What's new
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!

With or without Rogers, Titans won't alter stance on Turner

nqboy

First Grade
Messages
8,914
http://www.smh.com.au/news/league/with-or-without-rogers-titans-wont-alter-stance-on-turner/2006/12/12/1165685680018.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

GOLD Coast managing director Michael Searle believes Melbourne officials may attempt to use the Titans' anticipated signing of Wallabies star Mat Rogers to pull out of the player-swap deal that had been expected to end the protracted Steve Turner saga.

But Searle said Rogers's signing - which may be finalised this week - would have no bearing on Turner's attempts to pull out of his deal, and vowed to continue to demand compensation from the Storm. The Titans are understood to be seeking two junior Storm-contracted players, who have already been earmarked by the Gold Coast, plus a financial settlement, as compensation for the loss of Turner.

Searle, who was yesterday still to hear back from Melbourne's chief executive Brian Waldron with a response, believes his counterpart may be waiting for the Rogers situation, which had looked like an unlikely solution to the ongoing spat between the two clubs, to play out before deciding whether to go ahead with the deal.

Melbourne believe if Rogers signs with the Titans, using money that would have originally been used to pay Turner, Gold Coast officials would not be able to press ahead with their demands.

But Searle insisted: "Our position isn't going to change. Whether or not they're waiting to see what happens with Mat Rogers, it doesn't change their obligation. Melbourne didn't send us Rogers. We're not going to reward Melbourne because Mat Rogers wants to come here. We've got our position on the table. If they think it's going to change if Mat Rogers signs, they're mistaken."

Proving the animosity between the two camps had not died down despite the two club bosses breaking bread at the recent CEOs conference, Searle also predicted the Storm would attempt to use the possible signing of Rogers to their favour by attempting to compare them in the hope of convincing the Titans to back down.

"I think they'll try and draw comparisons but there are no comparisons," Searle said. "If anyone tries to compare the two situations, they'd be a fool to do so. They're vastly different. One's got exceptional family circumstances and the other has got cold feet."

Searle said it was up to the Storm to ensure that Turner, who has offered to pay the difference between the two salaries for the next three seasons, plays in the NRL next season.

"It's in Melbourne's court," Searle said. "We've told them what we're happy to accept. If they want Steve Turner to play they have to activate it. If they don't want to do the deal, that's fine, but that means he won't be playing."

Saying it had become a matter of principle, coach John Cartwright echoed Searle, insisting the Titans would not budge on their demands even if Rogers gains a release from his rugby union contracts to join the club a year ahead of schedule.

"It comes down to how much Melbourne want to keep him now," Cartwright said. "They made an offer to him, knowing full well he had an agreement with us. I don't think Mat Rogers has got anything to do with us and Melbourne, to be honest. They've left us short a player. To do what they've done, it's only fair, for us to release him, that they supply us with a player or players. If Melbourne really want to keep Steve, they've got to at least talk turkey with us. There are 25 players in the same boat as Steve. They all made a big decision to come up here. It does make you crook in the guts that Steve's done what he's done, but he's had a fair bit of help from Melbourne in that regard as well."

Rogers will meet both ARU chief executive Gary Flowers and Waratahs coach Ewen McKenzie over the next two days as he continues his attempts to secure a release, with the Titans ready to make an immediate offer should he be successful.
 

[furrycat]

Coach
Messages
18,827
*cue storm fan* TAKE IT TO COURT *exit storm fan*

Wonder why they haven't tried to take legal action? They know they'll lose thats why...

Get packin' turner... Can't believe Melbourne are going to give up players for a nuffy winger.
 

skeepe

Immortal
Messages
47,380
I have actually heard the Storm fans saying that the Rogers situation is the same as the Turner situation.

What they conveniently forget is that Rogers initiated this with no urging from the Titans. The Titans have done the right thing and said they'll wait and see what happens and if Rogers gets a release, that's when they'll attempt to lure him. With Turner, Melbourne are the ones pulling the strings, telling Turner he should break a contract and stay with them.
 

