Mitch Moses Denied Release - Confirmed

I have no doubt the greedy little bag of self interest was exposed somewhere along the line as having already committed to the eels whilst we thought we were still "negotiating"..possibly by attempting to recruit others(Nofo?)..and that's why we took the drastic step of withdrawing his offer despite being earmarked as someone we wanted to build the club around.So much for that.
It wld take something like that..
And as a consequence,hes feeling miffed(we probably cost him a few sheckles)which is why he wants out now.
Personally,Id do the exact opposite of anything he wished for,and also etch in tablet to NEVER recruit a Isaac Moses plyer again!Hes poisoned all these kids with greed and avarice
 
Yeah you'd think it's only a matter of time before the club says enough is enough in regards to the manager.

If the Roosters won't deal with him then that's a sign

Honestly, this whole situation one way or another needs to be sorted next week.
 
if joke-of-NRL is serious to stop mid year transfers, the new regulation:
- if a player manager is caught, his licence is suspended for 3 years, on 2nd offence - life ban
- if a player signs mid season contract, his contract is automatically extended for period he signed for another club at the same salary he was before he signed mid year contract, so if Moses was on $300K and signed 4 yrs with another club mid year, his contract with WT extends for 4 years at salary of $300k.

Something like this should quickly stop any mid year BS.
 
@ said:
Yeah you'd think it's only a matter of time before the club says enough is enough in regards to the manager.

If the Roosters won't deal with him then that's a sign

Honestly, this whole situation one way or another needs to be sorted next week.
Click to expand...

Nothing like using a go between if you are attempting to take the moral high ground in not dealing with a manager.
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
Wow best article I have rad for a while.
Wish it was picked up in traditional media

That won't happen as there are too many inaccuracies presented as fact - they would face a lawsuit.

So why isn't the author here facing a lawsuit?
He's put his name to it

Really? what are the inaccuracies and are you also suggesting that traditional media never publishes anything with potential inaccuracies?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Looks like he cant answer you Dazza
 
@ said:
Seems so…. :unamused:
Click to expand...

Sorry,boys, don't sit in front of the computer all day.
The piece is littered with inaccuracies and assumptions.
Moses knocked back a $3 million deal…. well, it has been stated that it was not that amount and was withdrawn by the club, not Moses.
Ben Elias is played a large part in Balmain only having 2 board members? That's a stretch.
It's also suggested Moses should have taken a pay cut like Farah, Marshall and Lawrence were' claimed to have done ' to prove how loyal he is - like them. :laughing:
They deferred their pay ... one reason we are paying so much for Farah to play elsewhere.
Even so - why should he take a pay cut when others are squeezing the lemon dry?
And then we get the ' if they are all very, very close why might they be at different clubs?'
Ummm ... maybe because they are professional footballers trying to earn a living?
Moses, Brooks and Tedesco share a house and say they are mates... I would suggest they actually are mates.
There's plenty of other stuff is just opinion - and nothing wrong with an opinion as long as it's not presented as fact.
And, yes, newspapers do have people check that a story might lead to litigation (libel or slander) before it is printed.
 
@ said:
@ said:
Seems so…. :unamused:

Sorry,boys, don't sit in front of the computer all day.
The piece is littered with inaccuracies and assumptions.
Moses knocked back a $3 million deal…. well, it has been stated that it was not that amount and was withdrawn by the club, not Moses.
Ben Elias is played a large part in Balmain only having 2 board members? That's a stretch.
It's also suggested Moses should have taken a pay cut like Farah, Marshall and Lawrence were' claimed to have done ' to prove how loyal he is - like them. :laughing:
They deferred their pay ... one reason we are paying so much for Farah to play elsewhere.
Even so - why should he take a pay cut when others are squeezing the lemon dry?
And then we get the ' if they are all very, very close why might they be at different clubs?'
Ummm ... maybe because they are professional footballers trying to earn a living?
Moses, Brooks and Tedesco share a house and say they are mates... I would suggest they actually are mates.
There's plenty of other stuff is just opinion - and nothing wrong with an opinion as long as it's not presented as fact.
And, yes, newspapers do have people check that a story might lead to litigation (libel or slander) before it is printed.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Don't agree with much of what cktiger says but agree completely with this. Poor, sensationalist article clearly written by a fan with a lack of ability to write on the subject objectively. Pass.
 
@ said:
@ said:
Seems so…. :unamused:

Sorry,boys, don't sit in front of the computer all day.
The piece is littered with inaccuracies and assumptions.
Moses knocked back a $3 million deal…. well, it has been stated that it was not that amount and was withdrawn by the club, not Moses.
Ben Elias is played a large part in Balmain only having 2 board members? That's a stretch.
It's also suggested Moses should have taken a pay cut like Farah, Marshall and Lawrence were' claimed to have done ' to prove how loyal he is - like them. :laughing:
They deferred their pay ... one reason we are paying so much for Farah to play elsewhere.
Even so - why should he take a pay cut when others are squeezing the lemon dry?
And then we get the ' if they are all very, very close why might they be at different clubs?'
Ummm ... maybe because they are professional footballers trying to earn a living?
Moses, Brooks and Tedesco share a house and say they are mates... I would suggest they actually are mates.
There's plenty of other stuff is just opinion - and nothing wrong with an opinion as long as it's not presented as fact.
And, yes, newspapers do have people check that a story might lead to litigation (libel or slander) before it is printed.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The article otherwise states that the $3 million figure is rumoured and it would cause no reputational damage in any event. No action in defamation there.

