Parramatta Eels sign Josh Papalii for 2014

[Raider_69]

this is a post i made in the raiders forum about the prospect of legal action:

Ultimately its the same dance we did, the same dance souths did and the same dance the dragons did. State you'll explore all legal avenues but ultimately do nothing.

Like us and the others in similar cases, i expect the Eels might have a case, and the lawyers might say "we can win this case" but common sense always prevails and that common sense is, what is the outcomes of a successful legal challenge? Forcing a player to play for your club, in a salary cap era who doesnt want to be there. And thats where the lawyer talk ends and where the common sense begins and legal action ceases.

There isnt any achievable outcome that can help the Eels, and there certainly isnt an outcome worth risking LOSING the case and having to not only admit defeat on a player but then have to pay court costs of a frivolous case. All parties were aware of this round 13 rule, and i find it hard to imagine under those circumstance the courts will accept that the Eels had a legally binding contract when they were aware that the governing body which registers those contracts would not ratify it until a certain date.

They'll stomp the feet, they'll do the song and dance and then move on quietly.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

I've already moved on.

 

[strider]

I've already moved on.

where have you moved onto mate? ... somewhere nice and sunny?

 

[strider]

this is a post i made in the raiders forum about the prospect of legal action:

Ultimately its the same dance we did, the same dance souths did and the same dance the dragons did. State you'll explore all legal avenues but ultimately do nothing.

Like us and the others in similar cases, i expect the Eels might have a case, and the lawyers might say "we can win this case" but common sense always prevails and that common sense is, what is the outcomes of a successful legal challenge? Forcing a player to play for your club, in a salary cap era who doesnt want to be there. And thats where the lawyer talk ends and where the common sense begins and legal action ceases.

There isnt any achievable outcome that can help the Eels, and there certainly isnt an outcome worth risking LOSING the case and having to not only admit defeat on a player but then have to pay court costs of a frivolous case. All parties were aware of this round 13 rule, and i find it hard to imagine under those circumstance the courts will accept that the Eels had a legally binding contract when they were aware that the governing body which registers those contracts would not ratify it until a certain date.

They'll stomp the feet, they'll do the song and dance and then move on quietly.

yeah i agree totally .... nothing will happen .... it wouldn't be worth the money to get nowhere (or even if hell froze over, force a guy who doesn't want to be here play here)

 

[Raider_69]

I've already moved on.

And so you should. As has been said by club officals and players, you guys need guys committed to Parramatta, ready to dig their heels in to restore the club to the glory days of the 80's, just as we need guys ready and willing to help restore us to the glory days of the 90's.

Papalii is just not the guy for your club, so best spend on the cash on someone who is.
I honestly think this result is the best for Josh Papalii, and both clubs.

 

[Chipmunk]

So you're proposing round 15????????????


The problem is not so much the cooling off period - there is NO cooling off period. There is simply a clause in the contract that gives a "right of last reply" to the incumbent club. If they match money and convince the player to stay, then player can stay at his current club for the same cash.

This is a scenario which has never yet eventuated. No player has signed for another club, only to have his home club match money and him change his mind about leaving, and stay.
Surely we can see why it never eventuates?
I'll give you an example:
A lady is dating a man, she wants to get engaged, he doesn't propose. Eventually another man comes into the scene, woos her, wins her heart, and proposes, producing a bigger ring than the one she asked the first bloke for. She accepts his proposal. The first bloke suddenly tells her that she means the world to him, and that he'll buy an equally big ring and propose. But it's too late, her heart is elsewhere, she's gone.

Now obviously there's flaws in the analogy, but it helps us understand why the round 13 clause has never yet been successfully used. There are times that it's been talked about (eg Tony Williams and Parra) - but it doesn't happen. It's hard to find the required cash, and harder still to convince the player that they are actually part of your plans and you really really want them - they've moved on.


MAYBE Papali will change his mind and the Raiders will find the cash?

MAYBE he just will....3 hours later than your post by the looks of it

 

[Delboy]

The danger for the NRL in pursuing this matter, is that this is not the only rule that ultimately can be challenged. It could lead to actions on the salary cap etc, and put the overall landscape of the game open to legal challenges it has avoided for a long time.

Actually dont want this to happen, but it is a quite unnecessary rule, cant even remember why it was out in place, probably to appease someone like the Dogs or Roosters (joke)

 

[Chipmunk]

This carries more credibility than constant crap from Canberra.

How much credibility does it carry again?

