Sonny Bill

[Meth]

He was on tv STATING he would resign and he "shook hands" in agreement... that is a fact.. everybody else on here is right.

If so, I don't really have an issue if he does in fact sign, as he said he would, at the end of the world cup. Contracts and things can take some time to work out (especially with a bloke like Khoder involved, I would imagine) and if he'd rather focus on world cup preparations and then give attention to the necessary details later, I don't see the problem with that.

If he goes abroad or switches code (can't really see the latter happening), then it's a dog act.

 

[Micistm]

If so, I don't really have an issue if he does in fact sign, as he said he would, at the end of the world cup. Contracts and things can take some time to work out (especially with a bloke like Khoder involved, I would imagine) and if he'd rather focus on world cup preparations and then give attention to the necessary details later, I don't see the problem with that.

If he goes abroad or switches code (can't really see the latter happening), then it's a dog act.

I would respect him more if he signed and stayed, proved his dream was to be an AB and he was going to stick at it...but we'll see. That drink advert on the radio sums up how defiant him and his team are...they really think they are above any code and should be allowed to do anything they want and have special treament only for themselves. If he doesn't sign I'd just shrug and say good riddance...as long (back on topic) the Warriors don't go anywhere near the primadonna liability that is SBW inc.
Maybe UK Superleague would be his scene. He'd go well there, get well paid, get lots of promotion opportunities...and there has to be tons of beneficiaries over there to box with.
...As long as it doesn't rain or get a bit frosty, if he didn't like it he'd be off again:lol:

 

[ThirdEye]

First player that has pledged loyalty to NZRU then changed? To my knowledge, yes.

There have been others.

At worst he said he 'wished' to remain? Read the following: http://tvnz.co.nz/all-blacks/black-brand-tips-scales-sbw-4326023

If he has, as the article states, actually signed a contract with the NZRFU then what the frak are we arguing about?

 

[Te Kaha]

There have been others.


If he has, as the article states, actually signed a contract with the NZRFU then what the frak are we arguing about?

There havent been any others... and he didnt sign.. he agreed verbally, which is still a valid contract and now has said he wil look elsewhere... He "changed his mind"... its a pity it was after the WC squad was announced tho... then his place could have gone to someoone more deserving.

 

[ThirdEye]

There havent been any others... .

Both Ron Cribb and Nathan Mauger pledged allegiance to NZ rugby only to change their minds when they weren't selected - and there are many more examples of players hedging their bets in a similar fashion. It is a common negotiating tactic which usually passes by unnoticed - until it grabs the attention of the small-minded and bigoted.

he agreed verbally, which is still a valid contract and now has said he wil look elsewhere

If the Rugby Union are accepting verbal agreements as 'valid contracts' then they are even more of an anachronism than I originally thought.

 

[Izz]

Both Ron Cribb and Nathan Mauger pledged allegiance to NZ rugby only to change their minds when they weren't selected - and there are many more examples of players hedging their bets in a similar fashion. It is a common negotiating tactic which usually passes by unnoticed - until it grabs the attention of the small-minded and bigoted.


If the Rugby Union are accepting verbal agreements as 'valid contracts' then they are even more of an anachronism than I originally thought.

It cracks me up how almost every vigorous discussion on this site ends up in personal insult, both direct and implied.

Play the ball, not the man, anyone?

 

[ThirdEye]

It cracks me up how almost every vigorous discussion on this site ends up in personal insult, both direct and implied.

Play the ball, not the man, anyone?

If you haven't got anything to contribute to the discussion, you should really stfu.

 

[Te Kaha]

Both Ron Cribb and Nathan Mauger pledged allegiance to NZ rugby only to change their minds when they weren't selected - and there are many more examples of players hedging their bets in a similar fashion. It is a common negotiating tactic which usually passes by unnoticed - until it grabs the attention of the small-minded and bigoted..

True... they both agreed to stay and then left.. oh wait.. no they didnt... There is a world of differnce with waiting until you see if you are selected then leaving... to flat out saying you will stay, announcing it, then "changing your mind"

If the Rugby Union are accepting verbal agreements as 'valid contracts' then they are even more of an anachronism than I originally thought.

