabloid headlines, for a while there it looked more like Womens Weekly.

I don't think much of their website, or the people that run it, making suggestions to them would more than likely fall on deaf ears.

Turner said he wanted to play on the Gold Coast and agreed to terms.
He then did a backflip. The Storm management got in his ear.
When the Titans said they wouldn't grant a release, the sob stories started.

Thems the facts.

Blame it on the media if you like, but there is no denying that Turner (and the Storm) has decided, late in the piece, to try and get out of an agreement. Thereby stuffing people around and turning the negotiations into a media circus.

Yep, from where I sit, that seems accurate.

lol. You probably believe that too.
I'm just asking the question. You're avoiding that question.

Which question am I avoiding? Specify and I'll answer as best I can.

As for picking pieces from posts, I address all your 'points'. You're far more selective in your replies.

You addressed ALL my points? You sure about that?

(*wonders why he bought up Tonya Harding*)

I originally typed that I'd expect Storm to do whatever it takes to be successful... but I don't want them to hire some hitman to take out two-thirds of an opposition team (regardless of how much I hate those other teams.)

Well thanks for sharing your wisdom.

Your welcome. . It's a pleasure to try and enlighten one such as yourself.

I can assure you that even us morons can be quite adept at reading between the lines of media reports, with or without your assistance, and despite your own very apparent preconceptions.

Careful using big words like adept and preconceptions, you don't want to confuse us 'morons'.
I fully agree that Turner and Storm haven't done the 'honorable' thing, and you may be surprised by my actual preconceptions, however I like to argue for the sake of arguing, even if I'm on the losing side. Debating is fun, especially mass debates.

 

[Cloud9]

are all Storm fans this stupid?

fair dinkum

Do all titans fans have double standards?

 

[El Diablo]

who's the Titans fan?

what double standards?

If you try and compare Pulletua to Turner then you are stupider than what i first thought.

 

[Cloud9]

Try and keep it in perspective... if you can.

I have the bigger picture in view

By your opinion. By my opinion he has acted in a professional and considered manner ever since Steve Turner reneged on his agreement.

Using bully boy tactics, treating Turner like meat, calling him a "kid?"Very professional.

He never claimed to be. Who is saying Searle is the NRL?

Thats right he never claimed to be. I was saying he is acting like the NRL.

Nope...in this case, the principal objective is to stop players walking out on contracts, and stop other clubs gazumping each other after a contract has been agreed to. The game would be in a terrible mess if that was allow to happen in an unchecked manner.

You're assuming there was a proper contract in the first place. I emphasise the word "proper" with all the finer details spelled out and signed by both parties.

You mean the Titans should do as they're told?

You mean Turner should do as he is told?

If mutual respect is the criteria, then the Storm should pack their bags now. They have shown almost zero respect for the Titans in all this.

If mutual respect is the criteria, then the Titans should pack their bags now. They have shown almost zero respect for the Turner in all this.

That would be the easy way out. The hard way is to take a stand. In the case of Turner and the Storm, it is a concept you're struggling with.

The hard way is to for Searle to swallow his ego. In the case of Titans and it is a concept you're struggling with.

No its not. Its fundamental to this.
Players should not think they can walk out on contracts. And clubs should not think they can get away with signing players who are contracted elsewhere.

You're assuming Turner was properly contracted.

No smoke screens, those are the cold hard facts as to what is happening.

The hard facts are..this should go to the courts.

Just repeating yourself now, as I am. See previous point.

You know i'm right.

Again, refer to previous point.

ditto.

And statistical evidence? LOL! There's plenty of statistical evidence of players sticking by their contracts... there's one humdinger of a precedent. But its a little hard to produce proof for things that will happen in the future. However, the next time this looks like happening, we can assume that the Storm (and other clubs) will think twice before they think they can sign players who are contracted to the Gold Coast.

You have no stats.

Plus there's no scare tactics going from the Titans end. Geez, they offered him a 1 year deal just the other day... very concilliatory. Was that a scare tactic?

Stick to the topic - precedents

I believe Steve Turner is the prime example here.

Again, you're assuming.

What's your point? The Titans have released Puletua this week so they are not adverse to the idea if the circumstances warrant it.
Are you saying that the Titans are compelled to release Turner because he reneged on the contract? If that's what you're saying, its a bizarre argument.

Double standards by Titans

Yes yes... as you keep saying. I think we understand what you mean. But to say it defies logic is ignoring all the other factors - your argument is locked into a single process of forever yielding to the player's demands. Hardly good for the game.

It makes good sense to release someone who is unhappy. Take Walker for example. Why keep an unhappy employee?

If you think its all about keeping Turner happy, then I remind you that a man is only good as his word. In the long run, I hope that Turner will benefit from this experience.

How stupid can the Titans be by not getting the finer details confirmed in writing. Oral contracts are fine but there's too many grey areas.

 

[Cloud9]

who's the Titans fan?

what double standards?

If you try and compare Pulletua to Turner then you are stupider than what i first thought.

Given you're obvious dislike for the Storm, i think i can relegate your opinions to the gutter.

Were you at the meetings between Searle and Pelletua/Turner . Explain what the difference is.

 

[El Diablo]

yup, stupider than i first thought

congratulations

 

[Cranky]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20851128-11088,00.html

Looks like he is staying

I wonder who the Storm will offer up though.

 

[Willow]

LOL. Looks like Cloudy has devolved into simple trolling.

