Confirmed: Matterson released from Wests Tigers.
- Thread starter Joel Helmes
- Start date
- Status
ElleryHanley
Well-known member
@Snake said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062017) said:
He is not another player, he is an Origin class player at 24.
He would stand out anywhere on this year's form.
Madge
Well-known member
@Snake doesn’t mean you let go of him... you need players like him in your squad, Boyd Cordner is no superstar, should the roosters get rid of him ?
jirskyr
Well-known member
Managers, hey, why can't we just line them all up and shoot them? Poor old clubs must shake their heads in frustration when BS like this hits the papers.
First and foremost, I agree with @4jtigers - any player who doesn't want to be here can go. Being held to ransom by players is the worst possible outcome and simply doesn't ever end well. Every employer knows that once staff members start trying to leverage other job offers against their current salary, you are in an uphill battle to satisfy that staff member. If not this contract, it will happen again on the next one.
There are perhaps 5 or 6 players in the whole NRL who should be given unilateral power within their club and Ryan Matterson isn't one of those dudes.
Because nrl.com posted it, I assume the noise about meetings is true. The question then becomes why rival NRL clubs are receiving questions of interest on behalf of Matterson, with 2 years to run on his deal. Yes he had a great season for Tigers, but also Tigers afforded him the platform to perform well outside of the Roosters shadow. I believe some players forget this, that their form and performances are not independent of their club - you don't necessarily get the same positive result in different scenery.
The quote "several clubs are monitoring the situation". Of course they are!!! They are probably the same clubs that were sounded out in the first place.
It's therefore all about money and frankly, if $350K for Matto is accurate, he's probably being underpaid. Whoever would have thought Tigers not necessarily paying overs for an up-and-coming player!!
First and foremost, I agree with @4jtigers - any player who doesn't want to be here can go. Being held to ransom by players is the worst possible outcome and simply doesn't ever end well. Every employer knows that once staff members start trying to leverage other job offers against their current salary, you are in an uphill battle to satisfy that staff member. If not this contract, it will happen again on the next one.
There are perhaps 5 or 6 players in the whole NRL who should be given unilateral power within their club and Ryan Matterson isn't one of those dudes.
Because nrl.com posted it, I assume the noise about meetings is true. The question then becomes why rival NRL clubs are receiving questions of interest on behalf of Matterson, with 2 years to run on his deal. Yes he had a great season for Tigers, but also Tigers afforded him the platform to perform well outside of the Roosters shadow. I believe some players forget this, that their form and performances are not independent of their club - you don't necessarily get the same positive result in different scenery.
The quote "several clubs are monitoring the situation". Of course they are!!! They are probably the same clubs that were sounded out in the first place.
It's therefore all about money and frankly, if $350K for Matto is accurate, he's probably being underpaid. Whoever would have thought Tigers not necessarily paying overs for an up-and-coming player!!
Mighty_Tiger
Well-known member
Matto didn’t play like a player not engaged.
Its clear his manager is canvassing him around based on the wording.
Unless we get an awesome player in return / we come out infront there would be no way we should be letting him go. He is the best backrower we have had since Ellis.
Its clear his manager is canvassing him around based on the wording.
Unless we get an awesome player in return / we come out infront there would be no way we should be letting him go. He is the best backrower we have had since Ellis.
ElleryHanley
Well-known member
@Snake said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062019) said:
Ummm, he was a bench player and won a comp. same level as Radley.
earl
Well-known member
@ElleryHanley said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062018) said:
Exactly. Name the better lock forwards in the game. Taumolo, Frizzel, maybe Burgess or Cameron Murray. He gets a spot in all teams in the comp based on form.
leftrightout
New member
@ElleryHanley said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062028) said:
Matto should stick around because when we don’t make the 8 again next year Madge will be gone
earl
Well-known member
@jirskyr said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062026) said:
Assuming this article is accurate we clearly don't have to pay overs for quality players. If we have the best offer these guys will come here.
jirskyr
Well-known member
@ElleryHanley said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062028) said:
Honestly Roosters can't afford Matto now. That's the entire reason we got him in the first place, because they went in on Crichton and Matto was pushed down a rung.
