Dave K. wrote:I hope we are keeping at eye on the happenings at Hudds, therecis talk of them signing Inu, if they do I'd look at one of their young wingers, maybe as part of the Jones deal.
Inu has signed for Leigh.
Seniors will both feature more next year. As Turner has left, they will both be direct replacements for either wing and centres.
Dave K. wrote:I hope we are keeping at eye on the happenings at Hudds, therecis talk of them signing Inu, if they do I'd look at one of their young wingers, maybe as part of the Jones deal.
I doubt that there will be a deal or a fee, we'll just agree to a release.
GiantJake1988 wrote:I’ve been told Hull are paying 40k of his salary still for next year. Giants are doing similar for Matagi and Turner
Ridiculous if true. Player doesn’t want to be here so we agree to release him from the contract HE signed and then we are going to pay £40K of his wage (assuming because Hudds can’t afford to pay the whole of what they are offering) What a f*cking joke, he wants to leave so bad let him go and play for what Huddersfield are willing to pay him.Let's not override the swear filter, it's there for a reason
Aswilco93 wrote:Ridiculous if true. Player doesn’t want to be here so we agree to release him from the contract HE signed and then we are going to pay £40K of his wage (assuming because Hudds can’t afford to pay the whole of what they are offering) What a f*cking joke, he wants to leave so bad let him go and play for what Huddersfield are willing to pay him. Original post edited.
It happens regularly if you want to free cap space up. Giants next year will be paying part of 4 players wages; Oliver Roberts, Seb Ikahihifo, Matagi and Jordan Turner
GiantJake1988 wrote:It happens regularly if you want to free cap space up. Giants next year will be paying part of 4 players wages; Oliver Roberts, Seb Ikahihifo, Matagi and Jordan Turner
Haha surely not if the player wants to leave, just let him leave and pay nothing towards his wages? Or am i missing something
All one year extensions for those that the club decide to keep, I wouldn't be sad if Griffin went elsewhere and we also sold Connor whilst he still has value.
Jones situation is a shambles and has cost the club loads of money and likely continue to do so, Houghton and Shaul are done deals but I'd have offered them a year contract this time around as well
I just don't see anyone hammering down our door for many of the players, Sao, Connor and Satae so let the players earn a decent contract through performances/
MorningGlory23 wrote:Haha surely not if the player wants to leave, just let him leave and pay nothing towards his wages? Or am i missing something
Team x has player y on £100,000/year and has a full year to go on contract, Team z will take you off his hands but only want to pay £60k/year as they are doing you a 'favour' by taking him off your hands as a problem player and £100k off your cap so they ask for £40k to cover that difference. Tea x say no, team z say fine, we'll go elsewhere, player y keeps on getting £100,000 and could be left on the sidelines all year long doing feck all and taking up cap space. Given the circumstances and feeble excuses he should have had his contract terminated and he be told to do one, taken the urine out of the club IMO, seemingly the 'can't settle down/don't want to move into the area excuse gets brought up too often as a reason to want out.
Remember Bulldogs did same with regards to Pritchard and they allegedly covered half his actual wage cost so they could offload a player well past their best and use his salary cap elsewhere. Pearson was never going to continue on paying the huge chunk of wages so it was a gimme FP was going back to Aus despite the supposed 'contract' length.
48756c6c20 524c4643 wrote:Team x has player y on £100,000/year and has a full year to go on contract, Team z will take you off his hands but only want to pay £60k/year as they are doing you a 'favour' by taking him off your hands as a problem player and £100k off your cap so they ask for £40k to cover that difference. Tea x say no, team z say fine, we'll go elsewhere, player y keeps on getting £100,000 and could be left on the sidelines all year long doing feck all and taking up cap space. Given the circumstances and feeble excuses he should have had his contract terminated and he be told to do one, taken the urine out of the club IMO, seemingly the 'can't settle down/don't want to move into the area excuse gets brought up too often as a reason to want out.
Remember Bulldogs did same with regards to Pritchard and they allegedly covered half his actual wage cost so they could offload a player well past their best and use his salary cap elsewhere. Pearson was never going to continue on paying the huge chunk of wages so it was a gimme FP was going back to Aus despite the supposed 'contract' length.
You are very much correct.
The difference with Super League is that the whole wage will come off your cap and only what the Giants pay him will be on ours. The difference will be an added expense to Mr Pearson.
In the NRL the “difference” remains on the selling clubs cap.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum