Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

NRL and other Australian Rugby League Discussion
Fade To Black
Member
Member
Posts: 4783
Joined: Tue 21 Feb, 2012 5:51 pm
Has liked: 29 times
Been liked: 61 times

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Unread post by Fade To Black » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:20 pm

the third wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 3:06 pm
Dib called Woods on Tuesday night after the Bulldogs’ decision was made public to inform him of the coaching situation.

- AAP

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... 4947d5d974
At least Unca Ray had the decency to ring Azza and consult with him, not like those bad people at Wests Tigers who left Mr 2040 to have to resort to having to say things such as "disappointed is a big word but I didn't hear from anyone within the club for 3 weeks", and " the first I heard about anything was on the TV whilst I was having a feed with me missus". Poor fella ain't got much book-learnin's behind him that is for sure.
Eagerly await more pearls of wisdom from the big dog, he will keep all WT fans amused with his dim-witted ramblings for the next few at least.


User avatar
Basil Tiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 559
Joined: Tue 18 Sep, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Northern NSW(ex-Sydney).
Been liked: 3 times

Unread post by Basil Tiger » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:38 pm

Spud Murphy wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 7:48 pm
Jim Dymock should get the gig, he's a good coach.
He was promised the Gig back in 2011(12?),not sure who was on the Board at the time so the promise is probably worthless now.

I haven't seen it mentioned but apparently one of the reasons DH left Manly was the growing interference of the Eagle Angel girls in the running of the Football Club.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... inrao.html
Greetings All,from far Northern NSW.

User avatar
Milky
Member
Member
Posts: 5091
Joined: Fri 29 Mar, 2013 7:08 pm
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 10 times

Unread post by Milky » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:42 pm

jirskyr wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 1:43 pm
Cultured Bogan wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 12:13 pm
TopTiger wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 12:01 pm
Cultured Bogan wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 11:51 am


How was it non binding?
Supposedly signed a heads of agreement and not a contract.
Ah OK, cheers.
Like I said, a million to one that Dessie doesn't hire his favourite lawyer and take that to court. Dogs will be forced to settle, no doubts about it. Des might not get the full value of his "heads of agreement" but it will cost Dogs hundreds of thousands if not millions to either defeat him in court or reach an agreement.

You would expect that Des' lawyers and manager would have know at the time of "heads of agreement" extension that there might be blood in the water at end of season and not made an agreement that left Des totally out to dry.

BTW I had to look up what a HoA was, wikipedia:
A set of heads of agreement, heads of terms or letter of intent is a non-binding document outlining the main issues relevant to a tentative (partnership or other) agreement.[1] A heads of agreement document will only be enforceable when it is adopted into a parent contract and subsequently agreed upon, unless otherwise stated. Until that point, a heads of agreement will not be legally binding (See Fletcher Challenge Energy Ltd v Electricity Corp of New Zealand Ltd [2002] 2 NZLR 433).

However, such documents can be legally binding if the agreement document contains terms or language that expressly indicates the binding intention. Equally, a letter which contains no express indication of whether its terms were intended to be binding, can be found to be binding due to language used.


So we are being told now that Dogs announce Des' extension a few months ago and actually the terms and issues were written on a bit of toilet paper in lead pencil? How many other NRL contracts are done in this manner, and is this the same thing that Fifita had when he had that fight with the Dogs over revocation of contract?
Legally speaking, an agreement requires intent and consideration to be legally binding.

Consideration was obviously there with Hasler agreeing to coach, the reported 1.5mil per season.

Intent was there when the Dogs announced the signing and Hasler put pen to paper.

Agreement was obviously there.

The heads of agreement was legally binding no doubt about it. I think its just Dib saving his backside infront of the fans and there will be a payment organised to Hasler.

User avatar
Fibros
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon 14 Aug, 2017 6:23 pm
Been liked: 8 times

Unread post by Fibros » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 10:00 pm

I know its a long shot but wouldn't it be great entertainment if the dogs made Sharon captain.

Nelson
Member
Member
Posts: 2531
Joined: Sat 31 Oct, 2015 11:17 am
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 75 times

Unread post by Nelson » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 10:30 pm

Milky wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:42 pm
jirskyr wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 1:43 pm
Cultured Bogan wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 12:13 pm
TopTiger wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 12:01 pm


Supposedly signed a heads of agreement and not a contract.
Ah OK, cheers.
Like I said, a million to one that Dessie doesn't hire his favourite lawyer and take that to court. Dogs will be forced to settle, no doubts about it. Des might not get the full value of his "heads of agreement" but it will cost Dogs hundreds of thousands if not millions to either defeat him in court or reach an agreement.

