Fraze23
Well-known member
@Tiger78 said:
Under the new rules though isn't he under the line of 11 years, so therefore wouldn't require the stand down?
Or is it the dictator Greenberg's discretion and he can stand down whoever he likes?
Tigerlily
Well-known member
@Tiger78 said:
I was just going say the same @Tiger78 as Musgrove has a history of passed indiscretions both he and Chee Kam will be in court on the 5th of March, so it a case of wait and see….
cqtiger
Well-known member
I can sort of understand the NRL discretion clause instead of a standard stand down rule.
For example - If a player commits a first offence (not under the 11 year rule) Greenburg may stand him down for a month. Now imagine if Matt Lodge was to commit a similar offence now.
For example - If a player commits a first offence (not under the 11 year rule) Greenburg may stand him down for a month. Now imagine if Matt Lodge was to commit a similar offence now.
@Fraze23 said:
It's under 11 years so they still have the discretion to stand down and while "they're making no determination of guilt or innocence" they have stood down Walker and Musgrove using that discretion who just happen to be the players in most jeopardy of conviction (Musgrove's case reportedly involves CCTV and Walker's involves a good samaritan witness with no axe to grind).
prattenparkchild
New member
With the NRL refusing to clear his contract how long before WT have to walk away from this? We have until 30 June to sign 30th player and at the moment Musgrove is it. What if the court case continues beyond 30 June and NRL and the magnificently inconsistent Greenberg has to adjudge WT again? Do we get hit with a $1m fine by Greenberg for not having our 30th player? Or do we seek NRL approval due to circumstances of their making to walk away from contract offer and sign someone else?
balmain boy
Well-known member
No. He was released by Souths to join us. He's technically been uncontracted since then (November/December…) and been training with us for free with the idea he would be back-paid once contract is registered.
If his hearing is on Monday i don't know why the NRL would bother stating he's not registered on Friday.
If his hearing is on Monday i don't know why the NRL would bother stating he's not registered on Friday.
mike
Well-known member
The trouble with all this is the assumption of guilt and that they actually did commit an offence. That will be proven by a court. This is getting to be guilt by social media. We wouldn’t have all the facts and neither would the NRL. I think it’s a disgraceful approach. Don’t get me wrong if they are found guilty then by all means throw the book at them. But I defiantly don’t like the assumption of guilt until proven innocent.
Fraze23
Well-known member
@Nelson said:
Makes you wonder what the point of the 11 year line is if they are just going to stand blokes down at their own discretion anyway?
LeichhardtTiger
Well-known member
It's an interesting conundrum PPC. Has any other team EVER been short of signing 30 players by 30 June?
If Musgrove's case goes beyond 30th June he basically is bye bye to Season 2019 completely cos who would have spots available other than us?
BTW - How's his welfare going Todd? No paid job since he signed and then got busted days later!
I thought that we were cashed up prior to this drama to the tune of around $750K under the cap.
Musgrove would fetch maybe $250K and Jennings similar. So $500k plus the $320K Robbie fine puts us 70K over the cap. But if Musgrove misses some early months of the season then maybe his sign on value reduces accordingly (back ended on performance perhaps).
If Musgrove's case goes beyond 30th June he basically is bye bye to Season 2019 completely cos who would have spots available other than us?
BTW - How's his welfare going Todd? No paid job since he signed and then got busted days later!
I thought that we were cashed up prior to this drama to the tune of around $750K under the cap.
Musgrove would fetch maybe $250K and Jennings similar. So $500k plus the $320K Robbie fine puts us 70K over the cap. But if Musgrove misses some early months of the season then maybe his sign on value reduces accordingly (back ended on performance perhaps).
Harvey
Well-known member
Can we walk away? Was there a clause in the contract saying it must be registered before we pay him?
Another Greenberg discretion that screws is over. My understanding is that the charge relates to approaching a woman that he had previously interacted with and forcibly French kissing her against her wishes.
He is now facing an indefinite ban until the court case is finalised, but Bolton has copped 6 weeks for something that sounds similar, and Walker 3 months for a physical assault of a woman.
Welcome to Greenberg’s law where his definition of “fairness” is more important than consistency
Another Greenberg discretion that screws is over. My understanding is that the charge relates to approaching a woman that he had previously interacted with and forcibly French kissing her against her wishes.
He is now facing an indefinite ban until the court case is finalised, but Bolton has copped 6 weeks for something that sounds similar, and Walker 3 months for a physical assault of a woman.
Welcome to Greenberg’s law where his definition of “fairness” is more important than consistency
Interestingly enough wasn't Musgrove released to join us? Does his contract with the Rabbitohs revert to being current if his new contract is not registered?
Harvey
Well-known member
Apparently one of the factors in “discretionary” penalties is violence against women and/or children.
So I assume MCK will be free to play and will watch with interest as other indiscretions arise.
Some clubs (the usual suspects) will be able to bypass this by paying off the victim before it ever gets near the legal system.
So I assume MCK will be free to play and will watch with interest as other indiscretions arise.
Some clubs (the usual suspects) will be able to bypass this by paying off the victim before it ever gets near the legal system.
prattenparkchild
New member
There are huge amounts of grey in this arent there? If i was WT managers, not that we have a current CEO, id be asking some detailed questions to the NRL and outside contract lawyer specialists about this and getting NRL advice in writing. I feel we could get badly burnt in this.
Harvey
Well-known member
That was my question. If so, following the Ethan Lowe signing, Souths have more than 30 players on their roster and are over the cap.
Harvey
Well-known member
I also assume that anything we have paid or do pay him is now outside of our cap as he is not a registered top 30 player.
Next question is where does he fit in to the 29 players required to be registered by March 1\.
The NRL clubs should walk and form their own group to run the competition
Next question is where does he fit in to the 29 players required to be registered by March 1\.
The NRL clubs should walk and form their own group to run the competition
gallagher
Well-known member
@Harvey said:
It's a good question. I guess souffs would say that if he is cleared then he goes on the tigers books. If he is found guilty and the tigers don't want him then souffs will terminate his contract for breach of contract. Either way he won't be at souffs for 2019\.
But until the courts decide his fate it's a very messy situation for both clubs.
Masterton
Well-known member
And if he is our "last on", does that mean we can't contract him if we're over the cap? (I guess that's less likely now the hit is over 2 years).
prattenparkchild
New member
Kasiano now looks like Saints taking the opportunity of a subsidised signing via Storm's free wheeling with a so called salary cap to replace De Belin. Any replacement for Musgrove will come from a very lean player market unless we can hunt in the ESL.
