Moltzen Staying Or Going

@alien said:
Did Wests Tigers tell Moltzen he could sign with another club, or just say he can shop around because they might not be able to keep him???

X2 100%. There is a difference.
 
@Chris said:
The thing that annoys me most about this is everything was fine when Moltzen was playing poorly. He hit some form at the end of the season and now his move to the Dragons is an issue. If in fact, Stephen Humphreys mentioned back when the deal was done between Moltzen and the dragons, why didn't he nip it in the butt then? Was the club waiting to see if Moltzen improved and used the situation as a safety cushion? As far as I'm concerned is that the club told Moltzen to look elsewhere, he did and signed a contract. Moltzen and the club should do the right thing now and honor that contract. The fact he's found form now is simply our bad luck. If the dragons want him, Moltzen needs to go. If the dragons and Tigers come to an amicable agreement then I'm happy for him to stay. I'll be disappointed if we keep Moltzen with the dragons left high and dry. Makes us look bad and it's simply not right.

I agree. I thought it was a bad move to let him go because I knew it would take a while for him to get his chops back. Now with the Lui drama its a bad look for the club but I would still like to keep him even if there is a blue with Saints and we look like the baddies.
 
@softlaw said:
Contract law has so many grey areas that this could get real messy, real quickly.

& if we're looking at having Moltzen at 7 to replace Lui then I think we're asking for trouble. His passing game is not good enough for the halves **and he's another player who will fit right in to not taking the safe option and kicking to the corner with a few minutes to go a la the Warriors game.**

That comment really hurts! However, you are probably right.
 
Some people are saying that Moltzen should honor his contract.

If that is the case then he should be here next year in 2012 as this is the last year of his contract with us.

Moltzen was informed he could look around. He still had a contract and would be paid if he stayed. He looked around and cut short his current contract with the Tigers, an as it appears at the moment.

Moltzen was never told to go find another club next year because we are not paying you.

How do you know his manager didn't sign everything for him and perhaps misunderstand the release? (I wont say mislead, that would be defamatory).

By the way, this was happening well before the Lui incident, so you can't claim the Tigers were suddenly enticing someone to break an agreement because they might punt Lui. That is horse crap.
 
@Swordy said:
@alien said:
Did Wests Tigers tell Moltzen he could sign with another club, or just say he can shop around because they might not be able to keep him???

X2 100%. There is a difference.

Surely, with all of the above posts one way or another, none of the posters really know whether the Club told Moltzen he could sign with another club or they told him he could shop around for offers! In order to make comment about the behaviour of the Club, Moltzen or St. George, this information would be needed to be critical of anyone.
 
This whole thing is a joke. So unprofessional by both parties.

Moltzen is not worth his fuss, let him go.
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
 
funny how the DT said Humpty was unavailable for comment, yet he provided the SMH with a couple of quotes. Speaks volumes for the Terrorgraph
 
I wonder if the Dragons announcing his signature early has angered Humpty so much he decided to play it out this way….hold off on it all?

Either way, moving the posts after the kick off is never a good look, we tell him to look around, then we say we want him....this will cost us
 
To be honest whether it is sheens or humphrey's pulling the strings on this one i am quite happy with it. Given that Lui is being moved on due to disciplinary reasons and we were already screaming for a quality / consistent 1, and considering what is available in the market when we look at both the 7 & the 1 i think it's a smart move to agitate the dragons to keep Moltz.

It is what i would expect of someone with the clubs best intentions at heart. I dont really mind if we get painted as bad guys in the media for this one… they seem to get on our bandwagon as soon as we string 2 results together anyway!

I think it's a prudent move to retain a good player so here's hoping he stays! Either way actually i think i have more respect for the boys in charge.
 
Well this is all very disappointing.

It is not a good look for the club. It wasn't a good look when Elford did it to the Bunnies and that turned out just as we deserved on field.

If he is retained and played at half I guess our centres and wingers have at least a full season of being run out of space on the flanks and poorly positioned etc
 
@smeghead said:
If he is retained and played at half I guess our centres and wingers have at least a full season of being run out of space on the flanks and poorly positioned etc

He won;t pass it to them anyway
 
i dont think Saints will want him if his heart is not in it.I thinkwith Lui they couldnt offer Moltzi as much.now that Lui gone Money is there for Tim.its business.But in this case I dont think Timmy wants togo.So he has to stay with Wests…
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
 
Seriously some of you guys are unbelieveable….

Who gives a toss about the dragons.... All they ever do is whinge, They have the most arrogant supporters in the comp and tbh im glad we are sticking it up them...

Im also sick of hearing dragons fans say "we dont want him if he doesn bleed red", Well why did they sign him in the first place?? His heart was ALWAYS at the tigers..

