Jarome Luai

Status
Not open for further replies.
GNR4LIFE said:
To everyone freaking about the 10 day boogeyman. Why would Luai renege after months of negotiations to start all over again? And what if he did renege, sign with the Dogs and enter a new 10 day period? We could just up our offer again and he could renege a second time.
Click to expand...
more money?
 
Kaito said:
10 day period starts with a formal offer
and an intention to sign with a rival club.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he won't join us, but theoretically if one of Politis' mates rang him tomorrow and says there's 10. Million waiting for you at the Roosters. Just wait the 10 days, reject the Tigers contract and then sign ours instead.
With the current wording there's nothing stopping this from happening. Rules need to be tightened made more definitive after the 10 day period
 
balmain boy said:
I'm not saying he won't join us, but theoretically if one of Politis' mates rang him tomorrow and days there's 10. Million waiting for you at the Roosters. Just don't sign the Tigers contract and then sign out instead. Turn the current wording there's nothing stopping this from happening. Rules need to be tightened made more definitive after the 10 day period
Click to expand...

I don't see it happening but do agree you should have to sign with your current club or take up the new offer after the 10 day period.
 
cochise said:
Mate, if it sets the club up for success then that is all I want. I know we haven't always seen eye to eye on this but I genuinely want what is best for the club.
Click to expand...
Never doubted that.

Well, I'm just happy there were no negatives emanating from everything for the club. That wasn't guaranteed but all positives it seems.

Obviously the HBG got on the front foot and came up with a pretty watertight arrangement. Obviously leaks weren't coming from that group......nobody picked events.

Any positives coming from your initiatives which I'm hoping for will be extras......recent positives must of course be credited to prior group especially the fast tracking course correct of benjis appointment from which alot of good news has flowed.

I'm glad we are having some changes but the prior administration is actually leaving the club in good shape.
 
Last edited:
Magpie_Magic said:
Never doubted that.

Well, I'm just happy there were no negatives emanating from everything for the club. That wasn't guaranteed but all positives it seems.

Obviously the HBG got on the front foot and came up with a pretty watertight arrangement. Obviously leaks weren't coming from that group......nobody picked events.

Any positives coming from your initiatives which I'm hoping for will be extras......recent positives must of course be credited to prior group especially the fast tracking course correct of benjis appointment.
Click to expand...
We are in the wrong thread lol, but I must say massive wraps need to go to the Holman Barnes Group who drove these changes through. There was a strong desire to do this with the least disruption possible, it was why I wasn't involved in some of the more disruptive strategies. I truly believe if you go about things in a calm and professional manner than you will be listened to, even when being critical and I think the results have shown that to be true.

I don't want to bag the previous board too much as people have lost roles that were very important to them, some at their own hands, but changing the course isn't a huge wrap when you were the one that set the wrong course to begin with.
 
cochise said:
We are in the wrong thread lol, but I must say massive wraps need to go to the Holman Barnes Group who drove these changes through. There was a strong desire to do this with the least disruption possible, it was why I wasn't involved in some of the more disruptive strategies. I truly believe if you go about things in a calm and professional manner than you will be listened to, even when being critical and I think the results have shown that to be true.

I don't want to bag the previous board too much as people have lost roles that were very important to them, some at their own hands, but changing the course isn't a huge wrap when you were the one that set the wrong course to begin with.
Click to expand...
Maybe the mods can move it to the right thread.

That's true but one can only correct quickly instead of doubling down as many leaders do.

Benji's appointment is one I wouldn't have made, and probably most other boards including the new one wouldn't have made. Couldn't imagine any NRL Club appointing benji. He's got players and coaches lining up to play for him, Richardson seems excited.

But it may catapult the club on a much steeper rise than otherwise which any more steadier administration can build on.
 
Magpie_Magic said:
Maybe the mods can move it to the right thread.

That's true but one can only correct quickly instead of doubling down as many leaders do.

Benji's appointment is one I wouldn't have made, and probably most other boards including the new one wouldn't have made. Couldn't imagine any NRL Club appointing benji. He's got players and coaches lining up to play for him, Richardson seems excited.

But it may catapult the club on a much steeper rise than otherwise which any more steadier administration can build on.
Click to expand...
We just had to make too many course corrections for my liking.
 
hsvjones said:
Cheer mate for the info.

Do you think the Panthers will forfeit the 10-day period so we could sign early. I was thinking they might so the media can close it off and they don't have the media circus carrying on every day.
Click to expand...
Yeah I don’t know anything on that, the whole 10 day thing seems a real sideshow, not sure how it helps anyone
Now or in 10 days I think we’re almost certainly done either way
10 days from Friday is Christmas Day so maybe that’s when we can officially unwrap the presents
 
cochise said:
I don't see it happening but do agree you should have to sign with your current club or take up the new offer after the 10 day period.
Click to expand...
I don’t see why it shouldn’t happen.
This rule was brought in to give the current club a chance to have a final shot at offering a contract extension, which I have no problem with. Kinda like the Tualigi scenario ‘which thankfully it wasn’t implemented before he left for manly otherwise we would still have him’.

so if the previous situation was player signs with rival club and current club or any other club has to suck it up.
Why would the NRL introduce a rule that not only benefits the current club but increases the chance of a month long bidding war?

I’m not sure the scenarios we are playing out as possibles are what the NRL had in mind by introducing this rule.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

... and 13 more.
Total: 631 (members: 63, guests: 568)
Back
Top