Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Got something to discuss about RL in general? Then this is the place to post it.
DaveO
Posts: 14314
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by DaveO » Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:25 pm

fozzieskem wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:23 pm
DaveO wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:25 pm
Well there is a surprise. Another club besides Wigan finds out if you sign a contract with a player to pay him £x and then ask him to take a pay cut he isn't happy.
Yup does sound awfully similar to Sam last season doesn’t it?
It certainly does and I don't know what clubs expect to happen when they do this. If the players had been told their wages were due to drop part way through the contract they were about to sign maybe they would have looked elsewhere. It's getting them to sign under false pretences.

User avatar
wall_of_voodoo
Posts: 860
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 12:51 am

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by wall_of_voodoo » Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:41 pm

DaveO wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:25 pm
fozzieskem wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:23 pm
DaveO wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:25 pm
Well there is a surprise. Another club besides Wigan finds out if you sign a contract with a player to pay him £x and then ask him to take a pay cut he isn't happy.
Yup does sound awfully similar to Sam last season doesn’t it?
It certainly does and I don't know what clubs expect to happen when they do this. If the players had been told their wages were due to drop part way through the contract they were about to sign maybe they would have looked elsewhere. It's getting them to sign under false pretences.
From reports, (so please excuse me if not totally correct) but Watkins was supposed to have been one of the Leeds marquee players and also under the terms of the contract he signed also the Leeds captain. Someone at the club wants to use the marquee spot for someone else (James Maloney) and take the burden of captaincy from Watkins who has appeared to struggle with the pressure it

Not quite the same as Sam who was out-of-contract when he left, still don't let facts get in the way of a good moan
I'm a better fan than you
Because I don't "Boo"!!!

Yes I bloody know transfer fees do not count on the salary cap for those illiterates that need it explaining to them because they assume everyone is as thick as they are :roll:

DaveO
Posts: 14314
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by DaveO » Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:35 pm

wall_of_voodoo wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:41 pm
DaveO wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:25 pm
fozzieskem wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:23 pm


Yup does sound awfully similar to Sam last season doesn’t it?
It certainly does and I don't know what clubs expect to happen when they do this. If the players had been told their wages were due to drop part way through the contract they were about to sign maybe they would have looked elsewhere. It's getting them to sign under false pretences.
From reports, (so please excuse me if not totally correct) but Watkins was supposed to have been one of the Leeds marquee players and also under the terms of the contract he signed also the Leeds captain. Someone at the club wants to use the marquee spot for someone else (James Maloney) and take the burden of captaincy from Watkins who has appeared to struggle with the pressure it

Not quite the same as Sam who was out-of-contract when he left, still don't let facts get in the way of a good moan
All players are out of contract when they leave, so what is that supposed to mean? It's is what happened while he was still our player that matters and that is similar to what happened with Watkins.

The club decided it didn't want to pay him how much the marquee wage it had agreed with him previously would be were it to take the option up of a further year on his deal. Instead, while he was still our player, it said it didn't want to pay that but would instead offer him a new deal on a lower wage blathering on about how this was still a high wage to excuse offering him a lower one.

So if you are arguing Leeds didn't want to pay Watkins his marquee wage then given that is exactly what Wigan no longer wanted to do with Sam T, I fail to see the difference. Both players were asked to play for their club going forward on lower wages than their clubs said they would pay them when they signed their original contracts.

We moan about players wanting to break contracts but when the clubs start doing this it is OK? If the clubs aren't careful they will end up in court if they decide a player suddenly isn't worth what they agreed to pay a player and want to change things.

pedro
Posts: 4030
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:37 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by pedro » Wed Jun 05, 2019 5:22 pm

DaveO wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:35 pm
wall_of_voodoo wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:41 pm
DaveO wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:25 pm


It certainly does and I don't know what clubs expect to happen when they do this. If the players had been told their wages were due to drop part way through the contract they were about to sign maybe they would have looked elsewhere. It's getting them to sign under false pretences.
From reports, (so please excuse me if not totally correct) but Watkins was supposed to have been one of the Leeds marquee players and also under the terms of the contract he signed also the Leeds captain. Someone at the club wants to use the marquee spot for someone else (James Maloney) and take the burden of captaincy from Watkins who has appeared to struggle with the pressure it

Not quite the same as Sam who was out-of-contract when he left, still don't let facts get in the way of a good moan
All players are out of contract when they leave, so what is that supposed to mean? It's is what happened while he was still our player that matters and that is similar to what happened with Watkins.

The club decided it didn't want to pay him how much the marquee wage it had agreed with him previously would be were it to take the option up of a further year on his deal. Instead, while he was still our player, it said it didn't want to pay that but would instead offer him a new deal on a lower wage blathering on about how this was still a high wage to excuse offering him a lower one.

So if you are arguing Leeds didn't want to pay Watkins his marquee wage then given that is exactly what Wigan no longer wanted to do with Sam T, I fail to see the difference. Both players were asked to play for their club going forward on lower wages than their clubs said they would pay them when they signed their original contracts.

