Page 1 of 1

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:20 pm
by Fade To Black
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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:38 pm
by Basil Tiger
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

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:42 pm
by Milky
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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Wed 20 Sep, 2017 10:00 pm
by Fibros
I know its a long shot but wouldn't it be great entertainment if the dogs made Sharon captain.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Wed 20 Sep, 2017 10:30 pm
by Nelson
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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Wed 20 Sep, 2017 11:47 pm
by Milky
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.

Re: Media coverage - heating coming off us, onto Dogs

Posted: Wed 20 Sep, 2017 11:59 pm
by 05TIGZ
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???

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 3:26 am
by formerguest
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.

Re: Media coverage - heating coming off us, onto Dogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 4:47 am
by MG1962
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

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 6:21 am
by GNR4LIFE
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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 6:40 am
by Byron Bay Fan
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.

Re: Media coverage - heating coming off us, onto Dogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 7:13 am
by supercoach
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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 8:02 am
by Nelson
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...

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 8:07 am
by Cultured Bogan
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?

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 10:08 am
by colmcd
"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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 10:15 am
by Spud Murphy
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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 10:18 am
by 05TIGZ
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.

Re: Des Hasler to leave the Bulldogs

Posted: Thu 21 Sep, 2017 11:59 am
by GNR4LIFE
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.