You would expect that Des' lawyers and manager would have know at the time of "heads of agreement" extension that there might be blood in the water at end of season and not made an agreement that left Des totally out to dry.

BTW I had to look up what a HoA was, wikipedia:
A set of heads of agreement, heads of terms or letter of intent is a non-binding document outlining the main issues relevant to a tentative (partnership or other) agreement.[1] A heads of agreement document will only be enforceable when it is adopted into a parent contract and subsequently agreed upon, unless otherwise stated. Until that point, a heads of agreement will not be legally binding (See Fletcher Challenge Energy Ltd v Electricity Corp of New Zealand Ltd [2002] 2 NZLR 433).

However, such documents can be legally binding if the agreement document contains terms or language that expressly indicates the binding intention. Equally, a letter which contains no express indication of whether its terms were intended to be binding, can be found to be binding due to language used.


So we are being told now that Dogs announce Des' extension a few months ago and actually the terms and issues were written on a bit of toilet paper in lead pencil? How many other NRL contracts are done in this manner, and is this the same thing that Fifita had when he had that fight with the Dogs over revocation of contract?
Legally speaking, an agreement requires intent and consideration to be legally binding.

Consideration was obviously there with Hasler agreeing to coach, the reported 1.5mil per season.

Intent was there when the Dogs announced the signing and Hasler put pen to paper.

Agreement was obviously there.

The heads of agreement was legally binding no doubt about it. I think its just Dib saving his backside infront of the fans and there will be a payment organised to Hasler.
That's not the test for determining whether a Heads of Agreement is binding. It's whether the parties intended the agreement to be immediately binding having regard to the language contained in the Heads of Agreement and it's to be assessed objectively taking into account the circumstances giving rise to the agreement.


User avatar
Milky
Member
Member
Posts: 5091
Joined: Fri 29 Mar, 2013 7:08 pm
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 10 times

Unread post by Milky » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 11:47 pm

Nelson wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 10:30 pm
Milky wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:42 pm
jirskyr wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 1:43 pm
Cultured Bogan wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 12:13 pm


Ah OK, cheers.
Like I said, a million to one that Dessie doesn't hire his favourite lawyer and take that to court. Dogs will be forced to settle, no doubts about it. Des might not get the full value of his "heads of agreement" but it will cost Dogs hundreds of thousands if not millions to either defeat him in court or reach an agreement.

You would expect that Des' lawyers and manager would have know at the time of "heads of agreement" extension that there might be blood in the water at end of season and not made an agreement that left Des totally out to dry.

BTW I had to look up what a HoA was, wikipedia:
A set of heads of agreement, heads of terms or letter of intent is a non-binding document outlining the main issues relevant to a tentative (partnership or other) agreement.[1] A heads of agreement document will only be enforceable when it is adopted into a parent contract and subsequently agreed upon, unless otherwise stated. Until that point, a heads of agreement will not be legally binding (See Fletcher Challenge Energy Ltd v Electricity Corp of New Zealand Ltd [2002] 2 NZLR 433).

However, such documents can be legally binding if the agreement document contains terms or language that expressly indicates the binding intention. Equally, a letter which contains no express indication of whether its terms were intended to be binding, can be found to be binding due to language used.


So we are being told now that Dogs announce Des' extension a few months ago and actually the terms and issues were written on a bit of toilet paper in lead pencil? How many other NRL contracts are done in this manner, and is this the same thing that Fifita had when he had that fight with the Dogs over revocation of contract?
Legally speaking, an agreement requires intent and consideration to be legally binding.

Consideration was obviously there with Hasler agreeing to coach, the reported 1.5mil per season.

Intent was there when the Dogs announced the signing and Hasler put pen to paper.

Agreement was obviously there.

The heads of agreement was legally binding no doubt about it. I think its just Dib saving his backside infront of the fans and there will be a payment organised to Hasler.
That's not the test for determining whether a Heads of Agreement is binding. It's whether the parties intended the agreement to be immediately binding having regard to the language contained in the Heads of Agreement and it's to be assessed objectively taking into account the circumstances giving rise to the agreement.
You basically re-said what I just did...

