26 replies to this topic

[DeadShotKeen]

Anyone know any more about this clause? It's a great signing for us "in theory" but if there's any hint of it being a glorified loan or a "keep my options open" move from the kid then that taints it a fair bit for me. The RFL need to outlaw such clauses. Players are free to tout themselves around ahead of free agency and even when under contract in more extreme circumstances but these weasly "get-outs" just undermine fan confidence and reinforce a sort of begging culture among the less glamorous clubs.

I suppose Rovers may see it that by the end of that 2 year period they may be a more profitable and powerful SL proposition than Hudds and thus view it in more of a confident "Doesn't bother us" way. Still, I don't like it. If I'm forking out to watch games I want players committed to my club, at least in so much as that they're not viewing their next move before they've even pulled our shirt on.

I want to know more about this clause.

Edited by DeadShotKeen, 19 November 2012 - 01:02 PM.

[Ant]

Look at it this way
HKR have signed Eden for a 2 year deal with a 3rd year option

If he doesn't want to take this option then the Giants get to make the first offer on Edens services

If he doesn't take that then he can look about.
But only if he doesn't want to stay at HKR or they don't want him.

[Brigg Rover]

Anyone know any more about this clause? It's a great signing for us "in theory" but if there's any hint of it being a glorified loan or a "keep my options open" move from the kid then that taints it a fair bit for me. The RFL need to outlaw such clauses. Players are free to tout themselves around ahead of free agency and even when under contract in more extreme circumstances but these weasly "get-outs" just undermine fan confidence and reinforce a sort of begging culture among the less glamorous clubs.

I suppose Rovers may see it that by the end of that 2 year period they may be a more profitable and powerful SL proposition than Hudds and thus view it in more of a confident "Doesn't bother us" way. Still, I don't like it. If I'm forking out to watch games I want players committed to my club, at least in so much as that they're not viewing their next move before they've even pulled our shirt on.

I want to know more about this clause.

To be fair to players I don't think they are concerned too much with whats happening in 2 years and are more concerned about the right now.

Edited by Brigg Rover, 20 November 2012 - 11:14 AM.

[westhuller]

Cannot see the problem Rovers have got a great player for two years at least.

[DeadShotKeen]

Cannot see the problem Rovers have got a great player for two years at least.

Would you not be concerned by such a clause with an FC signing?

I just don't like the idea that the selling club and/or the player has been able to exert some control here. It's hard to imagine that the same would happen with a Leeds or Wigan signing, for example, and shows to some extent the light in which we're regarded by players and other clubs. It makes me uncomfortable and further emphasises that SL has power balance issues.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

Would you not be concerned by such a clause with an FC signing?

I just don't like the idea that the selling club and/or the player has been able to exert some control here. It's hard to imagine that the same would happen with a Leeds or Wigan signing, for example, and shows to some extent the light in which we're regarded by players and other clubs. It makes me uncomfortable and further emphasises that SL has power balance issues.

Well if you can get over your issues with the deal , just enjoy watching the player, you have imo got a real gem, far from the finished article but heaped with potential, There are 5 or 6 players i would have let go before Eden. Given the game time i expect him to become a top player very quickly, He made some mistakes last season but he also played some very good football and whoever played fullback for the Giants second half of last season was on a hiding to nothing, You will not be disappointed.

[Roy Boy]

Would you not be concerned by such a clause with an FC signing?

I just don't like the idea that the selling club and/or the player has been able to exert some control here. It's hard to imagine that the same would happen with a LEEDS or Wigan signing, for example, and shows to some extent the light in which we're regarded by players and other clubs. It makes me uncomfortable and further emphasises that SL has power balance issues.

Iestyn Harris - not quite the same but similar?