Tim Sheens set to sue the Tigers for $1.5m

[gronkathon]

The delusional old merkin thinks he would have earnt bonus payments with results.

f**k that guy

 

[Marshall_magic]

I don't get as mad at Sheens as most Tigers fans do. The thing that baffles me is Penrith show some interest in the guy and Humphries panics and signs him up on a lucrative long term deal. If we didn't sign him up on such a ridiculous deal in 2011 we wouldn't be in this mess today.

 

[BuffaloRules]

It was in the articles released in the aftermath. I do not have a link to any of them sorry

I can only find this article where both Humphreys and Trodden say that a Coaching Director type role is unlikely to be offered.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sheens-role-up-in-air/story-e6frg6n6-1226481369610

 

[BuffaloRules]

I'm hoping they have a bit more to their defence then this

Humphreys said the Sheens decision came after his club conducted a "thorough review" after a "disappointing" season.
Sheens still had two years remaining on his contract.

Asked was Sheens sacked or did he quit, Trodden said: "Neither. It was a restructure of our football operations as a result of our review process."
Reminded it had to be either one or the other, Trodden said: "No."

 

[madunit]

It was in the articles released in the aftermath. I do not have a link to any of them sorry

http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/ti...id-for-kangaroos/story-fndujljl-1226541429011

"The Daily Telegraph has been told that Sheens has declined several newly-created roles within the club after being sacked as head coach on September 25.
Sheens had another two years remaining on his Tigers deal, despite club officials shunting him in favour of new coach Mick Potter.
Fearing the club may be taken to court, Wests Tigers offered Sheens a job in development - but he has rejected the role."

 

[SharkShocked]

Contractually is he obliged to take a different role after a restructure? And if declining them does that void any of his claims?

I'd imagine the Tigers board must believe it does as they've stopped paying him.

 

[shiznit]

Contractually is he obliged to take a different role after a restructure? And if declining them does that void any of his claims?

I'd imagine the Tigers board must believe it does as they've stopped paying him.

Either that or they were too broke to pay out his contract alongside Potters.

Maybe they agreed to that release thinking he would find a new club pretty quickly which would void his deal.

Then after awhile they realised they couldn't afford them both so stopped paying him...

All pure speculation of course... But it has that smell...

 

[Usain Bolt]

It'll end with a out of court settlement.

 

[Perth Red]

Contractually is he obliged to take a different role after a restructure? And if declining them does that void any of his claims?

.

No, but if the role no longer exists after a restructure and he is offered a similair role on same terms then he has that choice or their has to be compensatory pay out/redundacy agreement. . As it is the role did continue and they just didn't want him in it so yes he has every right to call foul play.

 

[BunniesMan]

If Sheens had a contract and he did all he was obliged to do under that contract and the Tigers did not then he is entitled to money. At the very least he is entitled to his day in court.

 

[some11]

"Restructuring" is a pretty clever way to get rid of a shit coach.

 

[innsaneink]

He leaves clubs as a despised & hated man

 

[Notell]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...6918484009?from=igoogle+gadget+compact+bi_rss


TIM Sheens has reportedly pushed ahead with legal action against the Wests Tigers, filing a claim that could cost the club as much as $1.5 million.

According to a Fairfax report, Sheens ? case against the Tigers will be heard in Supreme Court on December 8 after it was set down for hearing on Tuesday.

The court documents filed by Sheens? legal team reportedly demand ?the full value of his remuneration entitlements under the terms of the contract of employment from 1 July 2013 until the expiry of the term of his employment?.

When Sheens was sacked at the end of the 2012 season he was coaching under a contract that was due to expire at the end of this season.

Sheens was on an estimated salary of $450,000 and was last paid by the Tigers in July last year.

The Kangaroos mentor is also seeking ?damages for loss of opportunity to earn bonus payments under the contract of employment?, ?damages for breach and repudiation of the contract of employment? and ?damages for loss of enhancement of repudiation?, as well as costs.

According to the report, Sheens? legal team will argue that the four-time premiership-winning coach is entitled to a payout of between $1.25 million and $1.5 million

So what?

What is your point in posting this?

 

[redvscotty]

I'd say it's rugby league news and there is cause for discussion?

