What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Todays Leader: Contract News

B

blacktip-reefy

Immortal
Messages
34,079
no it's not.
Peachey not being sewn up is very bad news for the team.
Whats the use of doing everything correct, then failing because of the mistake of not resigning Peachey?
Also Gallen. That is very bad news. At this stage. he has has shown hiself to be very flexible & committed. Provides great balance to the squad.
 
Macca

Macca

Coach
Messages
18,399
I was talking about the guys we did re-sign. That is all good news. Do you really think I am happy that Peach and Gallen still haven't been sewn up?
 
b_shark

b_shark

Juniors
Messages
253
Even if peach's legs don't allow him to run around as much as her used to he is vital to the team, and I would hate to have to see him go around spruiking to other clubs - he deserves to be a one club man, same as ET and Healey. Are our other players contesting fullback at first grade/all season calibre yet??

Also agree gallen - his last few games have been awesome.
 
P

PJ

First Grade
Messages
6,079
Happy with the news so far but would like to see Gallen and Peach retained.

Whilst Peach is coming to the end of his career I feel we owe him.
 
TRIALS

TRIALS

Juniors
Messages
793
Article On Foxsports says nothing of Sullivan signing actually it says we are still chasing him. It says that we signed Nutley Dumas and Isemonger ...but no sully.
 
Dragon Slayer

Dragon Slayer

Coach
Messages
15,561
P.J we owe him nothing........
He has been well paid by the club in the past and done a great job in return.

In the past couple of seasons he has certainly not been value for money. If he was the Sharks would've signed him by now.

If the club make a strong business decision to not sign him up for next year they may of turned the corner in running the club the way it should be. No more players playing because their the son of...........and no more resigning of players because of long service to the club and what they have done in the PAST. The club has to get out of this sentimental crap and play hard ball and not be a retirement village.

Treister and Graham are a case in point. After they left the Sharks how many people here said they would come back to bite us? Plenty!!!! Treister is now retired and Graham is in premier league for West Tigers. And people wanted these two still playing for us................. :roll:

As for "2.5 clubs after him" whatever that's mean't to mean? :roll: Peachey has stated Sharks or the highway.

As for "not pilaging" if we had offered $270 K for Riddell and withdrew the offer that tells me that they have a bit of cash to spend . So expect plenty of new faces but not necessarily alot of name players. Because if we have too "promote from within" we are in big trouble with the way premier league is going and the the flegg players still too young.
 
b_shark

b_shark

Juniors
Messages
253
Dragon Slayer said:
P.J we owe him nothing........
He has been well paid by the club in the past and done a great job in return.

In the past couple of seasons he has certainly not been value for money. If he was the Sharks would've signed him by now.

If the club make a strong business decision to not sign him up for next year they may of turned the corner in running the club the way it should be. No more players playing because their the son of...........and no more resigning of players because of long service to the club and what they have done in the PAST. The club has to get out of this sentimental crap and play hard ball and not be a retirement village.

Treister and Graham are a case in point. After they left the Sharks how many people here said they would come back to bite us? Plenty!!!! Treister is now retired and Graham is in premier league for West Tigers. And people wanted these two still playing for us................. :roll:

As for "2.5 clubs after him" whatever that's mean't to mean? :roll: Peachey has stated Sharks or the highway.

As for "not pilaging" if we had offered $270 K for Riddell and withdrew the offer that tells me that they have a bit of cash to spend . So expect plenty of new faces but not necessarily alot of name players. Because if we have too "promote from within" we are in big trouble with the way premier league is going and the the flegg players still too young.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would kill the salary cap or the budget, or our longer term plans for the development of players to re-sign him for another year as a transitional arrangement until our next fullback is confident and ready for a full season, and to allow the Peach to be able to make arrangements to retire with dignity. Would hate to see him have to play for another club.
 
Macca

Macca

Coach
Messages
18,399
Peachey has won us games this year. Are we going to go of his form this year or last year on whether to re-sign him, because on this years form he needs to be re-signed.
 
N

Nages

Juniors
Messages
164
Sharks' trio re-sign
June 17, 2004

CRONULLA have moved quickly to re-sign three key members of their forward pack ahead of the NRL's June 30 anti-tampering expiring.

The Sharks today announced the retention of experienced pair Danny Nutley and Sam Isemonger, along with exciting young back-rower Daniel Dumas, for the next two seasons.

"Put Sam (Isemonger) and Danny Nutley in your pack and you're going to go forward in what you're trying to do," said Cronulla coach Stuart Raper.

"And in Daniel Dumas we have a very good young player who should be a quality first grader with us for a long time."

The Sharks are still in negotiations with a number of their other key off-contract players, including hooker/halfback Michael Sullivan, and hope to make further announcements soon.


...are we sure Sully has re-signed?
 
P

PJ

First Grade
Messages
6,079
DS I agree with most of what you say however Peachey has been a loyal club man for many years, and has stayed loyal when he could easily have moved to greener pastures. This is why I think we owe him.

It's all very well to say we owe him nothing since he has been well payed , which may be true but I think he could have doen better elsewhere, but we as fans get upset when players don't show loyalty and leave for better prospects, more money etc. (just look at what Phil Bailey was copping earlier in the year when it was thought he was leaving). The club needs to show some loyalty to long term club men if they expect any back. This also sends some positive reinforcement to younger players.

I fully agree we can't be a retirement home, and I wasn't of them crying over Triester and particularly Graham but I also believe that Peachey has been playing well enough this year to warrant a new contract.
 
S

Shark

Bench
Messages
3,085
Jeez, you blokes have a short memory of the contribution Treister made to our side.

We have NOT had a settled, consistent dummy half since he was punted. Our play around the ruck has suffered as a result.

And being 28 years of age does not constitute 'retirement home' age for NRL first graders. He still had a good 2 or 3 years in him.

Peach should only be re-signed if he WANTS to play. Put him on a small contract with match payments. Or incentives, or whatever. I want him to be around, but more importantly I want HIM to want to be around.
 
P

PJ

First Grade
Messages
6,079
He's said he wants to be around and he has been playing like he wants to be around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top