However at the end of the day...

The fact is the Tigers have not ever given Moltz a release... They told him that he could negotiate elsewhere but saying that is totally different to saying, here's a release go play there....

I say suck it Dragons.. Just another thing for you to whinge about :blah :blah :sign: :sign:
 
The track record of people wanting to get out of contracts to remain at their present clubs seems to be pretty close to 100%. It's hard to remember too many cases when someone dug their heels in but was still forced to move. Add to that the (apparent) fact that Moltzen is still signed to play here in 2012 and I'd be betting that TM will be a Tiger in 2012\. Whether this situation voids his contract at the Saints for 2013-14 is another matter.
 
@GNR4LIFE said:
funny how the DT said Humpty was unavailable for comment, yet he provided the SMH with a couple of quotes. Speaks volumes for the Terrorgraph

The Tigers do not talk to the Telegraph.

Period.

Makes them (the telegraph) look like hacks when they say the Tigers were not available, then the SMH has a paragraph or 10 from Benji, Sheens, Ayshford, the Tigers Ball boy, some guy in a tigers jersey, and Barry O'Farrell
 
@Yossarian said:
The track record of people wanting to get out of contracts to remain at their present clubs seems to be pretty close to 100%. It's hard to remember too many cases when someone dug their heels in but was still forced to move. Add to that the (apparent) fact that Moltzen is still signed to play here in 2012 and I'd be betting that TM will be a Tiger in 2012\. Whether this situation voids his contract at the Saints for 2013-14 is another matter.

You seem pretty cluey Yoss.
Do you think Taubers verbal to the dragons gives them any leg up at all?

_**Moltzen's manager, Martin Tauber, will meet with Tigers chief executive Stephen Humphreys today over the utility back's future. He has already secured a verbal agreement from Humphreys that Moltzen will be released from the final year of his Tigers contract, enabling him to officially join the Dragons and potentially be a replacement for Darius Boyd at fullback.
Tauber spoke with Dragons chief executive Peter Doust and next year's coach Steve Price yesterday and assured them the Tigers would not stop the move. ''They're not going to stand in his way,'' Tauber said.**_
 
@underdog said:
@GNR4LIFE said:
funny how the DT said Humpty was unavailable for comment, yet he provided the SMH with a couple of quotes. Speaks volumes for the Terrorgraph

The Tigers do not talk to the Telegraph.

Period.

Makes them (the telegraph) look like hacks when they say the Tigers were not available, then the SMH has a paragraph or 10 from Benji, Sheens, Ayshford, the Tigers Ball boy, some guy in a tigers jersey, and Barry O'Farrell

You were on a roll until you mentioned Barry O'Farrell. BOF is ALWAYS available to talk to the Terror!
 
@innsaneink said:
@Yossarian said:
The track record of people wanting to get out of contracts to remain at their present clubs seems to be pretty close to 100%. It's hard to remember too many cases when someone dug their heels in but was still forced to move. Add to that the (apparent) fact that Moltzen is still signed to play here in 2012 and I'd be betting that TM will be a Tiger in 2012\. Whether this situation voids his contract at the Saints for 2013-14 is another matter.

You seem pretty cluey Yoss.
Do you think Taubers verbal to the dragons gives them any leg up at all?

_**Moltzen's manager, Martin Tauber, will meet with Tigers chief executive Stephen Humphreys today over the utility back's future. He has already secured a verbal agreement from Humphreys that Moltzen will be released from the final year of his Tigers contract, enabling him to officially join the Dragons and potentially be a replacement for Darius Boyd at fullback.
Tauber spoke with Dragons chief executive Peter Doust and next year's coach Steve Price yesterday and assured them the Tigers would not stop the move. ''They're not going to stand in his way,'' Tauber said.**_

Verbal agreements are pretty meaningless. It's hard to guage whether Tauber believes a verbal agreement really carries that much weight or is just using this to try to get an upgrade to Motlzen's WT contract (and presumably an extention) to stay is debatable. At the moment his client either has a one year contract worth x at the Tigers or a 3 year contract worth (say) x+20% at the Dragons so it's not unreasonable to expect him to try and get the Dragons deal up.It's in his client's interest not to have that Dragon's contract voided.

However, his client appears to want to play for the Tigers and that is going to be the important factor. As I said, players rarely if ever move against their will if they dig their heels in. If Moltzen wants to stay a Tiger I would suggest Tauber is taking a hard line to get the Tigers to shift their contract to something more on par with what the Dragons have offered and apparently TM has signed.
 
I would think the first contract with the Tigers would be binding unless Tim has a release from them in writing. It might come down to Tim and his manager copping a fine, and he gets to stay at the Tigers - hope so anyway!
 

Members online

Back
Top