We moan about players wanting to break contracts but when the clubs start doing this it is OK? If the clubs aren't careful they will end up in court if they decide a player suddenly isn't worth what they agreed to pay a player and want to change things.
hes saying Watkins isnt out of contract but tomkins was so is different
http://www.speedtest.net/result/1857407490.png

nathan_rugby
Posts: 1745
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by nathan_rugby » Wed Jun 05, 2019 6:20 pm

pedro wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 5:22 pm
DaveO wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:35 pm
wall_of_voodoo wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:41 pm


From reports, (so please excuse me if not totally correct) but Watkins was supposed to have been one of the Leeds marquee players and also under the terms of the contract he signed also the Leeds captain. Someone at the club wants to use the marquee spot for someone else (James Maloney) and take the burden of captaincy from Watkins who has appeared to struggle with the pressure it

Not quite the same as Sam who was out-of-contract when he left, still don't let facts get in the way of a good moan
All players are out of contract when they leave, so what is that supposed to mean? It's is what happened while he was still our player that matters and that is similar to what happened with Watkins.

The club decided it didn't want to pay him how much the marquee wage it had agreed with him previously would be were it to take the option up of a further year on his deal. Instead, while he was still our player, it said it didn't want to pay that but would instead offer him a new deal on a lower wage blathering on about how this was still a high wage to excuse offering him a lower one.

So if you are arguing Leeds didn't want to pay Watkins his marquee wage then given that is exactly what Wigan no longer wanted to do with Sam T, I fail to see the difference. Both players were asked to play for their club going forward on lower wages than their clubs said they would pay them when they signed their original contracts.

We moan about players wanting to break contracts but when the clubs start doing this it is OK? If the clubs aren't careful they will end up in court if they decide a player suddenly isn't worth what they agreed to pay a player and want to change things.
hes saying Watkins isnt out of contract but tomkins was so is different
Agreed. Pretty obvious the Tomkins wand Watkins situations are different.
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."

Caboosegg
Posts: 1624
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:51 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by Caboosegg » Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:53 pm

Isnt the difference obvious?

Tomkins, the club had an option for a futher year. They didnt take it but instead offered him a longer contract but not on a marquee contract/Wage

Watkins signed a contract saying he WILL be Marquee and Captain next year and leeds are going back on it.

Although the theme of offering a lower wage is the same the contract side is different.
RL's biggest issue is the constant negativity of its own fans.

support verb [ (ENCOURAGE)

"to agree with and give encouragement to someone or something because you want him, her, or it to succeed"

nathan_rugby
Posts: 1745
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by nathan_rugby » Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:38 pm

Caboosegg wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:53 pm
Isnt the difference obvious?

Tomkins, the club had an option for a futher year. They didnt take it but instead offered him a longer contract but not on a marquee contract/Wage

Watkins signed a contract saying he WILL be Marquee and Captain next year and leeds are going back on it.

Although the theme of offering a lower wage is the same the contract side is different.
Not at marquee salary or less than what he had been on?

Hasn’t it been quoted and verified that Tomkins contact offer was the 3rd biggest Wigan had offered ?

The conclusion from that is that it’s either a marquee salary (and high) or we have only ever offered two contacts worth the marquee amount: (what is it? £150k?)
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."

shaunedwardsfanclub
Posts: 5847
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:08 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by shaunedwardsfanclub » Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:49 pm

nathan_rugby wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:38 pm
Caboosegg wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:53 pm
Isnt the difference obvious?

Tomkins, the club had an option for a futher year. They didnt take it but instead offered him a longer contract but not on a marquee contract/Wage

Watkins signed a contract saying he WILL be Marquee and Captain next year and leeds are going back on it.

Although the theme of offering a lower wage is the same the contract side is different.
Not at marquee salary or less than what he had been on?

Hasn’t it been quoted and verified that Tomkins contact offer was the 3rd biggest Wigan had offered ?

The conclusion from that is that it’s either a marquee salary (and high) or we have only ever offered two contacts worth the marquee amount: (what is it? £150k?)
£175k I think.
Winning is down to 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration - Shaun Edwards

fozzieskem
Posts: 2867
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by fozzieskem » Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:22 am

To me it’s the similarity of both clubs trying to renegotiate deals they’d agreed on,it’s always a gamble bring back or indeed handing a player a big deal after all the next tackle could be his last.

Yes Tomkins deal was running down whereas Watkins deal was fairly new it’s tgat both clubs tried and succeeded in getting both players of their books as a marquee player,though if it’s true Watkins was due to be the marquee player next season why did Leeds go out and find two to fill the spots?,is anyone’s guess.

To me it highlights the problem with this silly marquee rule,you can’t predict the future so you can’t or shouldn’t at least go giving big deals out like a demented Noel Edmonds,I’ve never hid my distaste for the cap it’s stifling our sport but if it’s to stay give clubs the 350 thou on the cap and do away with marquee rule,it singles out players when after all it’s none of our business what they earn

User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 5242
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by Wigan_forever1985 » Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:35 am

fozzieskem wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:22 am
To me it’s the similarity of both clubs trying to renegotiate deals they’d agreed on,it’s always a gamble bring back or indeed handing a player a big deal after all the next tackle could be his last.

Yes Tomkins deal was running down whereas Watkins deal was fairly new it’s tgat both clubs tried and succeeded in getting both players of their books as a marquee player,though if it’s true Watkins was due to be the marquee player next season why did Leeds go out and find two to fill the spots?,is anyone’s guess.

To me it highlights the problem with this silly marquee rule,you can’t predict the future so you can’t or shouldn’t at least go giving big deals out like a demented Noel Edmonds,I’ve never hid my distaste for the cap it’s stifling our sport but if it’s to stay give clubs the 350 thou on the cap and do away with marquee rule,it singles out players when after all it’s none of our business what they earn
I agree i dont think the Marquee system works at all
Always be yourself - unless you can be Dan Bilzerian then ALWAYS be Dan Bilzerian!

Post Reply