Ben Elias being a large part of the reason Balmain only have two board members? Well he's explained the rationale behind that assertion. It is not a bald assertion. It is advanced as an honest opinion and no doubt he would raise contextual truth as a defence, which would involve an airing of a lot of dirty laundry by the party bringing the action. Pretty sure that's safe from an action in defamation.

Newspapers don't check to make sure everything is fact, they check to make sure that everything is defensible or so unlikely to result in an action that there is negliglble risk in going to print. I know you worked for a newspaper or somewhere else in the media so I'm not telling you things you don't already know. That article poses no danger of litigation.
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
Seems so…. :unamused:

Sorry,boys, don't sit in front of the computer all day.
The piece is littered with inaccuracies and assumptions.
Moses knocked back a $3 million deal…. well, it has been stated that it was not that amount and was withdrawn by the club, not Moses.
Ben Elias is played a large part in Balmain only having 2 board members? That's a stretch.
It's also suggested Moses should have taken a pay cut like Farah, Marshall and Lawrence were' claimed to have done ' to prove how loyal he is - like them. :laughing:
They deferred their pay ... one reason we are paying so much for Farah to play elsewhere.
Even so - why should he take a pay cut when others are squeezing the lemon dry?
And then we get the ' if they are all very, very close why might they be at different clubs?'
Ummm ... maybe because they are professional footballers trying to earn a living?
Moses, Brooks and Tedesco share a house and say they are mates... I would suggest they actually are mates.
There's plenty of other stuff is just opinion - and nothing wrong with an opinion as long as it's not presented as fact.
And, yes, newspapers do have people check that a story might lead to litigation (libel or slander) before it is printed.

The article otherwise states that the $3 million figure is rumoured and it would cause no reputational damage in any event. No action in defamation there.

Ben Elias being a large part of the reason Balmain only have two board members? Well he's explained the rationale behind that assertion. It is not a bald assertion. It is advanced as an honest opinion and no doubt he would raise contextual truth as a defence, which would involve an airing of a lot of dirty laundry by the party bringing the action. Pretty sure that's safe from an action in defamation.

Newspapers don't check to make sure everything is fact, they check to make sure that everything is defensible or so unlikely to result in an action that there is negliglble risk in going to print. I know you worked for a newspaper or somewhere else in the media so I'm not telling you things you don't already know. That article poses no danger of litigation.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

This, exactly but it is like.. :deadhorse:
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
There is people trying to portray the club as a basket case in the media and little mention on the dog act by Moses. There trying to manipulate people into thinking what they been doing isn't wrong. The facts are there just wish media would call them out on it.

I don't understand how Moses could produce a contract with Parra at such short notice unless it already prepared and just waiting for ink to dry. Maybe he is upset because it took away his bargaining power away from Parra and they can now drop his price before his cooling off period expires that could even be as late as end of season.

No one signs something in 48hrs. He had been talking with them for a while. To not just sign and ask for an immediate release is a dog act.

Didn't see any other big recruit ask for a mid season release when they signed a contract…..

The spoilt brat and the Benny should be shipped onto the front page for all their dodgey exploits.....
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Then you go got uncle Benny in the media saying its the clubs fault that he left. Ahh no he could of signed a contract with us for the past 12 months and did not after the club had got him ready for first grade and shipped a host of players out of the club to accommodate the brat
 
He'll have a blinder tomorrow.
Eels coach will give instructions not to hurt him in tackkes and don't run at him.
 
Ivan Cleary yet to make decision on Mitchell Moses’ mid-season switch to the Parramatta Eels
APRIL 16, 2017 2:03PM
\
\
WESTS Tigers coach Ivan Cleary is undecided on whether Mitchell Moses will transfer mid-season to Parramatta, but insists speculation won’t affect his performance against them on Monday.
Moses is already understood to have signed with the Eels for next season, but requested a mid-season release to the NRL club last week. That was originally denied by the Tigers, however speculation has since mounted that he will be granted a release following the Easter Monday ANZ Stadium blockbuster.
But Cleary said he was yet to make a call on when Moses would be leaving the club — let alone if it would happen in the coming days.

“I really haven’t thought about it too much at all,” Cleary said on Sunday. “It was a bit of a shock what happened last week. I’ve got enough to worry about before worrying about things like that. “Those thoughts will come to my head when they come in.” Moses was one of the Tigers’ best players in their upset 26-16 win over North Queensland in Townsville last week. And Cleary accepts that all eyes will again be on the 22-year-old when he comes up against his future club. But he said he hadn’t spoken to the club’s chief playmaker about the current situation, and didn’t expect it to be an issue come kick off.
“I guess for Mitch it’s crossed his mind we’re playing Parramatta,” Cleary said. “He probably thought about it earlier in the week after it was done last week. But for the rest of the week and heading into tomorrow the focus will be on his job at the Wests Tigers. “His job is here to play for the Wests Tigers and his teammates. It’s going on elsewhere in the NRL.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 373 (members: 4, guests: 369)
Back
Top