Agent Mulder

Bench
Messages
4,329
I'm sick of the Gold Coast bitching about this.....STILL, Get over it, Everyone knows Parramatta have the best wingers in the comp anyway.
 

skeepe

Immortal
Messages
47,380
Oh dear. How deluded.

AM, would you feel the same way if a player signed with Parramatta, Parramatta built a plan for next year with that player in mind, and then said player decided at the 11th hour that, oh actually, I don't want to play for Parramatta anymore, and I won't give a good reason why.

I bet you'd be singing a different tune then.
 

The Colonel

Immortal
Messages
41,810
skeepe said:
Oh dear. How deluded.

AM, would you feel the same way if a player signed with Parramatta, Parramatta built a plan for next year with that player in mind, and then said player decided at the 11th hour that, oh actually, I don't want to play for Parramatta anymore, and I won't give a good reason why.

I bet you'd be singing a different tune then.

We've already had that problem and that prick signed with Manly.... ;-)

Glad to see the Titans sticking to it at least, if they or the NRL didn't the precedent that would be set would have problems for all clubs.
 

innsaneink

Referee
Messages
29,365
skeepe said:
Oh dear. How deluded.

AM, would you feel the same way if a player signed with Parramatta, Parramatta built a plan for next year with that player in mind, and then said player decided at the 11th hour that, oh actually, I don't want to play for Parramatta anymore, and I won't give a good reason why.

I bet you'd be singing a different tune then.

He gave a good reason, he said hes happy in melbourne now, thats his ''home'', he says its not about the money and he'd pay the Titans the difference that the Storm topped up.
Seems equivalent to Rogers', "I have family problems so I wanna break my contract cause I'll feel better returning "home"..." to me.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
67,083
Let them sign Rogers and then send them Turner, then insist the NRL do a thorough salary cap review!
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
67,083
ps So the Titans HAVEN'T made Rogers an offer despite him being under contract to the ARU?
 

skeepe

Immortal
Messages
47,380
innsaneink said:
He gave a good reason, he said hes happy in melbourne now, thats his ''home'', he says its not about the money and he'd pay the Titans the difference that the Storm topped up.
Seems equivalent to Rogers', "I have family problems so I wanna break my contract cause I'll feel better returning "home"..." to me.

They are completely different and you know it.

Rogers, off his own bat, has decided he wants to leave the ARU and head to Queensland. This is his own choice. The Titans have not offered him a contract, have not encouraged him to break his current contract, and have had absolutely nothing to do with his decision to leave union.

Turner is different. The Storm offered him a contract despite him being bound to another club, and are encouraging him to break the contract with the Titans. The Storm have EVERYTHING to do with his decision to not go to the Titans.
 

Evolution

Juniors
Messages
477
skeepe said:
I have actually heard the Storm fans saying that the Rogers situation is the same as the Turner situation.

What they conveniently forget is that Rogers initiated this with no urging from the Titans. The Titans have done the right thing and said they'll wait and see what happens and if Rogers gets a release, that's when they'll attempt to lure him. With Turner, Melbourne are the ones pulling the strings, telling Turner he should break a contract and stay with them.

So despite both Turner and the Storm saying that it was Turner that came to the club to say he wanted to stay with them and then Melbourne looked into Turner claims that he had not signed a contract with the Titans which were confirmed by the NRL and then they signed the contract.

You believe Searle’s side of the story with the very manipulative and evil Storm team that forced Turner to change his mind and are still using some sort of mind control on him to keep him away from there? Could it be this extra $100 000 that has been rumored that the Storm said they will pay him if he stays? Down the drain that went when Turner said he would pay any extra money to the Titans or would play for nothing if he did not have to go up there. So what other reason except he does not want to play for the Titans can be used now?

It is perfectly fine for Rodgers to break a contract to go to the Titans? I suppose in this instance it is the Titans that are getting the benefit so all is good along with the added benefit of him leaving Union to come back to League.

How do the Titans have so much money in the cap to play for all these players?
 

Prodigiousman

Juniors
Messages
933
Just a few points:

1. I personally can't see how Turner can turn out of the Storm in 2007 unless the Gold Coast get the compensation they are after.

