The True Meaning of Ancient and Loyal

[MrsLam]

Listen I read about 3 of your opinions but my eyes are all over the place right now and I don't think I even understood the ones I did read but good on Kris. I absolutely love the guy, I remember reading that someone had said "Faz is not loyal" He hasn't actually agreed anything yet has he? I've been at uni all day so not read any news yet.

[DaveO]

Fraggle posted:

You're making the mistake in saying that he's driving this. He's not. The RFU approached the Wigan club about the possibility of him and Rads being available. The club invited the two players to join the discussions, Rads said no thanks, Faz is trying to make a decision about his financial long-term future. There's probably some clause that says that whilst negotiations are ongoing then there will be no public announcements from the player as that could jeapadise any discussions.

Given this:

"Even if we did have it, under the salary cap we can't spend a penny of it anyway - we'd rather have the player."

Saind by ML I can't understand why the club let the RFU anywhere near Farrell.

A simple phone call along the lines of "Hi, Andy, some nutcase form the RFU has been asking if you were available but we pointed out you are contracted to us for two more years. Just thought you ought to know. Get well soon. Bye."

Well you get my drift.

Dave

[Fraggle]

DaveO posted:

Fraggle posted:

You're making the mistake in saying that he's driving this. He's not. The RFU approached the Wigan club about the possibility of him and Rads being available. The club invited the two players to join the discussions, Rads said no thanks, Faz is trying to make a decision about his financial long-term future. There's probably some clause that says that whilst negotiations are ongoing then there will be no public announcements from the player as that could jeapadise any discussions.

Given this:

"Even if we did have it, under the salary cap we can't spend a penny of it anyway - we'd rather have the player."

Saind by ML I can't understand why the club let the RFU anywhere near Farrell.

A simple phone call along the lines of "Hi, Andy, some nutcase form the RFU has been asking if you were available but we pointed out you are contracted to us for two more years. Just thought you ought to know. Get well soon. Bye."

Well you get my drift.

Dave

I hadn't read Lindsay's comments when I wrote those messages, but it does seem to put a different spin on things doesn't it? As you say, the club should have immidiately told the RFU to bog off and things would never have got to the players, but it seems Faz is being a bit more pro-active in wanting a new challenge than the initial stories were saying. If Maurice is any kind of chairman he should put his foor down and insist on keeping his players, it's not like we've a massive squad to start with.

[warrior till i die]

im going to say to radlinski staying is super super kris super super kris super super kris super kris radlinski!!

[The Black Pearl]

Radlinski is a great player but I think on last noghts performance and others that I have seen he isn't a leader. Just look how we should have closed the game down in the last 10mins I truely believe that if Farrell had played we would have won the game. Good luck Faz from a true Riversider.

[robjoenz]

thegimble posted:
So then who do you think the players will respect then a guy who is going to union for the money or a guy who will stay and loose out financially. He could go for a new challenge or more money but Radlinski will stay and fight whilst Farrel will take the money and run.

If Farrell stays because the deal collapses on financial terms then how can u excpect players to have the same respect for him now as they did a few weeks ago. as he was willing to leave if terms are met. He has been paid well and looked after well by the club.

Its amazing how you excpect fans to stay loyal and players not.

I expect true fans to wait for the full story to emerge before passing judgement. It seems as though yourself and a few other have already decided Farrell is a money grabber and off to Union to line his pockets.

By all accounts Farrell is well off already and the financial deal offered to him by Union is not disimilar to that which he is on now so to say he is going purely for the money unwarranted IMO.

Similarly things seemed to have quietened down because clubs think it a risk taking a League forward who will take time to adapt, to my understanding it's nothing to do with financial terms.

Farrell has not said much concerning his future, probably to stop the press manipulating stories. It would be nice if he'd make a press release soon but until then who knows what is going on other than some rumours a mate of mate who has links with the club told you down the pub?

[DaveO]

Fraggle posted:
If Maurice is any kind of chairman he should put his foor down and insist on keeping his players, it's not like we've a massive squad to start with.

Quire right. It is his job to put the interests of the team first.

If you read the article he is putting the interests of Farrell before that of the team.

Under the circumstances and given his comments about not needing or wanting the money, he should insist Farrell at least plays this season out.

If he lets Farrell leave this is worse than when Eric Hughes got rid of Edwards.

Dave

[warrior till i die]

at least farrells hair looks a bit decent now.It will be a big loss if he goes but at the end of the day its his decision and if he wants a new challenge id support him.

[thegimble]

robjoenz posted:

thegimble posted:
So then who do you think the players will respect then a guy who is going to union for the money or a guy who will stay and loose out financially. He could go for a new challenge or more money but Radlinski will stay and fight whilst Farrel will take the money and run.

If Farrell stays because the deal collapses on financial terms then how can u excpect players to have the same respect for him now as they did a few weeks ago. as he was willing to leave if terms are met. He has been paid well and looked after well by the club.

Its amazing how you excpect fans to stay loyal and players not.

I expect true fans to wait for the full story to emerge before passing judgement. It seems as though yourself and a few other have already decided Farrell is a money grabber and off to Union to line his pockets.

By all accounts Farrell is well off already and the financial deal offered to him by Union is not disimilar to that which he is on now so to say he is going purely for the money unwarranted IMO.

Similarly things seemed to have quietened down because clubs think it a risk taking a League forward who will take time to adapt, to my understanding it's nothing to do with financial terms.

Farrell has not said much concerning his future, probably to stop the press manipulating stories. It would be nice if he'd make a press release soon but until then who knows what is going on other than some rumours a mate of mate who has links with the club told you down the pub?

Ive posted a similar message to the first part of yours in the last couple of days. There is something more here than we are been told.

Now Mo tells us the deal will take time. Ive never called him a money grabber or that he was lining his pockets. The first message was re Radlinski staying and that the money side for him was not an issue. Some people are happy with what they have in life and some are not.

Generally the grass is not greener on the otherside.

Whilst we all have a go on one and other its the players who will suffer. Like all id rather he makes his mind up gets a contact signed and go if he is going. Its not fair on the present squad. If Faz left today wed be in a position to get cover to a much needed squad. Whilst they are hagling over the deal we are 1 shirt down yes hes not back until May, but we could get cover in and have the financial means under the cap to do so.

We need a big player in asap if he is going and with the NRL not yet underway we mioght get cover. The cover needs not be world class on a short term basis (until the end of the season) but cover is needed as last night showed the players were shattered after 70min as we did not have the bench of the quality of the Bulls.

The longer the deal is refused or signed the harder it will be to get a player in.

[robjoenz]

thegimble posted:
We need a big player in asap if he is going and with the NRL not yet underway we might get cover. The cover needs not be world class on a short term basis (until the end of the season) but cover is needed as last night showed the players were shattered after 70min as we did not have the bench of the quality of the Bulls.

The longer the deal is refused or signed the harder it will be to get a player in.

A big not-world class player? I don't follow, tall you mean?

NRL might not be underway but players are all tied up in contracts now and we'll have no chance of getting a decent replacement let along anyone anything like as good as Farrell.

Whether he goes now, drags dealings on for a couple of months or stays we aren't going to be able to get any cover better than what we've already got for this season. Lockers has taken over as LF and we've loads of second rows, we have the squad available in that position to cover his injury spell but as for signings it's far too late IMO.