Every contract is assessed objectively, don't see your point?

In order for a heads of agreement to be legally binding it must contain the essential elements of a contract. Consideration, intent and offer/acceptance.

It must not expressly state that it is subject to being formed as a formal contract.

Haslers lawyers would not be stupid enough to allow him to sign a document stating that.

The Dogs objectively intended to be bound at the time they announced the signing.

05TIGZ
Member
Member
Posts: 435
Joined: Sun 26 Mar, 2017 5:57 pm
Has liked: 107 times
Been liked: 48 times

Unread post by 05TIGZ » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 11:59 pm

Well the fun and games at the bulldogs continues. CEO gone, captain goneee, coach goneee. Board elections next year. Woodsy what have you done to yourself???

formerguest
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 3197
Joined: Fri 07 Jun, 2013 7:33 pm
Has liked: 229 times
Been liked: 76 times

Unread post by formerguest » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 3:26 am

Woods should know where he stands in the pecking order now, as Foran was contacted last week prior to Hasler being shown the door, whilst poor Aaron was only rung afterwards.

MG1962
Member
Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu 06 Apr, 2017 12:44 pm
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 14 times

Unread post by MG1962 » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 4:47 am

05TIGZ wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 11:59 pm
Well the fun and games at the bulldogs continues. CEO gone, captain goneee, coach goneee. Board elections next year. Woodsy what have you done to yourself???
Hey captain coach CEO, sounds like a sweet deal for me lol

User avatar
GNR4LIFE
Member
Member
Posts: 18809
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 5:57 pm
Has liked: 66 times
Been liked: 204 times

Unread post by GNR4LIFE » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 6:21 am

Fibros wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 10:00 pm
I know its a long shot but wouldn't it be great entertainment if the dogs made Sharon captain.
I'm sure they will know better. Josh Jasckson would be odds on.

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 3898
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm
Has liked: 53 times
Been liked: 52 times

Unread post by Byron Bay Fan » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 6:40 am

I read about ten pages on the Kennel site and poor Dessie has not one supporter - and I thought RF had it tough here. Des won't get a lap of honour, a decent burial or even an eulogy - only an unmarked burial site.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

supercoach
Member
Member
Posts: 6448
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 2:38 pm
Has liked: 95 times
Been liked: 94 times

Unread post by supercoach » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 7:13 am

Its funny we sack the coach and we are a basket case, dogs sack the coach,CEO and captain and the press tell us how they don't tolerate failure and are willing to make hard decisions in order to turn things around.

Than again success over a long period earns you some respect.

Nelson
Member
Member
Posts: 2531
Joined: Sat 31 Oct, 2015 11:17 am
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 75 times

Unread post by Nelson » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 8:02 am

Milky wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 11:47 pm
Nelson wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 10:30 pm
Milky wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:42 pm
jirskyr wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 1:43 pm

Like I said, a million to one that Dessie doesn't hire his favourite lawyer and take that to court. Dogs will be forced to settle, no doubts about it. Des might not get the full value of his "heads of agreement" but it will cost Dogs hundreds of thousands if not millions to either defeat him in court or reach an agreement.

You would expect that Des' lawyers and manager would have know at the time of "heads of agreement" extension that there might be blood in the water at end of season and not made an agreement that left Des totally out to dry.

BTW I had to look up what a HoA was, wikipedia:
A set of heads of agreement, heads of terms or letter of intent is a non-binding document outlining the main issues relevant to a tentative (partnership or other) agreement.[1] A heads of agreement document will only be enforceable when it is adopted into a parent contract and subsequently agreed upon, unless otherwise stated. Until that point, a heads of agreement will not be legally binding (See Fletcher Challenge Energy Ltd v Electricity Corp of New Zealand Ltd [2002] 2 NZLR 433).

However, such documents can be legally binding if the agreement document contains terms or language that expressly indicates the binding intention. Equally, a letter which contains no express indication of whether its terms were intended to be binding, can be found to be binding due to language used.


So we are being told now that Dogs announce Des' extension a few months ago and actually the terms and issues were written on a bit of toilet paper in lead pencil? How many other NRL contracts are done in this manner, and is this the same thing that Fifita had when he had that fight with the Dogs over revocation of contract?
Legally speaking, an agreement requires intent and consideration to be legally binding.

