None Of Corey Parkers Business....

[BunniesMan]

Be interesting to see exactly what happens with Inglis come origin time. He has lied to his Melbourne team mates about wanting to go home on compassionate grounds To QLD with his missus and has pissed the Broncs players off. Wonder whether they will say "Nope we do not want him here this year". Could be interesting.

Slater and Smith said they have no problem with him, wish him the best and want him to be happy.

The compassionate ground bs was bs for everyone involved all along. Do you think they wouldn't have released him if he didn't have that excuse? They released because of the salary cap, not because they have such a kind and compassionate heart.

 

[Loudstrat]

Corey Parker said the right thing.

And besides, it's none of Mundine's business either. Parker was in the right - and speaks for just about everyone who is still not holdig on to the belief that Inglis will do the right and rational thing.

IF inglis is still around and selectad for Origin, I cannot wait to see the reception he'll get from the Bronco crew.

 

[stormbati]

I think he has every right to an opnion

contract law says Brisbane could force inglis to play for them if they wanted
him to

but who would want that cheating liar at their club I certainly woundnt

Not really, he's still contracted to Melbourne.

 

[The 18th Man]

Well Lockyer, Smith and Slater who are 3 of the most high profile QLD players have all wished Inglis well. I think he'll be very welcome in the QLD lockerroom in 2011.


Just because he could have said something more critical of GI doesn't mean he should have. Anyone can say nice things during the easy times, it takes a real man to be dignified in difficult situations.


People that believe that should come into the 21st century. There's been plenty of examples of clubs backing out of handshake agreements when something better comes along. This is 2010, if you don't have a signature you don't have much of anything.

1. Where did I say Greg Inglis wouldn't be welcomed back to the QLD team in 2011? Greg Inglis will be warmly accepted as a member of the QLD team though I'd bet each way that he lost some respect by his peers in that team in the way he has conducted himself in this instance. Just my opinion.

2. In my opinion, Lockyer could have been more forthright as captain of the Brisbane Broncos as Corey Parker has done. I understand the limitations on the Brisbane, QLD and Australian captain given his standing in the game, again, I don't agree with the softly, softly comments he made. I'd prefer my captain to come out and speak on behalf of the team. He may well have, I just don't buy it.

3. No, people who believe that a man's word is his honor can continue to believe in that BunniesMan. It's their right too and a belief that still runs true today for many. It may not be your cup of tea, but again, your opinion is not the be all end all as you seemingly think it is. I am not concerned with "plenty of examples of clubs backing out out handshake agreements" as that doesn't in my opinion make the situation right in my view.

Come down from the Ivory Tower BunniesMan, it's a lot nicer down here with us lesser beings.

 

[dontbro]

Antilag....you are quite right in your posts regarding contract law in this country.

However, if there was a legally enforceable contract between the Broncos and Inglis, the Broncos can seek an injunction which, if granted, would disallow Inglis from practicing and earning an income as a sportsperson in this country for anyone other than the Broncos for however long the contract term was.

So, yes, while equity will not compel a person to be a slave to a contract of service to an employer, sportspeople, like actors, musicians, and television presenters, are in a special category, and equity can restrain them by way of injunction from offering their unique services (in Inglis' case, as an athlete) to another employer. He could work at red rooster, though, because he's not utilising his athletic skills there.

That's essentially what the Bulldogs were going to do with Sonny Bill.

Don't ask me for any citations, just take my word for it.

 

[The 18th Man]

Antilag....you are quite right in your posts regarding contract law in this country.

However, if there was a legally enforceable contract between the Broncos and Inglis, the Broncos can seek an injunction which, if granted, would disallow Inglis from practicing and earning an income as a sportsperson in this country for anyone other than the Broncos for however long the contract term was.

So, yes, while equity will not compel a person to be a slave to a contract of service to an employer, sportspeople, like actors, musicians, and television presenters, are in a special category, and equity can restrain them by way of injunction from offering their unique services (in Inglis' case, as an athlete) to another employer. He could work at red rooster, though, because he's not utilising his athletic skills there.

That's essentially what the Bulldogs were going to do with Sonny Bill.

Don't ask me for any citations, just take my word for it.

Nice post. Thanks for this.

 

[dontbro]

Nice post. Thanks for this.

No problems. Anytime.

 

[Lambretta]

Inglis has never played for Broncos...

What about Justin Hodges... from roosters wanting to leave mid season...

What about it? Justin Hodges was homesick for Brisbane and his relationship with his Sydney based girlfriend had broken down. He felt isolated from his family and asked for a release back to his home town.

Thing is Hodges ASKED the Roosters and we released him. I certainly don't harbour any ill will towards him for it. I merely dispise him for being a Bronco


Look - I don't have a problem where Inglis goes. It's up to him to choose the best place for him to play and he has his own reasons for wanting to do so. They can be financial, emotional or geographical. I don't give a sh*t. Inglis has the RIGHT TO SIGN FOR WHOEVER HE WANTS. In that respect, you are correct.

But having said that, Corey Parker ALSO HAS THE RIGHT to make comments on players and their decisions when they directly affect him and the club he plays for - providing he doesn't slander Inglis or make unfounded accusations.

His comment - remarking on the fact that he only wants to play with people who genuinely want to play at the club is a fair one. After all, Rugby League is the one sport where you cannot afford to have even one passenger.