Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The risk of the PO increases with the likelihood of the player activating it.
But what if the PO (supposedly) reduced the cost of the contract (as you seem to always claim) that we're wasting on the declined benchwarmer?
Yep, referees panic when the underdog is winning.
And (obs) if you don't give a PO, the risk of it can never increase.
Gough has been the ref in the Dogs, Knights and panthers losses this year.
If you don't give the player the PO he won't give the club a discount on his required salary. Ths is how commercial transactions work.
High likelihood is it? We should probably give them less money as well. I reckon there's a high likelihood that he would've signed anyway ffs
Why else would clubs agree to them?
Lol. This is how poor commercial transactions work. See the clip Pazza posted above.
Just offer them what we're offering them, but without the player option. If they walk away because some other weak club offers them a player option so be it, and move onto the next one. At least then we will have decided that we won't stay a weak club into the future.
The tickets are free. Not sure about the rest.
Desperate clubs also pay overs. You’ll note most of our players don’t have contract options. Why do some have them? You think we were only desperate to keep those ones? We could’ve just paid them more.
He's also fast. Has played centre and 5/8 in the 2s. Definitely a handy backup.
We've also not had a defensive structure or mindset for 11 plus years. Ryles will work hard on this. It will make a massive difference. Finally someone who has a f'n clue. Bring it on.
*4th