2. The Titans of course have had something to do with Rogers wanting to switch to League in 2007 - and that main something is the fact they sounded him out for a contract in 2008 - and why wouldn't you ask him if he was interested in switching early if you were part of the Titans organisation? Makes complete sense football and business wise.

3. The main difference between Turner and Rogers situation is this:
* Rogers signed his current contract with the ARU some years ago that included the 2007 season and the Titans have signed him for the 2008 season for when his ARU contract expired - and if the ARU releases him from his contract they will sign him for 2007 as well.
* Turner agreed to play for the Titans during this year as his current Melbourne contract finished in 2006 and 'agreed' to play for them for 2007 and beyond - doing so when his contract with the Storm ended. He then was offered a new contract by the Storm AFTER he had agreed to the Titans offer and held a press conference about his decision.

Now these two situations can be considered similar but the key difference is Turner has signed/agreed to two contracts after his current deal expired - whereas Rogers is after a release from his current contract (signed 2 or 3 years ago when he was off-contract) so he can then sign with the Titans for 2007. The situation would be identical if Rogers had re-signed with the ARU this season (if his contract had ended in 2006) and then signed with the Titans for 2007 and wanted a release then.

It boils down to Turner signing two contracts while basically off contract - much like Ruben Wiki did with the Auckland Warriors and Canberra Raiders in 1994.
You might think I'm splitting hairs here but think about it - players getting released mid contract happens ALOT and that is what will happen with Rogers and the Titans are there with an offer that he'll sign.

Whereas if Rogers had only re-signed with the ARU for 2007 this year and then turned around and asked to get out of it before the contract even started so he could sign with the Titans - then we'd be comparing identical cases.

I realise I've repeated myself a bit there but Turner has done the dirty in a big way on the Titans and the Storm have made it happen. We're talking about breaking an agreement before actually playing for that team - as stated - players get out of contracts halfway through or get cut all the time but at least they honour a percentage of that deal before they cut and run.

And finally 4. The Titans can afford all this because they are working from a clean slate - that means not having to pay Luke Swain ridiculous amounts of money for 8 good games in 2003 when they won the premiership (yes I realise he's a Titan now but the Panthers were hamstrung by his contract in a big way after 2003) or needing to shell out relatively big money for a youngster like Joe Williams who hasn't even come close to delivering on his ability in the top grade yet.

Face the fact that a lot of players in the NRL are getting far more than they should be and that eats into established salary caps like you wouldn't believe. For the Titans they have a clean slate - but come 2007's feeding frenzy they might be struggling to sign two or three good players because all their contracts are 2 or 3 year jobs.
 

cyberdj

Juniors
Messages
95
The Colonel said:
Glad to see the Titans sticking to it at least, if they or the NRL didn't the precedent that would be set would have problems for all clubs.

A precedents appear to have been set already.

'A written contract no longer needs to be lodged with the NRL within 10 days of agreement.'

Scenario, a player agrees to join a club six months before the end of season. No contract is lodged within 10 days of the agreement being made, in fact 5 months down the track, still no written contract lodged with the NRL. Said player then gets injured and will be out of the game for 12-18 months. What happens now if the club tries to renege on the deal?
Well, the player has a verbal contract so the club has to honour the deal?
What if the club refuses to honour the deal, and player forced to take legal action to get some money to live on?
Will the NRL be forced to make the club honour the deal? (That would mean another precedent gets set)
Could the player gets screwed over by both club and NRL, and left broke and despondant?

BTW if the contract was signed and lodged within 10 days of the agreement being made, none of this would of occurred. Instead for some reason 3 months passes without the contract being ratified by the club, player/agent and the NRL (ie signed contract lodged in accordance with the NRL Rules and Regulations).
 

Willow

Assistant Moderator
Messages
109,037
Evolution said:
It is perfectly fine for Rodgers to break a contract to go to the Titans?
Rogers is not breaking any contracts.

Requesting a release is not a breach of contract. If both parties are in agreement, then a contract can be terminated without fuss.

