LEGAL FIGHT 'COULD BANKRUPT BULLS'

[GeoffN]

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... dford.html

Bradford have revealed that arch rivals Leeds are suing them for £3.2million over the Iestyn Harris saga and, if successful, the move would bankrupt the Super League club....

[Bear]

This is bad news for RL In general.

[Spanakopitta]

I appreciate that bradford shouldn't have signed harris when there was common knowledge about this condition in his contract or whatever about leeds having 1st dib on him if he came back from union.

BUT, why is there not more critising Harris, why is he not being sued???? He knows what he's signed up for? :doz:

[ancientnloyal]

Are they still banging on about this? The Leeds chairman always has been a bit of a dipstick

[medlocke]

Tuff sh1t for Bradford, they new what they where doing when they signed the useless git, no use moaning on now

[CherryandWhiteandProud]

This isn't good for RL if it goes through. Let's admit, as much as we hate, for example, St Helen's it would be a shame to see them go. Maybe relegated for a season, but not bankrupt. We'd miss Big Matches, Rivalry, Hype, all the things that makes sport good. This would have a similar effect on Leeds fans. Leeds could do more harm than is justice with this. Idiots.

God posted:
So does this meen we wont be the most hated side in Super League, after all we have never made another Super League club bankrupt due to a player dispute :doz:

No, if another club sued the RFL and ended RL in Britain we would still be the most hated ex-RL club in britain.

I've had my rant, now I am content.

[Leyther Pie]

I heard that they will be done to the sum of around 1 million quid over this saga :conf:

[butt monkey]

The Bradford Chairman, Peter Hood, is quoted as saying that they are confident that they would win the case and that Leeds would be hard proved to explain why they can claim the sums in question!

Nevertheless, both Bradford AND Leeds have spent over £500,000 on legal fees already over this overrated ex-union twerp! So expect more wasted money and more derogatory comments in the media when the Court case (if it does) go to Court.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... _bulls.php

Read some of the posts! The one by "Adrian" might be quite pertinent.

[doc]

To be honest I can't see how Leeds can argue that they have first crack at him (Spotty). If Harris moved at the end of his contract or by transfer (fee being paid to Leeds) to another club in another sport it should be treated as termination of his contract with them and leave him as a free agent just as in any other form of business.

[butt monkey]

doc posted:
To be honest I can't see how Leeds can argue that they have first crack at him (Spotty). If Harris moved at the end of his contract or by transfer (fee being paid to Leeds) to another club in another sport it should be treated as termination of his contract with them and leave him as a free agent just as in any other form of business.

I think Leeds' argument is that Harris signed a pre-contract with them, in-so-much-as that IF/WHEN he returned to RL, Leeds would have first call upon his services.

This duly happened but, as claimed by the Loiners (and subsequently won in a Court Ruling), broke his arrangement with them, claiming that Bradford "must" have enticed him to break his "contract".

Now this "fight" is about compensation, for this over-rated has-been!