WiganWarriorsFans.com

100% Warrior wrote:

DaveO wrote:Why didn't he just tell Sarries to get lost?

Because if he has a player who's determined to go he may as well concentrate on obtaining the best deal possible for the club from Sarries.

We don't want Joel to leave but if you create an unhappy player by keeping him to his contract you risk disrupting the team ethos as a whole.

Not necessarily!

The biggest aspect of this that Dave hints at, is why sign anyone to any contract if at the drop of a hat the player (or his agent ) decide they "wants out" or move onto fresh pastures?

The fact a RU club is the one linked with Joel is regardless. If the precedent is set, what is to stop Leeds or St Helens (for example) tapping other players to ask for transfers and them leaving with the minimum fuss/transfers - just to allow "unsettled" players to leave to prevent camp disharmony as you say?

A club/chairman will offer a player a 5 year contract if they think that the player will be an asset to the club for the 5 years offered, if during that time another club shows an interest in that player whether it is a year or 2 or 3 into the contract then the club/chairman will have a few simple things to weigh up, firstly is the player irreplaceable, what sort of compensation package could the club recieve, does the player want to stay or go? etc.

In this case Joel is certainly not irreplaceable although he would certainly be a loss, the club will recieve a handsome compensation package and finally it seems as though Joel does want to go and who can blame him with the lack of respect the sport has shown his brother in recent times, amongst other things.

Sorry to break this to people but contracts mean absolutely nothing nowadays in any sport and if a player wants to leave 99.9% of the time they will do. A contract simply gives a player security of a wage for however long the contract is and that probably was the reason Joel signed for 5 years.

Referring to this topic, who can seriously blame Joel for wanting to leave even if it is only for financial gain, some people need to stop being so naive, if your a plumber, painter, waitress, school teacher etc. and somebody from another organisation offers you triple the money and more to do basically the same job, hmmmmmm let me think? what should I do? It is only a short career and a risky career at that, so who can blame Joel for having his head turned by money cos I certainly don't.

it will be a rumour for certain

100% Warrior wrote:

DaveO wrote:Why didn't he just tell Sarries to get lost?

Because if he has a player who's determined to go he may as well concentrate on obtaining the best deal possible for the club from Sarries.

We don't want Joel to leave but if you create an unhappy player by keeping him to his contract you risk disrupting the team ethos as a whole.

No you don't. You manage the situation and do not let that happen.

If you let players dictate to the club like this contracts are worthless.

Time to make the players fulfil their obligations. If they go into a sulk and don't want to play then the club needs to deal with it. If it can't then it's man management skills are lacking.

DaveO I do agree with you, it would be great if we lived in an ideal world and we could do that with players but, unfortunately 'Player Power' is a very destructive concept and clubs realise this and in the end give in and the player gets what he wants ultimately. I am not saying this is what is happening with Joel but I have had first hand experiance of 'Player Power' at a high level of sport and it is not easy to manage at all. Having said all that, I do appreciate what you are saying.

Contracts are not worth the paper they are written on and haven't been for a very long time.

butt monkey wrote:
The fact a RU club is the one linked with Joel is regardless. If the precedent is set, what is to stop Leeds or St Helens (for example) tapping other players to ask for transfers and them leaving with the minimum fuss/transfers - just to allow "unsettled" players to leave to prevent camp disharmony as you say?

Exactly. I mentioned the Harris saga as that was a player on five year deal at Wire who wanted to go to Leeds. He got his way eventually but it caused a hell of a stink at the time and few people supported Harris.

If Leeds came in for Joel IL would I presume tell them to go away.

Joel can ask to leave if he wants but having signed a five year deal if the club says no he should simply accept it and get on with it. He could have absolutely no complaints if the club did that.

The club and IL should do what is best for the club and we should not automatically assume that is always to let the player leave which is the usual almost default reaction when this crops up.

I should add given the salary cap any compensation package is not worth much in practical terms. The club makes a profit, it doesn't need the money, it can't spend it on players wages so I do not see a financial incentive to allow him to leave.

Dont know how true it is but ive been told that Saracens have offered 2.2 million for both Sam & Joel.Like i said dont know how true it is but it seems a big offer.If what ive posted is right the wages for both of them will earn dwarfs what they would earn in RL.

Different sport but Modric wanted to leave Spurs recently after signing a 5yr deal (i think) and they dug their heels in and he's still there. so it can happen

Fujiman wrote:Different sport but Modric wanted to leave Spurs recently after signing a 5yr deal (i think) and they dug their heels in and he's still there. so it can happen

He will be going in January!

gillysmyhero wrote:Dont know how true it is but ive been told that Saracens have offered 2.2 million for both Sam & Joel.Like i said dont know how true it is but it seems a big offer.If what ive posted is right the wages for both of them will earn dwarfs what they would earn in RL.

I presume you mean they have offered Wigan 2.2 million quid as compensation.

If so and disregarding the "unhappy player" syndrome you have to ask why on earth the club would entertain accepting it.

That would be such a negative thing to happen for the club and the fans. The most exiting player in SL (Sam) let go as soon as a large wadge of cash is waved? The negative effects on revenue would be huge.

How many people do you think would not renew their season tickets either in protest or just because they felt the team was being undermined if this went through?

Sport for clubs is not about profit as main motivator. It's about winning stuff and while the finances have to be on an even keel it should be quite easy to turn this offer down.

If IL accepts it I am afraid the "no point keeping an unhappy player, we don don't want to stand in the way of players" excuses that would undoubtedly be trotted out won't wash.

Letting either player go as soon as cash is waved is not what I want in a chairman. I want someone who looks after the interests of Wigan RL and I do not see how letting players in their prime who are contracted to the club go does that at all.