 

[Snoochies]

I wouldn't stress, we have til round 13 :sarcasm:

 

[Chipmunk]

Anyway I don't think we're a joke because of this. He wants to stay in his hometown and is also an idiot who jumps at the chance of some money and spotlight. Honestly don't want a guy like that IMO

Raiders will lose a bunch of other young players now, in a few years time it could really be a 'was he worth it?' Case

Personally I think we are better off buying Croker and Williams from the Faids

 

[Raider_69]

I want to stress depsite wanting to stick it to a select few who gave me shit, i genuinely feel for you guys. As i said i would early in the piece if he back flips. It sucks. It's a horrible rule, im pleased we've exploited it but its a terrible rule, and i sincerely wish Parramatta all the best in future recruitment, Ricky Stuart was my child hood hero and i wish him nothing but success, including at Parra, so i hope you guys find some quality talent (as long as it doesnt come from the nations capitol) and become a quality team again.

on that note, i say ive made my "i told you so" point and shall bow out on that note.

 

[The Phelan Folly]

I want to stress depsite wanting to stick it to a select few who gave me shit, i genuinely feel for you guys. As i said i would early in the piece if he back flips. It sucks. It's a horrible rule, im pleased we've exploited it but its a terrible rule, and i sincerely wish Parramatta all the best in future recruitment, Ricky Stuart was my child hood hero and i wish him nothing but success, including at Parra, so i hope you guys find some quality talent (as long as it doesnt come from the nations capitol) and become a quality team again.

on that note, i say ive made my "i told you so" point and shall bow out on that note.

Yeah cool.you can f**k off,now. merkin.

 

[jimmy77au]

as I said on Twitter (in much shorter form) - and it seems from above that they are - Take the matter to court - not so much to make him come to the club - his heart won't be in it anyway - but to make a stand with other players - and more so their managers - to say - listen - We're not here to be used as a tool to gain more leverage on contracts with other clubs / your current club - you either sign with us because you want to - or you piss off. Legal action - in my opinion, would ward off those managers who like to suggest that parra offered so much to leverage more for their players.....

 

[Eelogical]

This makes Michael Cronins day as a player that much more special. His word was good enough to say I would be backing up next year. Not so today, even with a signed contract. In the end, Canberra coughed up more and we didn't get a player. Managers get the kudos, and the supporters get a reaming.

 

[Pazza]

You raiders fans knew how big a dog this Papalii guy was, I guess it's just taken us by surprise!

In hindsight a player of such low moral standards won't fit in at parramatta, you can keep this bloke!

 

[Tony Bongo]

Tony i know you have something against the current board however this just seems like an agenda on your part. We had a signed deal with the guy

If you read the article a "source" said

Quote:
A contract is a contract - we won't be letting him go without a fight
while an Eels spokeman(who if you look at the article on the Eels website you will see it's Ken Edwards said
Quote:
To say we are disappointed by Josh's decision to not see through his verbal and written agreements to join the Parramatta Eels next season is an understatement. We are building something special here and we are only interested in people who are strong and committed joining this organisation
Those 2 statements contradict each other and i'm inclined to believe our CEO over an unnamed "source"

I don't want to have something against the current board!
I don't want our fans getting membership packages at the last minute, I don't want them to sack coaches every second year, I don't want them to keep changing staff, I don't want them to throw away a million dollar a year sponsor that has been with us for a decade when they don't have someone to replace them and I don't want them to be making announcements until it's 100% done and dusted.
I'm not denying that I have issues with how our club is currently being managed but I can tell you that it frustrates the hell out of me. I also see a lot of great things they have done and if they could fix some of what I've mentioned above, I believe we really could have a successful club.

 

[Eelogical]

You raiders fans knew how big a dog this Papalii guy was, I guess it's just taken us by surprise!

In hindsight a player of such low moral standards won't fit in at parramatta, you can keep this bloke!

IMO this goes for any player from any club who signs a contract. Once the ink is scrawled with an X it should be legal. Alas, these days it's all about the best deal under the laws that are in place.

 

[Parra Pride]

After this whole situation, I think that when we going into any future negotiations with players we are trying to sing from other clubs, we have it written in to the deal that they can't activate this clause if they sign.

 

[hineyrulz]

I hope we don't we take this to court, sure i feel like we got stiffed again but if the bloke doesn't want to come no pointing trying to point a gun at his head to keep him here. By the sounds of it the Raiders had to pay him a lot more than they were going to so maybe we will be a chance to pick up Thompson who would still be a massive upgrade than what we have.

 

[Eelogical]

This seems the point. The NRL have allowed players to dictate the price through astute managers rather than the clubs. Fair trading? Who knows, all I want to see is players stick to their word and do their best for whichever club they sign to.