Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:41 pm  

exiled Warrior wrote:

Maybe - but there are ways of doing things. If he had returned to the club for pre-season but asked for a transfer (and Sale then made a formal substantial offer) surely that would have given him more chance of getting what he wanted? Better than doing a no-show and upsetting everyone at Cas and creating a confrontational situation which now looks like going through the courts and costing everyone a lot of time and money. Sadly it looks like a case where no one really wins.

Yes I agree he has gone about it all wrong. As I said in my post Cas have been treated badly.

The antics of Solomona, Sandow and now Segayaro rightly have their clubs frothing at the mouth.

For years we have wondered how Leeds have been able to keep their players happy whilst Wigan seem to let players go if they just ask nicely. The boot seems to be on the other foot just now. Leeds currently have no full back or hooker - just to add to last season's woes.

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:46 pm  

Looks as though the marquee signing thing is starting to bite clubs on the booty. Lets just scrap the salary cap

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 1:04 pm  

Cherry_Warrior wrote:

Looks as though the marquee signing thing is starting to bite clubs on the booty. Lets just scrap the salary cap

I think that only Wigan and Hull actually paid a Marquee player last season, and though neither turned out to be a success the other ten clubs weren't affected. So I don't understand your point. The presence of a Marquee Player rule gives clubs a way around the Salary Cap, which most clubs haven't been able to apply.

Because of the poor exchange rate on the pound and the poor quality of Super League, getting players to come and play here is proving hard. We only get players who are having disciplinary problems who can't get a gig in the NRL at the time. The fact that Koucash agitated for the Marquee rule then couldn't apply it proves that the Salary Cap isn't the issue really.

There are probably ways of getting Sam Tomkins salary under the cap were we to need the money to pay George Williams for example.

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 1:11 pm  

cas all the way wrote:

This 300k you keep referring to is rubbish. Cas have net recieved an offer from Sale as yet. Please explain how Cas have acted wrong in anyway? Solomona turns up at Sale when he should be at Cas training.... Cas get Lawyers involved as player is under contract to Cas?? Cas have done the right thing instead of allowing him to leave.

They have received an offer.

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:21 pm  

So now solomona has decided retire from rugby league. What a pr*ck!

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:06 pm  

Cherry_Warrior wrote:

I have to step in here. Are people really criticizing Castleford for rejecting advances on their star player. Saying they should have accepted the offer is ridiculous. Cas were good enough to offer the man a very healthy wage and now they are villified for upholding their end of the bargain. Cas have tried to build a team around players like Solomona and because they have done it under contract and were willing to let him leave next year for free shows their ambition. There are 3 parties at blame for this outrageous shame on our sport and none of them are Castleford's fault.

I don't see anyone saying Cas have played a part in shaming the sport but please feel free to continue with the misrepresentation. Cas were placed in a situation they didn't deserve due to the atrocious actions of Solomona. Having then decided to go to court they have played a part in the situation as it now stands. You say accepting the offer (according to their Chief Executive 3 approaches have been rejected) is ridiculous. I say throwing money at lawyers to take Solomona to court is a poor use of whatever resources the club has. What do they expect to achieve, and at what price?

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:45 pm  

jinkin jimmy wrote:

I don't see anyone saying Cas have played a part in shaming the sport but please feel free to continue with the misrepresentation. Cas were placed in a situation they didn't deserve due to the atrocious actions of Solomona. Having then decided to go to court they have played a part in the situation as it now stands. You say accepting the offer (according to their Chief Executive 3 approaches have been rejected) is ridiculous. I say throwing money at lawyers to take Solomona to court is a poor use of whatever resources the club has. What do they expect to achieve, and at what price?

I actually applaud cas for having abit of a backbone over this. He was/is under contract so they were well within their rights to reject any offer for a player they didnt want to sell.
Weather this will make other players think again if they suddenly decide they want to walk out on agreed contract i dont know but like leeds and the hooker from penrith who's name i cant spell, least it shows some clubs wont just roll over and let a player take the mickey out of them.

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 6:18 pm  

wiganstripleL wrote:

I actually applaud cas for having abit of a backbone over this. He was/is under contract so they were well within their rights to reject any offer for a player they didnt want to sell.
Weather this will make other players think again if they suddenly decide they want to walk out on agreed contract i dont know but like leeds and the hooker from penrith who's name i cant spell, least it shows some clubs wont just roll over and let a player take the mickey out of them.

They will both roll over eventually. Agents are killing the game!

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 6:24 pm  

Aboveusonlypie wrote:

I think that only Wigan and Hull actually paid a Marquee player last season, and though neither turned out to be a success the other ten clubs weren't affected. So I don't understand your point. The presence of a Marquee Player rule gives clubs a way around the Salary Cap, which most clubs haven't been able to apply.

Because of the poor exchange rate on the pound and the poor quality of Super League, getting players to come and play here is proving hard. We only get players who are having disciplinary problems who can't get a gig in the NRL at the time. The fact that Koucash agitated for the Marquee rule then couldn't apply it proves that the Salary Cap isn't the issue really.

There are probably ways of getting Sam Tomkins salary under the cap were we to need the money to pay George Williams for example.

wire did

Re: Solomona : Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:16 pm  

As with most debates there are fans on here that take one side and visa versa, this is good. I understand that Solomona has the right to earn more money if presented with the opportunity but 'come on' how can any supporter of any club whatever sport criticise a club for making a rugby based decision. Cas have in the past sold players to stay in business and not take the option of screwing everybody by going into administration - (Clarke) for example.
It was clear from day one what was happening here but because of how it is playing out now, a player being persuaded to retire from the game for money effects every RL club, both in SL and NRL. Every club needs to stand up and lend their support to the RFL to fight this for the good of the game.
Could I quit my phone contract to go on another network and save money.