Moltzen Staying Or Going

Fraze

That isn't fact at all. Lui could have been or not have been. You don't know that as fact. People believe media at the drop of a hat
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
 
Do you believe there are any known facts at this time? Like ones given from direct quotes from Humphreys etc?
 
@Fraze23 said:
Fact of the matter is that if Rob Lui doesnt land himself in strife none of this comes to surface.
Tim still may have wanted to stay but its a case of tough luck.
We told him to look elsewhere and he did. I really don't think we are handling this the right way.
Click to expand...

It was in the process of coming ot the surface well before the lui incident.
 
@tiger91 said:
Weird analogy King Sirro, but I get your point. **I wouldn't want any player who wasn't prepared to bleed black, white and orange.**
If I were a Dragon, I would be hoping Moltz stays at the Tigers as he's head and heart won't be 100% committed to their premiership campaign. Not only that but I couldn't imagine the Dragons players would be willing to line up in defense with Moltzen knowing he never wanted to be there.
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
Click to expand...

Oh come on, thats way over the top…this IS timid tim we're talking about.
 
@T-REXX said:
Lat

You missed the point. But Not to worry.
\
\
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
Click to expand...

So what is YOUR point?

LaT didnt state he/she thought the Tigers had done anything wrong. ..merely pointed out he/she felt it wasnt an honourable way of doing business
 
All I think is that I'm saying is that if we bought a player who decided to try and weasel his way put of a contract, I don't want him.

Whether it was Adam Blair or a fringe first grader, if he isn't prepared to 100% commit to the club then he isn't the player I want representing us.
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
 
@T-REXX said:
Fraze

That isn't fact at all. Lui could have been or not have been. You don't know that as fact. People believe media at the drop of a hat
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
Click to expand...

If Lui wasn't going where would the money come from to keep him here? He left because we couldnt afford to keep him and sign Blair and co.

And King Sirro the point i was making was that even if he wanted to stay months ago the opportunity for that to become a reality didnt occur until Lui's escapades on mad monday.
 
I think it is interesting that the club has clearly changed their opinion on Moltzen's ability.

I was disappointed when he signed with the saints and felt his early season form would turn around once he got his fitness and strength back. But, clearly Sheens wasn't impressed with Moltzen and felt that he wouldn't be that big a loss. His subsequent form in the second half of the season must have changed this perspective.

Sheens has been really good with identifying the best players and working with players coming off serious injury (Prince, Hodgson, Richards) so I don't get why they got it wrong with Moltzen.

I also don't think it is a salary cap issue. We have signed a number of fringe first grade players whose place could be filled by cheaper juniors. I think it is important to have depth but there is no way the club can't incorporate a mid level contract in their salary cap. In my opinion, he was allowed to look around because Sheens didn't think he'd be playing first grade next year.

I really hope he stays at the club, he fits the tigers style of play perfectly. But, why was he seen as expendable in the first place?
 
@tiger91 said:
All I think is that I'm saying is that if we bought a player who decided to try and weasel his way put of a contract, I don't want him.

Whether it was Adam Blair or a fringe first grader, if he isn't prepared to 100% commit to the club then he isn't the player I want representing us.
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
Click to expand...

Youre talking loyalty… with the way the cap works these days, many players are forced to go elsewhere.
Theyre supposed to be professional athletes.
Apparently Gibbs & Fifita didnt wanna go to the sharks....loyalty and proffesionalism

Also, it doesnt matter that we didnt want him, and now we do?
How about 100% commitment from club to player?
You cant have it both ways, but it seems WTs do
 
Next thing you'll have is someone accusing Benji and Moltzen of instigating the argument between Lui and his partner so Moltzen can stay
I think the still Tigers want to keep both if possible
 
There's obviously a lot of to and fro in this discussion. These are the key facts so far as I'm concerned:

1) Almost all of what's gone on between Moltzen, his manager and the two clubs involved is unknown to outsiders.
2) Because of (1), it's really impossible - and unfair - to say that any party is acting illegally or unethically at this stage. It is possible to construct a plausible scenario that makes any or all parties look good or bad.
3) Having said that, it seems at least highly possible that the Dragons are going to have a legitimate reason to be pissed off with the Tigers, Moltzen or both.
4) It seems highly likely that Moltzen wants to be at the Tigers next year.
5) Given (4), it would seem cruel, not to mention pointless, if the Dragons forced Moltzen to play for them (that said, I remember Israel Folau "tearfully" telling his Melbourne colleagues he had to leave because he was homesick for Brisbane, yeah right).
6) I'd rather have Moltzen at the club next year than not.
7) Given (6), unless any rules have actually been broken my conclusion is: balls to the Dragons.
 
Top posts Troy and 2041.
To that I would like to add that until a Court or arbitrator says so there has been no illegality nor breach of contract.
All that is happening is that the relevant parties are asserting what they believe are their respective contractual rights.
IMHO a condition precedent to the Moltzen-Dragons contract is a release by the Tigers from the Moltzen-Tigers contract.
No release means no Tim to Dragons.

In the law there are often dissenting opinions. In my opinion, the Dragons contract with Moltzen is clearly invalid.
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED
 
@Fraze23 said:
@T-REXX said:
Fraze

That isn't fact at all. Lui could have been or not have been. You don't know that as fact. People believe media at the drop of a hat
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

If Lui wasn't going where would the money come from to keep him here? He left because we couldnt afford to keep him and sign Blair and co.

And King Sirro the point i was making was that even if he wanted to stay months ago the opportunity for that to become a reality didnt occur until Lui's escapades on mad monday.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It's a possibility that Dwyer may be exempt from the salary cap next year depending on his recovery. Again, merely a possibility at this stage.
 
@Fraze23 said:
@T-REXX said:
Fraze

That isn't fact at all. Lui could have been or not have been. You don't know that as fact. People believe media at the drop of a hat
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

If Lui wasn't going where would the money come from to keep him here? He left because we couldnt afford to keep him and sign Blair and co.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

again, you are believing what you hear in the media again.
WT never said that he was forced out due to the cap.
Is it possible that there was another reason/s behind it, or that Tim actually wanted to leave during the year?

just saying 😕
 
Just heard on sky news they showed us 2moros dailytelgraph that he is stayign with tigers and nrl has a contract with us so we can put it to bed he will be at wests tigers next year :smiley:😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 599 (members: 47, guests: 552)
Back
Top