Do you always ask stupid questions as a Tigers fan?

 

[Packy]

So what?

What is your point in posting this?

You're right.

Charlie. From now on, please use interpretive dance as your mode of communication

 

[Notell]

How is it news?
A millionaire is suing a company. Big deal. Most supporters of rugby league are blue-collars and far removed from wealthy men like Sheens. Perhaps the story is significant as it affects the liquidity of Wests Tigers... I don't know, and perhaps Charlie124 can enlighten me as to the significance (and if so, should have on his cut-and-paste post.) How on earth does it affect the footy this week-end? For the rest of the season? Long term? I suspect most strongly that it does not.

League is a game where interest really ought to be basic. Who ought to be five-eighth in the wet against a big forward pack? Who ought to do kicking in general play? Who is the better 5/8 / centre / hooker? Ever since SuperLeague, elitist crap like marketing, image, drugs, ASADA, sponsership, TV deals etc have become the "news" and it is as boring as year-old bats--t.

So I repeat, in respect of Sheens possibly suing the Tigers.... SO WHAT?????

PS I do not know how you came to the erroneous conclusion that I am a Tigers fan. I can see no spelling errors at all.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

I hope it goes like this:

WT: he stopped turning up to work so we stopped paying him.

Judge: fair enough. Case dismissed.

 

[Tommax25]

If they lose, does this mean they can sue the lawyers for their bad advice?

Yes, but if that happens then the lawyers can sue their guidance counselor from school for promoting the option to become a lawyer.

 

[Charlie124]

So what?

What is your point in posting this?

I don't need to have a point, this is an Internet forum for all things rugby league and rugby league related stories will be posted here for discussion. If that's not ok with you, you're free to leave. Better yet, go die in a fire maybe?

You're right.

Charlie. From now on, please use interpretive dance as your mode of communication

I tried interpretive dance once, the judge slapped me with a fine and ordered me to stay away from the local high school when I'm drunk. Uppity merkins.

How is it news?
A millionaire is suing a company. Big deal. Most supporters of rugby league are blue-collars and far removed from wealthy men like Sheens. Perhaps the story is significant as it affects the liquidity of Wests Tigers... I don't know, and perhaps Charlie124 can enlighten me as to the significance (and if so, should have on his cut-and-paste post.) How on earth does it affect the footy this week-end? For the rest of the season? Long term? I suspect most strongly that it does not.

League is a game where interest really ought to be basic. Who ought to be five-eighth in the wet against a big forward pack? Who ought to do kicking in general play? Who is the better 5/8 / centre / hooker? Ever since SuperLeague, elitist crap like marketing, image, drugs, ASADA, sponsership, TV deals etc have become the "news" and it is as boring as year-old bats--t.

So I repeat, in respect of Sheens possibly suing the Tigers.... SO WHAT?????

PS I do not know how you came to the erroneous conclusion that I am a Tigers fan. I can see no spelling errors at all.

Yeah nah.

 

[Chook Norris]

How is it news?
A millionaire is suing a company. Big deal. Most supporters of rugby league are blue-collars and far removed from wealthy men like Sheens. Perhaps the story is significant as it affects the liquidity of Wests Tigers... I don't know, and perhaps Charlie124 can enlighten me as to the significance (and if so, should have on his cut-and-paste post.) How on earth does it affect the footy this week-end? For the rest of the season? Long term? I suspect most strongly that it does not.

League is a game where interest really ought to be basic. Who ought to be five-eighth in the wet against a big forward pack? Who ought to do kicking in general play? Who is the better 5/8 / centre / hooker? Ever since SuperLeague, elitist crap like marketing, image, drugs, ASADA, sponsership, TV deals etc have become the "news" and it is as boring as year-old bats--t.

So I repeat, in respect of Sheens possibly suing the Tigers.... SO WHAT?????

PS I do not know how you came to the erroneous conclusion that I am a Tigers fan. I can see no spelling errors at all.

You remind me of those people who bother to leave comments, on news websites, such as "WHO CARES" as though it gives them a sense of importance for seeing something as trivial and insignificant.

If you don't view it as news, then don't comment. Simple.