You should look in to NZ contractual law... there are only three types of contracts that have to be written... and they are to do with land sales... contacts for and of employment dont require it.... if the NZRU decided to sue SBW they could... and given he agreed on national telly he would lose... thats an aside however... if he was an honorable person he would keep his word... he hasnt once... and now it looks like he wont again... all because he isnt good enough to be selected.

 

[Izz]

If you haven't got anything to contribute to the discussion, you should really stfu.

:lol:

You've already got no legs left to stand on, so piling up on you would be mean.

Oh, okay, i'll add something. Ron Cribb never verbally pledged allegiance to NZ while not contracted, only to turn his back later. He was contracted until 2005, but negotiated an early release to play in Japan in 2003. He hadn't been in the frame for AB selection since 2001, due to major injury, suspension and, subsequently, form issues.

And Nathan Mauger? Seriously? He was never in the frame again after 2002. Even if he had done as you suggested (which he didn't), it really wouldn't have mattered because he wouldn't have been picked anyway, so he wouldn't have been able to hold anybody to ransom.

Let me know how many people you win over with your 'if you don't agree with me you're small-minded and bigoted' arguing technique.

 

[Beavers Headgear]

The funniest part is the small minded comment coming from the bloke who delivered it lmao

 

[ThirdEye]

...

Let me know how many people you win over with your 'if you don't agree with me you're small-minded and bigoted' arguing technique.

No, I'm saying that the SBW-haters are small minded and bigoted.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

No, I'm saying that the SBW-haters are small minded and bigoted.

And the people on the non-SBW side (I won't call them haters, because I do not hate SBW) would call you a few things as well. Not me, I add.

Look, I think I am almost in the biased camp towards him. I LOVED him as a league player. I forgave him the Bulldogs walk-out, as he was young and impressionable and got poor advice. I have met the guy, I believe he's a good person beneath it all. He is not arrogant, he is talented as hell, but he's got the wrong people around him and listens to their every word. I thought he'd be one hell of an All Black. I got excited when he dominated S15, picked him ahead of Nonu for the WC early on, I defended him when de Villiers dismissed him as a one-trick pony (looks pretty prophetic now, for a guy tagged as a loon in the media) then he went and boxed, lost all form and it's spiralled from there.

If you were smart, you'd be attacking the NZRU and their flip-flopping and constant double standards. It sounds like the reason a contract has not been inked yet is due to third party deals, and the fact something Nasser has teed up clashes with All Black sponsors.

Carter/McCaw are tied in with a bottled water company, which is in direct competition to Coca Cola's products. Carter/Nonu (and others I may be unaware of) have been allowed sabbaticals. Are their new clubs not in some sort of direct competition with S15/ITM Cup sides? Are these NZ-based professionals outfits not losing revenue as a result of these deals being offered to certain players? I'll guarantee you the Crusaders lost $ as a result of Carter not playing the 2010 S15 season, he is bums on seats and a marketers dream.

So why is SBW not afforded a similar liberty? Is it because he's already taken more than enough through boxing concessions, excess $ to lure him despite lack of union pedigree, etc etc?

 

[ThirdEye]

I dont love him or hate him - I dont know him well enough for either. All I know he was a fine league player, and has shown some real promise in union. All the rest of it - whether he is 'moral', or 'loyal', etc - is a nonsense. Players all over the world sign contracts that are in their own best interests and it seems a little hypocritical to be holding Sonny Bill up to a different standard. The saddest thing will be if we never hear of him again - he took a big risk leaving the doggies to go play union and he should be given a chance to show of his 'wares.

 

[_addict]

I dont love him or hate him - I dont know him well enough for either. All I know he was a fine league player, and has shown some real promise in union. All the rest of it - whether he is 'moral', or 'loyal', etc - is a nonsense. Players all over the world sign contracts that are in their own best interests and it seems a little hypocritical to be holding Sonny Bill up to a different standard. The saddest thing will be if we never hear of him again - he took a big risk leaving the doggies to go play union and he should be given a chance to show of his 'wares.

