Tim Moltzen ... (war is over)

[Radical Rat]

I don't see how Doust gambled as you put it, he signed a player who was given permission to leave.
If Moltzen had of told the Dragons mid year that he wasn't coming, or even before seasons end, it would have bought the Dragons some time to get a Plan B together. You can't expect a player of note to be unsigned in October for the following year, it just doesn't happen like that. By the time Doust found out, it was too late to really do anything.

Also, as Doust has signed countless people before, he probably didn't put thought into a plan B, as Moltz3n signed a contact, and everyone else he's signed have just shown up. Crazy huh :crazy:

Of course Doust gambled. He should have made sure he had secured a release from Tim's current contract before signing him and thinking it was all locked in. He gambled in good faith that the Tigers would release him at the end of the year. Once again, maybe morally wrong from the Tigers, but who gives a sh!t, that's business.

I can't believe how stupid some of you blokes are. I understand if you think it's immoral of the Tigers. But legally it's black & white. The Dragons don't have a leg to stand on and that's why they've eventually given up.

 

[gypsy]

There is no contract. You can't have 2 registered contracts for 1 player. So what you have is a useless piece of paper with Moltzen's autograph.

Yes the Tigers did a backflip but that's business. The Dragons don't have a legal legal leg to stand on.

Here's some more reaction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4EZUzowrnQ

 

[Drain the Dragon]

Of course Doust gambled. He should have made sure he had secured a release from Tim's current contract before signing him and thinking it was all locked in. He gambled in good faith that the Tigers would release him at the end of the year. Once again, maybe morally wrong from the Tigers, but who gives a sh!t, that's business.

I can't believe how stupid some of you blokes are. I understand if you think it's immoral of the Tigers. But legally it's black & white. The Dragons don't have a leg to stand on and that's why they've eventually given up.

I've spoken to a few Tigers supporters who think what has happened is disgraceful.

As is your comment "but who gives a sh!t, that's business"

Are you Humpty?

 

[Father Ted]

There is no contract. You can't have 2 registered contracts for 1 player. So what you have is a useless piece of paper with Moltzen's autograph.

Yes the Tigers did a backflip but that's business. The Dragons don't have a legal legal leg to stand on.

Oral contract

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
An oral contract is a contract the terms of which have been agreed by spoken communication, in contrast to a written contract, where the contract is a written document. There may be written, or other physical evidence, of an oral contract – for example where the parties write down what they have agreed – but the contract itself is not a written one.
In general, oral contracts are just as valid as written ones,

 

[Father Ted]

Of course Doust gambled. He should have made sure he had secured a release from Tim's current contract before signing him and thinking it was all locked in. He gambled in good faith that the Tigers would release him at the end of the year. Once again, maybe morally wrong from the Tigers, but who gives a sh!t, that's business.

I can't believe how stupid some of you blokes are. I understand if you think it's immoral of the Tigers. But legally it's black & white. The Dragons don't have a leg to stand on and that's why they've eventually given up.

I disagree

Law.com's dictionary definition of oral contract is helpful:

An oral contract is often provable by action taken by one or both parties which is obviously in reliance on the existence of a contract.

So, are they relying on your agreement to do the programming work? Also, was the agreement detailed enough to be acted on (i.e. program specifications, due date, amount of equity to be given)? The answers to these questions will give you a clearer idea of whether or not you have an oral contract.

For what it's worth, you are certainly able to decline to do the work; if the contract is valid and they sue you on it you'll most likely just have to pay damages.

 

[gypsy]

Of course Doust gambled. He should have made sure he had secured a release from Tim's current contract before signing him and thinking it was all locked in. He gambled in good faith that the Tigers would release him at the end of the year. Once again, maybe morally wrong from the Tigers, but who gives a sh!t, that's business.

I can't believe how stupid some of you blokes are. I understand if you think it's immoral of the Tigers. But legally it's black & white. The Dragons don't have a leg to stand on and that's why they've eventually given up.

so why didn't the Tigers object when the Moltz3n signing was announced?
They just let it slide until Robert "The Muss" Lui went beserk, then reneged. Pretty wrong really.

 

[big pat]

I can't believe how stupid some of you blokes are.

and radical rat couldn't wait to tell us, would you like some cheese with you whine radical.

 

[Radical Rat]

so why didn't the Tigers object when the Moltz3n signing was announced?
They just let it slide until Robert "The Muss" Lui went beserk, then reneged. Pretty wrong really.

Yes I agree it pretty wrong. But the Tigers are just looking after themselves. This isn't kindergarten or under 7's where everyone has to play nice.

 

[Father Ted]

From what I've read we will be a big chance to get Damages if we sue Moltzen and friends which I hope we do despite what the vermin is saying.

 

[gypsy]

Yes I agree it pretty wrong. But the Tigers are just looking after themselves. This isn't kindergarten or under 7's where everyone has to play nice.

