A W O L

[Wintergreen]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a particulary "nice" thing to have done.

However, before we try to get on the RL high moral ground, it's no different to what RL did for years to RU players.

Whilst the RU players may have had a moral obligation to stay in their code, they didn't have a contractual one.

Solomona is no different.

[AncientWarrior]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a particulary "nice" thing to have done.

However, before we try to get on the RL high moral ground, it's no different to what RL did for years to RU players.

Whilst the RU players may have had a moral obligation to stay in their code, they didn't have a contractual one.

Solomona is no different.

He is different. He had a contract. It's not rocket science. Irrespective of what you think of my debating qualifications you can't get behind that fact. It has nothing to do with 'nice' it's the law.

[jaws1]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a particulary "nice" thing to have done.

However, before we try to get on the RL high moral ground, it's no different to what RL did for years to RU players.

Whilst the RU players may have had a moral obligation to stay in their code, they didn't have a contractual one.

Solomona is no different.

Different circumstances when RL went for RU players they were amateur with no contract.Why did we pay a fee then Joel Tomkins when he came back to Wigan reason he was under contract

[Wintergreen]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a particulary "nice" thing to have done.

However, before we try to get on the RL high moral ground, it's no different to what RL did for years to RU players.

Whilst the RU players may have had a moral obligation to stay in their code, they didn't have a contractual one.

Solomona is no different.

Different circumstances when RL went for RU players they were amateur with no contract.Why did we pay a fee then Joel Tomkins when he came back to Wigan reason he was under contract

That's fine if you think the issue here is contractual rather than moral.

[Wintergreen]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a particulary "nice" thing to have done.

However, before we try to get on the RL high moral ground, it's no different to what RL did for years to RU players.

Whilst the RU players may have had a moral obligation to stay in their code, they didn't have a contractual one.

Solomona is no different.

He is different. He had a contract. It's not rocket science. Irrespective of what you think of my debating qualifications you can't get behind that fact. It has nothing to do with 'nice' it's the law.

So if that player decided he couldn't play RL but could play another sport, the contract would prevent him doing so?

[bill.inger]

[quote

BTW, following your line of reasoning, I'm sure Newcastle will be pleased to learn that they needn't have paid £800,000 for Tuigemala - they could have got him for nowt.[/quote]

Did Wigan receive payment from Richmond for Scott Quinnell in 1996 after the two years he was here or was he out of contract?
These are all points in Castleford favour.

[thegimble]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a particulary "nice" thing to have done.

However, before we try to get on the RL high moral ground, it's no different to what RL did for years to RU players.

Whilst the RU players may have had a moral obligation to stay in their code, they didn't have a contractual one.

Solomona is no different.

Different circumstances when RL went for RU players they were amateur with no contract.Why did we pay a fee then Joel Tomkins when he came back to Wigan reason he was under contract

That's fine if you think the issue here is contractual rather than moral.

When it goes to court Moral will mean nothing. Contract will mean everything and the wording in that contract and in Cas T and C

[josie andrews]

Surely the point here is that Solamona has broken a contract with Castleford. There do not appear to be any mitigating circumstances such as illness, family issues etc. What he has gone to do is irrelevant-it could be stamp collecting! He has agreed to play for Castleford and now he is trying to get out of this agreement.


And btw A Merry Xmas to all on the site especially Josie!

Thank you Merry Christmas ???? ???????? x

[AncientWarrior]

[quote

BTW, following your line of reasoning, I'm sure Newcastle will be pleased to learn that they needn't have paid £800,000 for Tuigemala - they could have got him for nowt.

Did Wigan receive payment from Richmond for Scott Quinnell in 1996 after the two years he was here or was he out of contract?
These are all points in Castleford favour.[/quote]

Richmond paid £200,000 to Wigan for Scott Quinnell. I don't know of any instance where a player still under contract changed code without the selling club receiving a transfer fee. Can you imagine Maurice Lindsay allowing a contracted player to leave Wigan for nothing? I don't think so.

[Kittwazzer]

23 DEC 2016 AVIVA PREMIERSHIP
N'hampton
24
Sale Sharks
5
HT 14-0


Justifies his signing I suppose. They'd have been nilled without him!