1. Yes, we all know he's talented
2. 'Moral' and 'loyal' is not a nonsense because a) many people doing the wrong thing does not make it right; b) those fans and others who put faith in him can rightly feel jilted that he spat it all back in their face; c) why should anyone trust him if he's like that?
3. Signing contracts in one's own best interest is fine. Contracts are usually made in the interests of all the involved parties, stick to your contract and all is sweet. If anyone else is breaking contracts you should expect penalties, and we will bag them to the same standard.
4. Any waste of great talent is sad, it's usually the possessor of the talent who chooses to sow it in fertile soil, or squander it.
5. He may have taken a big risk to play Union, and only the most uptight of us would not have conceded his right to try his hand. So why didn't he just see out his contract, then go and do it instead of stabbing his club and their fans in the eye? If he'd gone about it in the right way we'd have no reason to grizzle.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

I dont love him or hate him - I dont know him well enough for either. All I know he was a fine league player, and has shown some real promise in union. All the rest of it - whether he is 'moral', or 'loyal', etc - is a nonsense. Players all over the world sign contracts that are in their own best interests and it seems a little hypocritical to be holding Sonny Bill up to a different standard. The saddest thing will be if we never hear of him again - he took a big risk leaving the doggies to go play union and he should be given a chance to show of his 'wares.

Agree it would be a shame if we never heard of him again. He's a hell of a rugby talent, whether it be union or league - more the latter.

SBW is being held up to a different standard as his management, and those in rugby circles, have done likewise. He's made his bed in that regard. His comments in regards to the Bulldogs and his way of departure, his recent quotes about staying for the love of the fans - and now possibly reneging on those words - put him in a different category.

I thought he'd deserved credit for coming back to NZ, taking a big pay cut and looking to make the All Blacks. But he was given a pretty big armchair ride to do so, and if he leaves now it makes it look like he used the situation to add an ego boost of a black jersey and a CV boost as well.

 

[Beavers Headgear]

I dont love him or hate him - I dont know him well enough for either. All I know he was a fine league player, and has shown some real promise in union. All the rest of it - whether he is 'moral', or 'loyal', etc - is a nonsense. Players all over the world sign contracts that are in their own best interests and it seems a little hypocritical to be holding Sonny Bill up to a different standard. The saddest thing will be if we never hear of him again - he took a big risk leaving the doggies to go play union and he should be given a chance to show of his 'wares.

Can you name me other players that have signed their contracts and walked out on them ?

 

[mean]

Can you name me other players that have signed their contracts and walked out on them ?

Correct me if I'm wrong....was it Wiki who had contract issues when he went to Canberra?

 

[Penrose Warrior]

Correct me if I'm wrong....was it Wiki who had contract issues when he went to Canberra?

I think he's talking union players...but yeah, Wiki verbally agreed to join the Warriors - I think he may have even signed a beer coaster in an airport with CEO Ian Robson because he didn't have anything else on him? Sounds like a wives tale, but it was along those lines.

Then Canberra came up with a better offer, and Ruben reneged. He copped a hell of a lot of heat for it.

And in SBW's case, just because someone else has done it doesn't make it right.

 

[Beavers Headgear]

Yep Wiki signed 2 contracts in 1994. Poor choice but didn't bolt from the country leaving his sponsors car outside the caryard with the keys in the door haha

 

[ThirdEye]

I think he's talking union players....

I was, but it doesn't really matter in any case - an example from any professional sport would suffice. If other professional sportsmen (or women) have terminated their contracts before time and not been vilified for it, then why is Sonny Bill? Players get out of their contracts all the time but we don't hear about it because it is usually done with the agreement of both parties - clubs dont want to keep players who are not committed, so they come to some arrangement (usually it means the player will get a little more money if they agree to keep the terms confidential.) The difference with SBW is that he didn't inform the club of his intentions. Sure, people might call that cowardly but a decision like that is not taken lightly and, if the gossip is to be believed, one he would not make without consulting the people that are close to him (depending on who you believe it is either the Mundine/Nassar clique or the Umaga clan.) So until I hear otherwise I am prepared to accept that he had very good reasons for doing what he did. Besides, I am sure the doggies got their full pound of flesh out of him, since it is the club that holds the purse-strings and are they bleating on about how Sonny Bill diddled them two years after the event? No. They're not. And they are the only ones that have a right to feel aggrieved - not the fans. Christ, players come and go from clubs constantly. Every year I get pissed at the players the warriors didn't hold onto so why would the loss of Sonny Bill be any more disturbing than any other player?

Jeez, this is exercising my brain too much, who gives a shit anyway.:?