Rumoured and Confirmed Signings - XXV

[BoneyBlake17]

Can someone tell me who this daniel lane character is. Everytime an article about will hopoate and the contract dispute is written in the fairfax papers he is writing it.

I noticed his name a couple weeks ago when he wrote 3 articles all negative about parramatta on the 1 day. He is the new proshenks at fairfax just curious thats all.

On Hopoate its obvious no one rates him anymore as teams would have found a way to fit him into there salary cap by know. Time to cut our losses and move on.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Can someone tell me who this daniel lane character is. Everytime an article about will hopoate and the contract dispute is written in the fairfax papers he is writing it.

I noticed his name a couple weeks ago when he wrote 3 articles all negative about parramatta on the 1 day. He is the new proshenks at fairfax just curious thats all.

On Hopoate its obvious no one rates him anymore as teams would have found a way to fit him into there salary cap by know. Time to cut our losses and move on.

Whether we have the choice to cut our losses is not entirely certain.

 

[lingard]

...

 

[Poupou Escobar]

...

Glad to see your outrage when other merkins make the same jokes. f**ken hypocrite.

 

[Jake the snake]

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/parramatta-offer-william-hopoate-unders-to-stay-an-eel-20151017-gkbn7k.html

If contract law applies we are up shit creek with this Hoppa case. I can't see how we will win it. We are totally in the wrong. The most basic says that if you have an offer and acceptance that is a contract in verbal terms. But in most cases verbal agreements don't hold up as they are hard to prove. I hoppas case we have a legal document signed by both parties. Signed by our then CEO.

We have no legs to stand on IMO

 

[Avenger]

If contract law applies we are up shit creek with this Hoppa case. I can't see how we will win it. We are totally in the wrong. The most basic says that if you have an offer and acceptance that is a contract in verbal terms. But in most cases verbal agreements don't hold up as they are hard to prove. I hoppas case we have a legal document signed by both parties. Signed by our then CEO.

We have no legs to stand on IMO

Nothing was signed. It was only a verbal agreement. That is why they are in court.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I believe we withdrew the offer.

 

[Jake the snake]

Nothing was signed. It was only a verbal agreement. That is why they are in court.

Really? I thought they had signed the contract but not lodged it with the NRL. I'll take that back we might be half a chance

 

[caylo]

Really? I thought they had signed the contract but not lodged it with the NRL. I'll take that back we might be half a chance

I think logically contracts would have conditions that the nrl had to approve the deal/players contract needed to be registered with the nrl as standard. This may not be the case but if i was organising the contracts I'd have it as standard

 

[Gazzamatta]

If contract law applies we are up shit creek with this Hoppa case. I can't see how we will win it. We are totally in the wrong. The most basic says that if you have an offer and acceptance that is a contract in verbal terms. But in most cases verbal agreements don't hold up as they are hard to prove. I hoppas case we have a legal document signed by both parties. Signed by our then CEO.

We have no legs to stand on IMO

I recall all the Hoppa contract extension talk started early in the season following words from Hoppas Manager saying a deal was pretty well done and would be finalised shortly. This and other forums continued to ask the question when would this deal finally be announced. Interestingly I dont ever recall any comment what so ever from the club. Possibly it was just Hoppas Manager applying pressure to get the deal done. Even the talk about the so called signed contract could well be paper talk generated by Hoppas Manager.
All that said I also believe there was a point in time where the club decided to back off Hoppa following his decline in form. I very much agree the guy is worth 200k max but even at that price, the damage has been done. Id be very surprised if he ever pulls on a Parra jumper again.

 

[Chipmunk]

Nothing was signed. It was only a verbal agreement. That is why they are in court.

Verbal agreement will be pretty easy to prove in court, if all parties privy to the verbal agreement (the clubs CEO at the time, the player and/or player manager) all confirm the details in court.

 

[Bigfella]

I recall all the Hoppa contract extension talk started early in the season following words from Hoppas Manager saying a deal was pretty well done and would be finalised shortly. This and other forums continued to ask the question when would this deal finally be announced. Interestingly I dont ever recall any comment what so ever from the club. Possibly it was just Hoppas Manager applying pressure to get the deal done. Even the talk about the so called signed contract could well be paper talk generated by Hoppas Manager.
All that said I also believe there was a point in time where the club decided to back off Hoppa following his decline in form. I very much agree the guy is worth 200k max but even at that price, the damage has been done. Id be very surprised if he ever pulls on a Parra jumper again.

I definitely remember Seward making public statements about him being signed up to be a key player for our future.

Around the same time he was also saying the club wanted to retain sandow.

 

[oldmancraigy]

Assuming a verbal agreement carries weight when it comes to NRL contracts.
I would be surprised if it did. No doubt there would be precedent of verbal agreements not being honoured, or the NRL not registering contracts.

Surely it must be more than that?

 

[Gronk]

Peni Terapo dropped the ball in the first 45 seconds last light. Then later scored a long range try.

Tonga won 20+.

http://m.nrl.com/tonga-qualify-for-2017-world-cup/tabid/10874/newsid/90566/default.aspx

 

[Gronk]

Assuming a verbal agreement carries weight when it comes to NRL contracts.
I would be surprised if it did. No doubt there would be precedent of verbal agreements not being honoured, or the NRL not registering contracts.

Surely it must be more than that?

The dogs move the goal posts twice on Fafita. First they agreed to pay him 8 squillion a year then reshaped it to contain 40% of TPAs , then pulled the offer entirely after the RU comment.

Verbal schmerbal.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Nothing was signed. It was only a verbal agreement. That is why they are in court.

Surely the story is that the club made a written offer, which Hoppa signed and returned to the club. The club the failed to register it, and probably did not counter sign the contract. But the failure to countersign or register does not mean that a common law contract did not exist. If it was just a verbal agreement it would not have got to court, as NRL employment contracts are not normally finalised verbally. If there was only a verbal agreement, there would be nothing to try to lodge with the NRL.

 

[Gronk]

Or because the NRL contract is pro forma maybe Hoppa's agent got his client to sign a to good to be true contract following a verbal offer by a dumb arse power drunk CEO ?

 

[Gronk]

Hoppa's gone anyway. A merkin from TheFilthySpammers said so cos he spoke to Hoppa's Grandma.

Lol

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Or because the NRL contract is pro forma maybe Hoppa's agent got his client to sign a to good to be true contract following a verbal offer by a dumb arse power drunk CEO ?

Well, I guess that's theoretically possible, but I haven't seen anyone suggest that is the case.

I haven't seen anyone at the club deny that a written offer was made (correct me if I'm wrong). All I've seen / heard are snippets stating that 'nothing was signed'. Those are 2 quite different assertions.

 

[Gronk]

Well, I guess that's theoretically possible, but I haven't seen anyone suggest that is the case.

I haven't seen anyone at the club deny that a written offer was made (correct me if I'm wrong). All I've seen / heard are snippets stating that 'nothing was signed'. Those are 2 quite different assertions.

The club have actually said zip about the whole dispute.