gronkathon
First Grade
- Messages
- 9,266
The delusional old merkin thinks he would have earnt bonus payments with results.
f**k that guy
f**k that guy
It was in the articles released in the aftermath. I do not have a link to any of them sorry
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."
It was in the articles released in the aftermath. I do not have a link to any of them sorry
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.
Contractually is he obliged to take a different role after a restructure? And if declining them does that void any of his claims?
.
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?
If they lose, does this mean they can sue the lawyers for their bad advice?
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
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.
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.