That's also the reason why Roosters have cheapies like Nat Butcher and Tetevano going around, because they go all-in in key positions and then try to up-skill the modestly-paid players.
Storm are no different - blokes like Justin Olam and Max King are on chicken feed.
supercoach
Well-known member
Be good to read some positive news re our club for a change. Everything is always negative.
jirskyr
Well-known member
@supercoach said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062035) said:
It was super-positive in the week we were trying to beat Cronulla and qualify.
@Madge
The issue is paying overs for him means no upgrade to forward player recruitment . Using the Roosters as an example of carrying players is not great ..my replies are what concerns the Tigers I do not give a crap what might or might not happen with other clubs ! The roster is poor and needs an injection, a reasonable upgrade would be the mark , I think his base contract is low for what he brings moving forward but certainly nothing ridiculous.
@Madge said in [Matterson unhappy at Tigers?](/post/1062022) said:
The issue is paying overs for him means no upgrade to forward player recruitment . Using the Roosters as an example of carrying players is not great ..my replies are what concerns the Tigers I do not give a crap what might or might not happen with other clubs ! The roster is poor and needs an injection, a reasonable upgrade would be the mark , I think his base contract is low for what he brings moving forward but certainly nothing ridiculous.
@jirskyr If the player manager has put feelers out like this should that be classed as a breach and be investigated by the NRL... As a few have already stated he might want an update but this is not the way to go about it. If the current deal was good enough for you to sign a year ago (When you wanted a starting spot as couldn't get it at current club) than it is good enough to stay there for the full term.. It goes both way and if a club went to a player Manager and said you player not living up to the standards we require for this kind of money we want to reduce his salary for the next year they would lose there sh&t. I understand in some cases where the player has a year or 2 left on contract and they deserves a increase and they renegotiate a higher salary but over more years and that's fine for all parties..
IF this is true and its about the money I would as a club look at extending his deal and giving him an increase from next year if we could fit it in.. To good of player to let walk and would not mind paying 500k to him as he is young and a player you build a club around..
IF this is true and its about the money I would as a club look at extending his deal and giving him an increase from next year if we could fit it in.. To good of player to let walk and would not mind paying 500k to him as he is young and a player you build a club around..
AL The Tiger
Well-known member
@leftrightout Not too sure about that buddy
This was first muted as a vague rumour by the lurker around the start of August.
Quoted below:
“There are rumblings out of a Sydney club about an in-form recruit struggling to get along with the coach.
Other clubs are aware of the situation and are monitoring it closely in case the player wants a fresh start next year. The issue is believed to stem from some choice words aimed at the player from the coach in front of the team.”
That lines up with the weeks between the Raiders game and the Newcastle game.
If anyone can remember Madge questioned some of the players character after the raiders loss and said they need to find it within.
The following week one of the most notable changes was Matterson moving from his favoured right back row position and moved to lock “this is the exact reason he left the roosters in the first place as they did offer him the position of lock”.
His minutes had been reduced for 80 to 60 with the positional change.
I’m not so sure this isn’t something to worry about.
Quoted below:
“There are rumblings out of a Sydney club about an in-form recruit struggling to get along with the coach.
Other clubs are aware of the situation and are monitoring it closely in case the player wants a fresh start next year. The issue is believed to stem from some choice words aimed at the player from the coach in front of the team.”
That lines up with the weeks between the Raiders game and the Newcastle game.
If anyone can remember Madge questioned some of the players character after the raiders loss and said they need to find it within.
The following week one of the most notable changes was Matterson moving from his favoured right back row position and moved to lock “this is the exact reason he left the roosters in the first place as they did offer him the position of lock”.
His minutes had been reduced for 80 to 60 with the positional change.
I’m not so sure this isn’t something to worry about.
- Status
