Risk or Reward?

Got something to discuss about RL in general? Then this is the place to post it.
DaveO
Posts: 15931
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: Risk or Reward?

Post by DaveO »

Contracts are pretty worthless but if players do sign long term deals and renege on them without the clubs agreement I hope they end up in court.

As we have seen most clubs including Wigan will let players leave if things are done properly. Not that I like it. But if they just walk out the book should be thrown at them.
AndyNick
Posts: 280
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Risk or Reward?

Post by AndyNick »

We know better than anyone that when the NRL comes knocking, contracts become pretty irrelevant. Sam Tomkins signs a 5 year deal that stipulates that during the 1st 3 years, he cannot talk to Rugby Union or the NRL. Less than 2 years in he signs for the Warriors. Now the good thing about having the 5 year deal in place is that we were able to command a transfer fee.

There was Gareth Hock. He signed a 5 year deal, NRL came knocking and all of a sudden he doesn't want a 5 year deal anymore. Now i've heard several versions of what happens next but we can all agree on the fact that Wigan were entitled to demand a transfer fee, one wasn't forthcoming and Hock leaves the club in unsavoury circumstances.

We've had the issues this summer with Messrs Sandow and Segeyaro. You can see both sides of it but the Taumalolo deal is certainly unprecedented.

The problem I can see with offering contracts like that (and this will sound unbelievebly arrogant) is that Superleague is packed with players who didn't make it at Wigan. I'm not going to name names but i'm sure we can name an entire team full of them. Potentially they could have all been on 5 year deals with us
Post Reply