Consideration was obviously there with Hasler agreeing to coach, the reported 1.5mil per season.

Intent was there when the Dogs announced the signing and Hasler put pen to paper.

Agreement was obviously there.

The heads of agreement was legally binding no doubt about it. I think its just Dib saving his backside infront of the fans and there will be a payment organised to Hasler.
That's not the test for determining whether a Heads of Agreement is binding. It's whether the parties intended the agreement to be immediately binding having regard to the language contained in the Heads of Agreement and it's to be assessed objectively taking into account the circumstances giving rise to the agreement.
You basically re-said what I just did...

Every contract is assessed objectively, don't see your point?

In order for a heads of agreement to be legally binding it must contain the essential elements of a contract. Consideration, intent and offer/acceptance.

It must not expressly state that it is subject to being formed as a formal contract.

Haslers lawyers would not be stupid enough to allow him to sign a document stating that.

The Dogs objectively intended to be bound at the time they announced the signing.
I didn't re-state what you said I stated what the test is for determining whether a Heads of Agreement is legally binding. If you're in the Supreme Court and they ask you what the test is then say what I said, not what you said...

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 16240
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains
Has liked: 78 times
Been liked: 158 times

Unread post by Cultured Bogan » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 8:07 am

Dogs fans want Pay or Dymock citing that they need someone who bleeds blue and white.

Kevin Moore bled blue and white, how'd that pan out again?
I swing like hell but know full well that I won't win the fight, but big man I'm the beta male that's gonna ruin your night...

Fuerza en la adversidad.

colmcd
Member
Member
Posts: 530
Joined: Wed 04 Jan, 2017 11:38 pm
Has liked: 39 times
Been liked: 58 times

Unread post by colmcd » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 10:08 am

"Aaron Woods has called for Canterbury to quickly appoint a new NRL coach to replace Des Hasler as Todd Payten emerges as a top candidate."

ROFL...

I rate Payten as a front row coach and their front row will fire. I mean he has to be doing something right at the Cowboys. But yea, he probably doesn't know there are Jerseys numbered below 8.

User avatar
Spud Murphy
Member
Member
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat 13 May, 2017 5:04 pm
Location: Second Heaven
Has liked: 137 times
Been liked: 88 times

Unread post by Spud Murphy » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 10:15 am

formerguest wrote:
Thu 21 Sep, 2017 3:26 am
Woods should know where he stands in the pecking order now, as Foran was contacted last week prior to Hasler being shown the door, whilst poor Aaron was only rung afterwards.
And that would be because Des was the main reason Foran signed in the first place, not so with Woods, but skew however you like.

05TIGZ
Member
Member
Posts: 435
Joined: Sun 26 Mar, 2017 5:57 pm
Has liked: 107 times
Been liked: 48 times

Unread post by 05TIGZ » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 10:18 am

Fade To Black wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:05 pm
Spud Murphy wrote:
Wed 20 Sep, 2017 7:48 pm
Jim Dymock should get the gig, he's a good coach.
Of what exactly? Has he even been an under 20's coach? He would be a massive stab in the dark by the Dogs IMO.
I called it 6 months ago, dean pay to coach the dogs next year. Dogs to miss finals again, probably need a full roster overhaul which will take a couple of years before they are up there again. Poor woodsy let the sand storm drama at the tigers for the volcano erupting at Canterbury.

User avatar
GNR4LIFE
Member
Member
Posts: 18809
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 5:57 pm
Has liked: 66 times
Been liked: 204 times

Unread post by GNR4LIFE » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 11:59 am

Spud Murphy wrote:
Thu 21 Sep, 2017 10:15 am
formerguest wrote:
Thu 21 Sep, 2017 3:26 am
Woods should know where he stands in the pecking order now, as Foran was contacted last week prior to Hasler being shown the door, whilst poor Aaron was only rung afterwards.
And that would be because Des was the main reason Foran signed in the first place, not so with Woods, but skew however you like.
You are doing a good job of skewing things yourself, claiming they are a stronger club than us for not waiting 3 weeks into a season to sack him like we did with Taylor. All the while leaving out the fact they extended Hasler only 4 months ago for two more years and now face having to go to court. Least we didn't make that mistake with Taylor at the end of last year when we overachieved by finishing a point out of the 8.

Post Reply

Return to “National Rugby League”