-
I can’t think of a CEO who has handled player exits WORSE than this bloke…
To Gibbs, Moltzen, Fifita…through to Beau and Heighno being told they can go to Penrith…through to “oh yeah, you can negotiate with other teams”…“wait, you actually want to leave, let me check”…“yes, you can go”…“wait, we haven’t released you”…“Tim hasn’t been released”…“we are about to release Tim”.
No excuses, he’s been absolutely amateurish in the way he’s handled people leaving. Maybe treating people like cattle worked in the Airlines, but it’s a disgrace they way he’s messed this up. If the players hadn’t of decided to “stick together” mid season and go on that great winning streak, he single handedly could have ruined the whole season.
Long term he may well do that anway. We are likely to go into 2012 with no spine yet again. One injury to Benji or Robbie and we are gone.
Horrible mismanagement.
-
You couldnt have summed it up any better cnx!!! Unfortunately…
-
I can’t think of a CEO who has handled player exits WORSE than this bloke…
To Gibbs, Moltzen, Fifita…through to Beau and Heighno being told they can go to Penrith…through to “oh yeah, you can negotiate with other teams”…“wait, you actually want to leave, let me check”…“yes, you can go”…“wait, we haven’t released you”…“Tim hasn’t been released”…“we are about to release Tim”.
No excuses, he’s been absolutely amateurish in the way he’s handled people leaving. Maybe treating people like cattle worked in the Airlines, but it’s a disgrace they way he’s messed this up. If the players hadn’t of decided to “stick together” mid season and go on that great winning streak, he single handedly could have ruined the whole season.
Long term he may well do that anway. We are likely to go into 2012 with no spine yet again. One injury to Benji or Robbie and we are gone.
Horrible mismanagement.
Given we dont know the inner workings I am happy to give the management the benefit of the doubt.
I will however say it seems weird the turn around in attitude regarding Moltzen in recent days.
-
Helmsey…they’ve lost “benefit of the doubt” with this latest stuff up.
Moltzen hasn’t got a release, his contract is with the Tigers for 2012…wait, he’s got a contract with St George and we’ll be letting him go.
WTF. Look at Humphreys quotes on just about anything over a 6 month period and you’ll see a million contradictions. The bloke just says whatever suits the 5 minute interview he’s giving.
-
I like Humphreys, but he has made some blunders since taking the top job.
I am not about to start calling for his head, he has been doing a good job for the most part.
The club has looked amateurish at certain points though. Its a steep learning curve I guess.
-
Last week he panicked when he realised we have no half back ready for 2012 now that Lui has messed up.
Humphreys = “hang on, maybe we won’t let Moltzen go”. Tries to find a reason, despite it being unethical. “Hang on, here’s a loophole!” Then stupidly tells the media Moltz may be staying.
Meanwhile……Moltzen’s manager flies back in from his US holiday and says “what on earth are you doing? he’s got a legal deal, YOU told us to find one. YOU said we weren’t wanted”.
Humphreys then = “oh, ummmmm…Tim will be leaving”.
Amateur hour at the Tigers folks, amateur hour.
-
Meh.
Our profit as a football club has grown both seasons he has been at the helm. We have sponsors people have actually heard of and people are happy to use their products.
Yes he has a learning curve in regard to the finer points of RL admin but really as long as the bottom line grows and success on the field continues the rest doesn’t matter to much to me.
I dont give a rats if players felt put out by the handling of exchanges and releases. Bottom line is a player can up and leave at any time they see fit. They will cite doing what’s best for their family or needing a change but sook if they get their pink slip and get shown the door when a football club makes the decision based on a change of culture of what’s best for the club and cap structuring moving forward
-
The NRL seemed to believe that legally it was our contract for 2012.
If the club wanted Moltzen to stay, legally they could make him (or let him, seen as Tim didn’t want to leave anyway).
-
@LaT:
The NRL seemed to believe that legally it was our contract for 2012.
If the club wanted Moltzen to stay, legally they could make him (or let him, seen as Tim didn’t want to leave anyway).
Which brings you to the one conclusion, a deal has been done with someone else
-
@smeghead:
Meh.
Our profit as a football club has grown both seasons he has been at the helm. We have sponsors people have actually heard of and people are happy to use their products.
Yes he has a learning curve in regard to the finer points of RL admin but really as long as the bottom line grows and success on the field continues the rest doesn’t matter to much to me.
I dont give a rats if players felt put out by the handling of exchanges and releases. Bottom line is a player can up and leave at any time they see fit. They will cite doing what’s best for their family or needing a change but sook if they get their pink slip and get shown the door when a football club makes the decision based on a change of culture of what’s best for the club and cap structuring moving forward
I’d have to agree. Things have moved on a bit from te days of Raddison Maine and Herbal World. And on the field the team has been a legitimate premiership contender the past 2 seasons. It’s hard to think of too many clubs with a better combination of on and off field success.
-
My opinion is that St George have been the foolish ones, not WT. When you buy a used car, you make sure it is unencumbered. When Saints decided to stake a good chunk of their salary cap with limited alternatives available, they should have dotted their I’s and crossed the T’s. They foolishly left a massive door open and when Lui stuffed up, the Tigers considered walking through it. No matter how it ends, Saints have been negligent, not Humphreys. As a WT supporter, I hope we dont take advantage of the loophole because I like us being the NRL “good guys”, but I admire Humpty for considering it.
Posted using RoarFEED -
@LaT:
The NRL seemed to believe that legally it was our contract for 2012.
If the club wanted Moltzen to stay, legally they could make him (or let him, seen as Tim didn’t want to leave anyway).
Which brings you to the one conclusion, a deal has been done with someone else
I would think dragons have requested a substantial amount of compensation. If paid, the compensation amount would be against our salary cap.
Humphreys gambled and lost. Not to say the gamble was not worth it, certainly worth a try and we are no worse off than prior to the story breaking.
-
@Gary Bakerloo:
@LaT:
The NRL seemed to believe that legally it was our contract for 2012.
If the club wanted Moltzen to stay, legally they could make him (or let him, seen as Tim didn’t want to leave anyway).
Which brings you to the one conclusion, a deal has been done with someone else
I would think dragons have requested a substantial amount of compensation. If paid, the compensation amount would be against our salary cap.
Humphreys gambled and lost. Not to say the gamble was not worth it, certainly worth a try and we are no worse off than prior to the story breaking.
If legally we were in the right, and the NRL was on our side, I can’t imagine why the Dragons would be in a position to demand compensation. I guess they could ask, but Tigers wouldn’t be under any sort of pressure to comply given the above reasons.
-
I’m not fussed about the whole situation to be honest. As long as the Tigers stay within the salary cap and can attract marquee players to the club as evidenced by Blair signing, and retaining top talent within the squad such as Ellis, Lawrence, Ayshford, Woods, Farah and Marshall, then I’m happy. Losing the likes of Fifita, Gibbs and Moltzen - all decent players in their own right, is not the be all and end all.
As Smeg also points out, financially the Tigers are doing well and have some top sponsors on board these days, and these sorts of things are vital for a club to succeed these days.
-
They had a signed contract and entered the agreement under the proviso the player was being released. They did nothing wrong and to lose Moltzen would mean they have to start looking for another player. Grounds for compensation in my opinion.