The thing is, our game is built around honesty, and these dog acts can be counted on two hands, over 100 years of footy.

All the Tigers have done, is open a massive can of worms over a very average, replaceable player.

 

[Radical Rat]

I disagree

Law.com's dictionary definition of oral contract is helpful:

An oral contract is often provable by action taken by one or both parties which is obviously in reliance on the existence of a contract.

So, are they relying on your agreement to do the programming work? Also, was the agreement detailed enough to be acted on (i.e. program specifications, due date, amount of equity to be given)? The answers to these questions will give you a clearer idea of whether or not you have an oral contract.

For what it's worth, you are certainly able to decline to do the work; if the contract is valid and they sue you on it you'll most likely just have to pay damages.

I understand the premise of an oral contract. I just don't think it's strong enough to break the legally binding document which the Tigers already have in place.

 

[Radical Rat]

The thing is, our game is built around honesty, and these dog acts can be counted on two hands, over 100 years of footy.

All the Tigers have done, is open a massive can of worms over a very average, replaceable player.

Not sure the game is built around honesty anymore, I think that went out the window a while ago. Although I get your point.

The thing is though, this situation really doesn't occur very often. The whole saga has been quite ridiculous. And you're quite right, Moltzen isn't worth all of it.

He'll be more useful at the Tigers than the Dragons anyway. His whole game is built around Benji inside balls. At the Dragons he was just gonna be an undersized utility player.

 

[Father Ted]

Might just come down to did they or did they not tell him he was free to seek employment elseware. I think they did and Moltzen and his manager as well as Peter Doust were then entitled to believe he was available. Certainly Moltzen believed it when he made plans to move to Wollongong , we know his fellow players and coach believed it . But now you and Humphreys want us to believe the complete opposite. Maybe it's less about what is a contract is worth and more about the credibility of the Tigers as a business or a club?

 

[Cagey Mac]

Realistically what can we expect?
Look at the way our politicians behave. They sacrifice the economy to their giant egos. They toss their beliefs and values out the window when they join the party machine (with few exceptions) Corrupt behaviour is rife. Playing the letter of the law rather than the spirit where expedient and damn the consequences.
Look at our media. Sensationalist, inaccurate, deceptive!
Almost everyone now plays to a minority constituency or audience. They narrowcast to the one-eyed. Ethics and values went out the window quite a while ago.
When people start realising that they have two ears and one mouth and the community understands the our common values aren’t just low statically but low and trending lower, then real substance may return to our society including our sport and our individual values.
I tell my six and nine year old kids that the only thing that you really have in life is truth and how you treat it is what defines you as a human being.
Things will get worse before they get better and I’m not holding my breath waiting for improvement.
Among others, The Tigers and the Sea Eagles have, in recent times have demonstrated individual and corporate values that cheapen them. I wonder if any of their supporters care.

 

[Drain the Dragon]

His whole game is built around Benji inside balls.

I always thought there was something going on with those two, sharing a flat and all that....

 

[Drain the Dragon]

so why didn't the Tigers object when the Moltz3n signing was announced?
They just let it slide until Robert "The Muss" Lui went beserk, then reneged. Pretty wrong really.

This is the thing Gypsy, it's an argument that goes around in circles, as we claim the moral high ground, and the vermin play their 'legal' card.

The more we bleat about it, seems the louder they will yell that we 'don't have a leg to stand on'.

Anyway, I believe in karma.

"Instant Karma's gonna get you....gonna knock you off your feet" --- look out TIGERS!!

 

[Radical Rat]

This is the thing Gypsy, it's an argument that goes around in circles, as we claim the moral high ground, and the vermin play their 'legal' card.

The more we bleat about it, seems the louder they will yell that we 'don't have a leg to stand on'.

Anyway, I believe in karma.

"Instant Karma's gonna get you....gonna knock you off your feet" --- look out TIGERS!!

Yes you're a true saint in every sense of the word.

Don't worry guys, maybe Gaz will have a change of heart....

 

[Hutty1986]

Yes you're a true saint in every sense of the word.

Don't worry guys, maybe Gaz will have a change of heart....

:lol: Yes, because we don't have plenty of cover for him. Troll fail

 

[Radical Rat]

:lol: Yes, because we don't have plenty of cover for him. Troll fail

Not trolling mate. I just find it incredible that Saints fans are having a cry about someone doing a backflip when they have the olympic champion of backflips Gasnier in their ranks. Just a bit ironic is all.

 

[gypsy]

:lol: Yes, because we don't have plenty of cover for him. Troll fail

It's a shame, Le Gaz was just starting to look good I thought.

You can't put Gasnier in the same basket as that nobody Moltzen.
Gaz let the club know of his decision, and that was that. Plus one was a great player, and the other never will be.