Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[TSP]

You can't force someone to break a contract with someone else - that other person has legal remedies in their favour against both parties. If we did that do you think "Satan" wouldn't exercise those rights against the Tigers ??

"Force the issue" i said.

Its his own choice to sign or not.

I havent threatened or bullied him.

Im giving him an "opportunity" to resolve the issue.

 

[Tom Shines]

In which case he could have made a statemenf to police at another time.

He said he was " required" to attend when he did. I very much doubt that.

Where they going to arrest him if he didnt go? No. Can they? No.

It seems to be a pretty ill thought-out and bad excuse.

We don’t know what the police said. Or the other circumstances , so pointless to speculate

 

[TSP]

We don’t know what the police said , so pointless to speculate

They cant force him or anyone else to make a formal statement.

Thats the law.

Ask a cop or a lawyer if you want.

 

[Tom Shines]

They cant force him or anyone else to make a statement.

Thats the law.

Maybe he wanted to

 

[TSP]

Maybe he wanted to

During his training?

He said he was "required" to go when he did.

Thats unlikely.

Hes got non training periods to attend if he wants to and im sure the cops could have booked him in later.

If hes helping them, they would like to help him.

 

[Tom Shines]

During his training?

He said he was "required" to go.

Thats unlikely.

I read the article … he says it was regarding a family member in relation to a domestic violence matter… is that not a reasonable priority over missing 40 minutes of training ?

 

[TSP]

I read the article … he says it was regarding a family member in relation to a domestic violence matter… is that it a reasonable priority ?

dv matters arent resolved during a period of training.

They can arrest and deny bail to a dv suspect on reasonable grounds. They do it all time.

They did it to Taylan May!

 

[Ron Brodrick's Spirit]

He's a fat useless heap of crap that no team wants.
Why are you wasting mental energy on him?

 

[Tom Shines]

dv matters arent resolved during a period of training.

They might be ..based on his statement he provided

 

[liltiger]

Biggest misconception around this Joint is that Wests Ashfield have plenty of money...
And they own Wests Tigers, Therefore - It shouldn't be an issue.

They might have more money than the pope - but they don't spend anywhere near the amount they should on this club... Never have.

I've said it many times,
I remember a meeting where it was discussed by the higher ups, Maybe 15 years ago...
One year, Canterbury Leagues Club gave 4 mill to the Football operations
- Must have been around 12-14 when they were red hot.

Wests Magpies and Balmain gave the Football operations (WT's) Less than 400k total
(Between both of them!!)

And here we were thinking we can compete.

So I guess what Adele said on the podcast was right, we have owners that don't spend money on anything to do with the joint. He was saying the best thing for us in terms of how HBG look after the place would be to privatise. He said though it has to be to the right owner, one who understands that success makes their investment worth more. So they pump money into the joint knowing if there's success they can get a return on investment. He said since the inception of the JV our owners whoever they are at the time have never really put money into the joint. Don't understand why Richo and the board don't just tell HBG they're a not for profit So start pumping money into the Wests Tigers.

 

[Tom Shines]

He's a fat useless heap of crap that no team wants.
Why are you wasting mental energy on him?

Richo is not that bad mate ,,,

 

[diedpretty]

No new information from our club.

But please, dont believe the media beat up around Galvin taking less money from us

Our contract was a proposal of a package, it was a 5 year 6 million dollar agreement that factored in 3rd party payments, it was never ever going to take up 1.1 million in salary cap every year.

Galvin has taken 750k for this year at the dogs which goes up 25% over the the length of the deal

throw in the third party payments from laundy hotels.

he is earning more than he would have received at the tigers.

How does Laundy supply third party deals. There is no way they can argue he is at arms length from the dogs being there major sponsor. Unless you're suggesting they are under the table payments.

 

[Tiger_Yoshi]

How does Laundy supply third party deals. There is no way they can argue he is at arms length from the dogs being there major sponsor. Unless you're suggesting they are under the table payments.

My understand too - 3rd party deals must be arms length…..but then again since when do NRL abide by their own rules

 

[Tom Shines]

My understand too - 3rd party deals must be arms length…..but then again since when do NRL abide by their own rules

Have the NRL ever discovered a breach of the salary cap that wasn’t the result of a whistle blower spilling the goods ?

 

[Oldman]

Have the NRL ever discovered a breach of the salary cap that wasn’t the result of a whistle blower spilling the goods ?

Robbie Farah

 

[Tom Shines]

Robbie Farah

Remind me of that one ..someone blabbed didn’t they?

 

[Oldman]

Remind me of that one ..someone blabbed didn’t they?

Not sure mate
Just came to mind when I saw the post.

 

[TSP]

They might be ..based on his statement he provided

Nope.

He voluntarily attends to make a statement.

Police have to compare and contrast his statement to other material they have.

They have a process.

They cant and wouldnt conclude an investigation into someone during or after a statement is being taken.

No chance.

And its their job to be a bit skepitical of what they are told by people anyway.

He could have lied in his statement.

But the issue is whether he had to go and make it when he said he did. And at first blush, i think thats rubbish.

If he didnt have to make it then but went anyway, he should be up-front.

Dont get me wrong, in principle id like to think people should be protected from other demands if they are making a statement. But to say that he was required to, at that time, on that date-i think its coming the raw prawn.

 

[Tom Shines]

Nope.

He voluntarily attends to make a statement.

Police have to compare and contrast his statement to other material they have.

They have a process.

They cant and wouldnt conclude an investigation into someone during or after a statement is being taken.

No chance.

What if he provides information that gets someone out or keeps someone in a cell? This could be the deciding factor needed with other evidence the police already have

 

[TSP]

What if he provides information that gets someone out or keeps someone in a cell? This could be the deciding factor needed with other evidence the police already have

I understand your point but the question is whether or not he was "requied to" at that time and on that date.

Im suggesting hes not under any legal obligation to make that statement at that time and on that date when he said he was required to.

So he may not be being truthful.

Even if he provides infornation, police will suss it out. They wont release someone because someone says something.

People lie in statements all the time unfortunately. Police are alive to peoples mischiefs.

But they will follow their processss.

If he can provide evidence that they threatened him in some way to make a statement at the time and date, he may have a case. But the chances of that are probably a million to 1.

I think they would have asked him when could he come in and then tried to help with a mutual time. Theyd appreciate him stepping forward.