Quote ="Red John"Indeed. Salford would have to offer substantially more money to [iany[/i player to get them to accept a flaky contract that could see them binned after one season over a guaranteed two or three year deal at another club. Can the club afford this? Even if we could, your idea causes problems. Let's imagine Salford are taken over by Sheik Yarbouti, and he pumps billions of pounds into the club. The salary cap means we can only spend a certain amount. Because of your 'potentially binned after one season' idea, the club has to offer players more money. So the number of players they can afford drops, the squad gets thinner, the chances of finishing outside the top 8 increases, so the chances of a player getting, effectively, sacked increases. It would take a special player (one who couldn't get a place anywhere else) to accept those terms. Agreed, but I don't think putting a termination clause in the contract is a viable solution. Let's look at another example. Suppose, by some miracle, we have a squad of superstars under your play well or get sacked regime, but get a run of serious injuries and end up with a massively depleted team for most of the season. We finish outside the top 8. So we then release all our best players because there's a clause in their contract that terminates the contract if they finish lower than 8th. Is this a good idea? Other clubs get by with guaranteed deals. The solution lies elsewhere. Not sure where, but ">elsewhere.'" What we need to deal with is the here and now not some fantasy island suggestion that a rich individual takes over who will pump billions in. In your unrealistice scenario, we would presumably be competing on a level footing with all other clubs paying the full cap and consequently able to go after well motivated players at the top end of the market as opposed to what we are left with now. In such a case a modified approach could be adopted to performance management but that is not where we are. Your second scenario flies off at an even wilder tangent. If you have a clause that allows you the [size=150OPTION[/size to terminate a contract why would you use it terminate the contracts of the best players? Surely you would release the worst players! Even then in the circumstances you outline, you may not wish to release any because you have clearly articulated the mitigation for the poor performance i.e the run of serious injuries and hence the massively depleted squad. Perhaps we could ask the Newcastle Knights how they offload players who still a year to go on their contract.

Quote ="Red John"Indeed. Salford would have to offer substantially more money to [iany[/i player to get them to accept a flaky contract that could see them binned after one season over a guaranteed two or three year deal at another club. Can the club afford this? Even if we could, your idea causes problems. Let's imagine Salford are taken over by Sheik Yarbouti, and he pumps billions of pounds into the club. The salary cap means we can only spend a certain amount. Because of your 'potentially binned after one season' idea, the club has to offer players more money. So the number of players they can afford drops, the squad gets thinner, the chances of finishing outside the top 8 increases, so the chances of a player getting, effectively, sacked increases. It would take a special player (one who couldn't get a place anywhere else) to accept those terms. Agreed, but I don't think putting a termination clause in the contract is a viable solution. Let's look at another example. Suppose, by some miracle, we have a squad of superstars under your play well or get sacked regime, but get a run of serious injuries and end up with a massively depleted team for most of the season. We finish outside the top 8. So we then release all our best players because there's a clause in their contract that terminates the contract if they finish lower than 8th. Is this a good idea? Other clubs get by with guaranteed deals. The solution lies elsewhere. Not sure where, but ">elsewhere.'" What we need to deal with is the here and now not some fantasy island suggestion that a rich individual takes over who will pump billions in. In your unrealistice scenario, we would presumably be competing on a level footing with all other clubs paying the full cap and consequently able to go after well motivated players at the top end of the market as opposed to what we are left with now. In such a case a modified approach could be adopted to performance management but that is not where we are. Your second scenario flies off at an even wilder tangent. If you have a clause that allows you the [size=150OPTION[/size to terminate a contract why would you use it terminate the contracts of the best players? Surely you would release the worst players! Even then in the circumstances you outline, you may not wish to release any because you have clearly articulated the mitigation for the poor performance i.e the run of serious injuries and hence the massively depleted squad. Perhaps we could ask the Newcastle Knights how they offload players who still a year to go on their contract.

Quote ="Red John"A risk that coud see the club unburdened by any sort of player ">whatsoever.'" Well not really because there are only so many places to go. Only 14 teams and the gap between SL and championship salary cap is substantial.

Quote ="Red John"A risk that coud see the club unburdened by any sort of player ">whatsoever.'" Well not really because there are only so many places to go. Only 14 teams and the gap between SL and championship salary cap is substantial.

Quote ="Ocker"Well not really because there are only so many places to go. Only 14 teams and the gap between SL and championship salary cap is ">substantial.'" So, the players who have more than one offer on the table will go to the clubs who are able to offer guaranteed two or three year deals. The rest - the ones without decent offers from elsewhere (y'know, the ones no-one else wants) - will come to Salford to join the contract termination lottery. Brilliant.

Quote ="Ocker"Well not really because there are only so many places to go. Only 14 teams and the gap between SL and championship salary cap is ">substantial.'" So, the players who have more than one offer on the table will go to the clubs who are able to offer guaranteed two or three year deals. The rest - the ones without decent offers from elsewhere (y'know, the ones no-one else wants) - will come to Salford to join the contract termination lottery. Brilliant.

Quote ="Red John"So, the players who have more than one offer on the table will go to the clubs who are able to offer guaranteed two or three year deals. The rest - the ones without decent offers from elsewhere (y'know, the ones no-one else wants) - will come to Salford to join the contract termination lottery. ">Brilliant.'" Only if we are very lucky. If not they'll do a year in our treatment room. icon_wink.gif" alt="icon_wink.gif" title="Wink" />

Quote ="Red John"So, the players who have more than one offer on the table will go to the clubs who are able to offer guaranteed two or three year deals. The rest - the ones without decent offers from elsewhere (y'know, the ones no-one else wants) - will come to Salford to join the contract termination lottery. ">Brilliant.'" Only if we are very lucky. If not they'll do a year in our treatment room. icon_wink.gif" alt="icon_wink.gif" title="Wink" />

"If you have a clause that allows you the OPTION to terminate a contract why would you use it terminate the contracts of the best players? Surely you would release the worst players"



Explain how this stands up in employment legislation:

1. Players can ask to be released but the club can require a transfer fee: this makes them different in that they cannot just hand in a month's (or whatever) notice. At the same time it gives them security of their contract. You remove one, their soliciors will make sure the other is removed. So Ratchford (for example) could leave in July.

2. You are not talking redundancy so explain how you marry "unacceptable performance" with lack of points in a season won by others, whose performance is not seen as worthy of sacking?

3. How you decide on the worst players. Poor Broughton: few tackles and few passes. Out! Your and my view is immaterial here: the targets and the stats set to show the meeting of such targets become the golden rule.

We're not a million miles away... We're a billion!