If Union do not grant the release, then Rogers is contract-bound to stay put. If they grant the relase, then he is free to go.

Do you do understand this?

Evolution said:
How do the Titans have so much money in the cap to play for all these players?
Are you making some sort of veiled allegation about something you know nothing about?
 

Evolution

Juniors
Messages
477
Willow said:
Rogers is not breaking any contracts.

Requesting a release is not a breach of contract. If both parties are in agreement, then a contract can be terminated without fuss.

If Union do not grant the release, then Rogers is contract-bound to stay put. If they grant the relase, then he is free to go.

Do you do understand this?
I understand the contractual agreements behind it all. I just like how people view the two differently. It is fine for Rodgers to walk out on his contract before it is over but Turner is the devil for wanting to do the same.

They both have their reasons for what they are doing and it looks like the Titans want another team to release a player to them when they refuse to do the same.

Willow said:
Are you making some sort of veiled allegation about something you know nothing about?
Take it however you like.
 

cyberdj

Juniors
Messages
95
Willow said:
Are you making some sort of veiled allegation about something you know nothing about?

Hardly seems a veiled allegation. The Titans have signed some top line players, is it not plausable that with the signings they already have that they may be near the top end of the cap?

Your claim seem a bit over-reactional though.
 

DeeGan

Bench
Messages
2,800
Evolution said:
I understand the contractual agreements behind it all.

If one was to read on here and in your first post, it is obvious you do not.

Evolution said:
I just like how people view the two differently. It is fine for Rodgers to walk out on his contract before it is over but Turner is the devil for wanting to do the same.

As pointed out, Matt Rogers is seeking a release from his current contract with the ARU and NSW Warratahs - if granted (reports are it will be) - he is free to sign with who ever he pleases. Unlike Steve Turner, Matt Rogers has not signed any contract with any other professional sporting club for 2007 outside of the ARU and NSW Warratahs.


Evolution said:
They both have their reasons for what they are doing and it looks like the Titans want another team to release a player to them when they refuse to do the same. Are they giving out compensation for Rodgers backing out of a contract like they are demanding from the Storm to do the same?

Way off the mark with the above - don't let facts get in the way of your opinion here.

From John Cartwright:

"He has a contract with us for the following year (2008) where he is definitely coming to us. He probably does not see a lot of hope in rugby union.

"I can see where he is coming from, but he is contracted to the ARU and the Waratahs and before anything, he has to sort that out.

"If that can be done and he could come here in 2007 then that would be sensationa
l.
"

The Gold Coast Titans are not looking at coercing Matt Rogers in to something he is not intent on doing on his own. We as a club will respect the process and contractual obligations Matt has agreed too. IF the ARU and NSW Warratahs release Rogers, we as a club would be crazy not to entertain the idea of signing Rogers for 2007 on top of his 2008 and 2009 contract.

Why would we offer compensation to the ARU if they release the player from his contract? :lol: The ARU do not have to release Matt Rogers and if they don't, Rogers rightly or wrongly will sit out the season which has nothing to do with the Gold Coast Titans.
 

DeeGan

Bench
Messages
2,800
cyberdj said:
Hardly seems a veiled allegation. The Titans have signed some top line players, is it not plausable that with the signings they already have that they may be near the top end of the cap?

Your claim seem a bit over-reactional though.

Michael Searle has said that the club does have cap room in which Matt would be signing for around $200,000 season - huge pay cut for Rogers which all reports are he will be happy to take to 1. Move out of Sydney and 2. Play in the code he has come to prefer.

How do they (Titans) have the money? I guess it comes back to good recruitment and negotiating at the round table to ensure we fall in line with the $4.0M salary cap.
 

eelandia

Juniors
Messages
854
Some of you are forgetting that Turner publicly proclaimed he would be playing with the Titans next year on 2KY's BSB.

Then suddenly he had re-signed with the Storm.

Comparing it with the Rogers situation is a stretch at best.

In regards to Frank P, he was let go by the Titans because his religion came into play...and we all know how dangerous it is to fight someone based on religious grounds. Hence, the Titans thought it best to let him go.

****
 
Top