Non-eels footy stuff

[Eelementary]

Couldn't Mannah have one when/if he reaches 300 games?

Apparently not - one of the conditions is to have played regular Origin or Test football.

 

[Eelementary]

It should be a no-brainer - love him or not, Tim Mannah is a cleanskin on and off the field, and a terrific ambassador for both our club, and the sport itself.

He thoroughly deserves a testimonial, but apparently, he's not eligible for one.

 

[JohnStoppafarty]

merkins!

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Apparently not - one of the conditions is to have played regular Origin or Test football.

The NRL: making up whatever shit suits our purpose at the time.

 

[Noise]

Apparently not - one of the conditions is to have played regular Origin or Test football.

Are these conditions written anywhere on the NRL website? I could only find this article (Herald as opposed to Kent - Telegraph)

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/bi...criteria-for-testimonial-20170901-gy93z5.html

which states there are some discretionary measures that includes the players representative achievements. Until the NRL release something I wouldnt take the Telegraph or the Herald's word on the issue

 

[JohnStoppafarty]

Are these conditions written anywhere on the NRL website? I could only find this article (Herald as opposed to Kent - Telegraph)

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/bi...criteria-for-testimonial-20170901-gy93z5.html

which states there are some discretionary measures that includes the players representative achievements. Until the NRL release something I wouldnt take the Telegraph or the Herald's word on the issue

Like the Telecrap and the Herald, the NRL makes shit up as they go along. What the actual go is could change on any day from any 3 of those disorganisations.

 

[Noise]

Like the Telecrap and the Herald, the NRL makes shit up as they go along. What the actual go is could change on any day from any 3 of those disorganisations.

Yep. And Kent's article on the weekend referencing Sutton and Mannah not getting testimonials (even though he doesnt know for sure) does its intended job of outraging a couple of the biggest and looniest supporter bases in sydney

 

[Gary Gutful]

Yep. And Kent's article on the weekend referencing Sutton and Mannah not getting testimonials (even though he doesnt know for sure) does its intended job of outraging a couple of the biggest and looniest supporter bases in sydney

I’m outraged that you would call us loonies.

 

[Eelementary]

Are these conditions written anywhere on the NRL website? I could only find this article (Herald as opposed to Kent - Telegraph)

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/bi...criteria-for-testimonial-20170901-gy93z5.html

which states there are some discretionary measures that includes the players representative achievements. Until the NRL release something I wouldnt take the Telegraph or the Herald's word on the issue

James Hooper said it on NRL 360.

I haven't been able to find anything in writing - but remember that this is the NRL, after all...

 

[Eelementary]

Yep. And Kent's article on the weekend referencing Sutton and Mannah not getting testimonials (even though he doesnt know for sure) does its intended job of outraging a couple of the biggest and looniest supporter bases in sydney

But why wouldn't we be outraged?

Tim Mannah has been a perfect ambassador for the game, and the club. No off-field dramas, no thuggery on the field, and a remarkable example for everyone in terms of coping with heartbreak with dignity and class.

He's not eligible for a testimonial, but a dude who deliberately signed 2 contracts (not to mention had a cry at the ref, whinging that his team was penalised, while Alex McKinnon was lying on the ground with a broken neck) gets one?

I'm a loony, true - but the NRL is f**ked, tbh.

 

[Noise]

But why wouldn't we be outraged?

Tim Mannah has been a perfect ambassador for the game, and the club. No off-field dramas, no thuggery on the field, and a remarkable example for everyone in terms of coping with heartbreak with dignity and class.

He's not eligible for a testimonial, but a dude who deliberately signed 2 contracts (not to mention had a cry at the ref, whinging that his team was penalised, while Alex McKinnon was lying on the ground with a broken neck) gets one?

I'm a loony, true - but the NRL is f**ked, tbh.

I'm not disagreeing that Mannah deserves it. I'm saying we don't even know if the NRL will/won't allow it so it's not worth getting outraged about until we do.

 

[Gary Gutful]

[INSERT TODD GREENBURG PHOTO]

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Paul Kent cops a lot of shit, but he's on NRL 360 now, and he's making a good point.

He's upset that John Sutton and Tim Mannah cannot have testimonial matches for their clubs, but Cam Smith and Thurston can.

Kent reckons (rightly) that Smith is no cleanskin (2 separate contracts while cheating the cap), and Thurston had his issues as a younger player, but Tim Mannah has always carried himself with class on and off the field, and is denied a testimonial by the NRL.

It's not often I agree with Kenty , but he's spot on.

Who, apart from Kent, actually said that Mannah has been denied a testimonial by the NRL? Surely the problem at the moment is that he has only played about 200 games, and when he has played 250 he will be eligible? If he plays 2 more years, he'll make it.

 

[Eelementary]

Who, apart from Kent, actually said that Mannah has been denied a testimonial by the NRL? Surely the problem at the moment is that he has only played about 200 games, and when he has played 250 he will be eligible? If he plays 2 more years, he'll make it.

It was James Hooper.

The eligibility issue centres around the fact that Mannah has not played enough rep footy.

That's the cause of the "outrage".

 

[Gary Gutful]

Just another bullshit, dodgy way of trying to remunerate marquee players.

TPAs, testimonials...it’s a completely unregulated rort.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

It was James Hooper.

The eligibility issue centres around the fact that Mannah has not played enough rep footy.

That's the cause of the "outrage".

So, has anyone from the NRL said that the rep footy issue would preclude Mannah from being eligible?

Surely the simple fact that Mannah has played 205 games, and needs to play 250 (according to the page you linked) is the obvious sticking point.

These blokes have a long history of just making shit up.

 

[strider]

I’m outraged that you would call us loonies.

Outrageous, though not entirely inaccurate

 

[Eelementary]

So, has anyone from the NRL said that the rep footy issue would preclude Mannah from being eligible?

Surely the simple fact that Mannah has played 205 games, and needs to play 250 (according to the page you linked) is the obvious sticking point.

These blokes have a long history of just making shit up.

I didn't link anything...

There are a number of factors that determine whether a player would be eligible for a testimonial or not:

* clean image on and off the field
* rep footy
* games played
* standing in the game.

You'd assume that by the time Mannah amasses 250 games, that he would tick three of the four boxes - but the sticking point is the lack of rep football.

The NRL might well surprise us all and allow a testimonial for Tim one day - however, given their history of gutless, inconsistent, and incompetent management, I won't be holding my breath...

 

[strider]

So, has anyone from the NRL said that the rep footy issue would preclude Mannah from being eligible?

Surely the simple fact that Mannah has played 205 games, and needs to play 250 (according to the page you linked) is the obvious sticking point.

These blokes have a long history of just making shit up.

So you are happy to believe the dodgy articles 250 game claim, but not the rep footy claim?

 

[strider]

Why cant there just be testimonials all over the place? .... what is the problem with allowing anyone such a thing?

Ive never heard of a league player having one in my time .... its just some horseshit their managers and clubs came up with to line their pockets even more