I have the bigger picture in view

Nope... you've lost all perspective. Making personal assumptions about those who are debating with with you proves that.

Using bully boy tactics, treating Turner like meat, calling him a "kid?"Very professional.

Is that it? lol
Turner is a kid. You need to grow an extra layer is that offends you.

Thats right he never claimed to be. I was saying he is acting like the NRL.

No you didnt, And no he's not.

You're assuming there was a proper contract in the first place. I emphasise the word "proper" with all the finer details spelled out and signed by both parties.

I'm not assuming anything. Read this:
1.The NRL has recognised the Titans-Turner agreement.
2. A contract does not have to be signed to be legally binding.
Why are these facts so hard for you to accept?

You mean Turner should do as he is told?

He wasn't forced into agreeing to terms with the Titans. And he should have stuck to the agreement he made.

The question I asked: Should the Titans do as they're told?
Answer... if you can.

If mutual respect is the criteria, then the Titans should pack their bags now. They have shown almost zero respect for the Turner in all this.

lol. You really need to write your own stuff. I have countered your arguments. Replacing my words in this manner is poor debating and the stuff of simpletons.

Shooting you down isnt the prime objective here, but you insist so here it is again:
The Titans made an agreement with Turner in good faith. It was the Storm who instigated the bad blood when they took Turner aside. It was Turner who acted unprofessionally when he reneged on an agreement.
Do you understand this?
Answer... if you can.

The hard way is to for Searle to swallow his ego. In the case of Titans and it is a concept you're struggling with.

Not interested in debating who has the biggest ego. I think there's plenty of that going around. If that's your 'point' then its hardly valid.

You're assuming Turner was properly contracted.

Again, not assuming. The NRL are satisfied that Turner is contracted to the Titans and only the Titans can release him from that contract.
Has this fact made first contact with you yet?

The hard facts are..this should go to the courts.

That's not a fact. That's an assumption.

You know i'm right.

No, you're totally wrong. As shown many times now.

You have no stats.

Are you saying there is no evidence of players sticking by their contracts?
Answer, with an answer... if you can.

Stick to the topic - precedents

Turner being offered a one year deal is very much on topic. Was that a scare tactic?
Answer... if you can.

Again, you're assuming.

Again, not assuming anything. Turner has backed out of a contract with the Titans. A contract that the NRL has recognised. Its a fact.
Are you in denial about this?

Double standards by Titans

I asked:
Are you saying that the Titans are compelled to release Turner because he reneged on the contract?
Answer... if you can.

It makes good sense to release someone who is unhappy. Take Walker for example. Why keep an unhappy employee?

We've already established that this is the core of your argument. The mouthpiece of the Melbourne Storm also pushes the same emotive line.
That being the case, what about that old concept of a man being as good as his word? Does that have any value to you?
Answer... if you can.

How stupid can the Titans be by not getting the finer details confirmed in writing. Oral contracts are fine but there's too many grey areas.

That's not as stupid as signing a player who was already contracted to another club.

 

[Kingytek]

Zing.....

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/NRL-battle-over-Turner-to-continue/2006/12/01/1164777781522.html

NRL battle over Turner to continue
December 1, 2006 - 4:49PM

The tug-of-war over Melbourne winger Steve Turner looks set to continue after Storm chief executive Brian Waldron denied reports a player swap had been struck with the Gold Coast Titans.

Waldron met with Titans managing director Michael Searle on Thursday and several reports have surfaced since claiming they had agreed a swap that would allow Turner to remain in Melbourne if the Storm provided the Titans with a player of similar ability.

But Waldron slammed the reports, saying people were "jumping the gun".

"No-one from Melbourne Storm has mentioned anything about swapping any players and when we've got something to say on the matter, we'll say it publicly," Waldron said.

"All I've said is I'm very happy to work with Michael Searle to try to alleviate the stress of the situation off Steve Turner and everyone else.

"All that came out of the meeting is that we'd have to continue to work together.

"We've both got ideas, we've just got to come to a common idea."

Turner agreed to join the Gold Coast for three years earlier this year but had a change of heart and re-signed with Melbourne.

Despite this Waldron says he doesn't believe the Titans should be owed compensation if Turner was to stay with the Storm.

"For what?" Waldron asked.

"People need to understand the rules, he hasn't signed a contract, he never signed a thing.

"His manager indicated to (the Titans) that he'd go and Steve changed his mind."

But Searle said on Thursday there was a legally-binding agreement and the NRL previously indicated its believes Turner should honour his agreement with the Gold Coast.

"From our point of view it's still very much he's got an agreement with us," Searle said.

"If we do come to a settlement between Melbourne and us then he'll play in Melbourne, but if we don't come to a settlement he's got a decision to make if he comes to play for the Gold Coast or sits out the next three years."

Searle said Turner had received his first pay cheque from the club this week, minus fines for missing training.

"He's only been fined for the last three days, but those fines will be ongoing now. So he's got his first payment, less a couple of thousand dollars."

An end to the Saga seems no closer despite Thursday's meeting, with Waldron saying the Storm would take no immediate action.

"There is no next step and no timeline, we'll sit and wait like we have said for a number of weeks and work through things slowly," he said.

"David Riolo (Turner's manager) is away for the next ten days so unfortunately there may not be a (solution) until he returns."

also here http://www.leagueunlimited.com/article.asp?ID=12560

 

[El Diablo]

is Turner returning all the money to the GC?

if he isn't one would assume he has accepted that he has a deal/contract with them