Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Red Willow

Joel Moon (merged threads)

80 posts in this topic

Moon took Salford to a tribunal earlier this year to try to force his release, he lost the case. Not the actions of a club wanting rid.

So, Salford refused to let him go for free but allowed him to go when another club payed a tansfer fee?

Makes sense to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No - we are skint and got things to pay :dry:

So you sold two players called Moon?

Or sold him twice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thoroughly depressing. Yet another calibre player leaving a club who need him to join one who don't and still widening the gap between the 2 clubs in question. This whole off-season is really bringing the inadequacy of licensing and the current cap into sharp focus. We need franchising and revenue sharing ASAP to make Super League interesting beyond games involving the top 4 or 5 elite sides.

I loved watching Moon last season (when fit). Real bag of tricks. Damn shame for fans of Salford and the little guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joel is daft as a brush but does have real talent.Hall will score bags of tries playing outside him.

He was selected for the Exiles game.

He has a good pair of hands, but suffered a number of injuries last season including a broken hand.

Sorry to see him go, he scored some outstanding tries for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thoroughly depressing. Yet another calibre player leaving a club who need him to join one who don't and still widening the gap between the 2 clubs in question. This whole off-season is really bringing the inadequacy of licensing and the current cap into sharp focus. We need franchising and revenue sharing ASAP to make Super League interesting beyond games involving the top 4 or 5 elite sides.

I loved watching Moon last season (when fit). Real bag of tricks. Damn shame for fans of Salford and the little guys.

If Leeds didn't want him why would they pay a transfer fee :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Leeds didn't want him why would they pay a transfer fee :blink:

He said need rather than want.

But Leeds have been saying for a while that we need a centre. Never really replaced Senior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said need rather than want.

But Leeds have been saying for a while that we need a centre. Never really replaced Senior.

Yeah,sorry,my mistake.

True Leeds have never really replaced Senior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.My point was that Bradford did not want to sell players and went down one route. Salford may have decided that they do want to sell players and they dont want to take the route the Bulls did.

Im not sure how anybody can criticise the treatment of the two clubs when they are in different situations. Maybe Salford dont want to keep these players!

The point is that Bradford went into administration which meant that their players were not contracted to the club and were free agents. It was therefore essential that the other Super League clubs agreed not to sign their players if they were to retain their squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that Bradford went into administration which meant that their players were not contracted to the club and were free agents. It was therefore essential that the other Super League clubs agreed not to sign their players if they were to retain their squad.

i dont believe administration means they are free agents.

Even if it did, this is exactly my point. Salford and Bradfords circumstances are different!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, it seems tis was more about player power, he was refusing/reluctant to return to the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whats the fuss. the player wanted away. leeds needed a centre. salford need money.

whatever way you look at it all seems fine with the deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what an arrogant response. Player unsettled by bigger club fakes homesickness and refuses to return.

And all is well with the world?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great for Leeds, strengthens an already strong squad ahead of their bid for an umpteenth consecutive 'super' league title.

Not so great for the competition though.

Leeds are absolutely right to do what's best for them but it'll get to a point eventually where super league itself will have failed its brief.

"In the kingdom of the blind...."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what an arrogant response. Player unsettled by bigger club fakes homesickness and refuses to return.

And all is well with the world?

its not arrogant . the player made it plain he wanted to leave last season long before leeds showed any interest in him indeed he is about the 4th choice centre from the list leeds drew up back in sept .

its not the style for leeds to unsettle a player as they always go through the correct channels before approching a player as bradford will testify when they tried to sign leiulia or whatever his name is from them earlier this month .

word is that salford contacted leeds to offer moon to them last week rather than leeds going after the player themselves after a previous offer had been turned down by salford without leeds making any contact with the player themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great for Leeds, strengthens an already strong squad ahead of their bid for an umpteenth consecutive 'super' league title.

Not so great for the competition though.

Leeds are absolutely right to do what's best for them but it'll get to a point eventually where super league itself will have failed its brief.

"In the kingdom of the blind...."

why not good for the competion what were leeds expected to do carry on playing a forward out in the centre position just to even things up or sign a player and even then stay within the cap limit .

the point is no club can spend more than a fixed sum which has been agreed on by all the clubs so what is unfair about leeds signing a player who did not want to play for his present club

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great for Leeds, strengthens an already strong squad ahead of their bid for an umpteenth consecutive 'super' league title.

Not so great for the competition though.

Leeds are absolutely right to do what's best for them but it'll get to a point eventually where super league itself will have failed its brief. "In the kingdom of the blind...."

I don't think RFL/SLE are at all blind to the situation hence a review in which three of the SL clubs have spoken openly about how they see Super League reducing in numbers.

Sure, one club was saved at all costs and retained most of it's players and made a link up with a local CC club, another is letting their best players go and has made no efforts to link up with a CC club.

Heavy clues as to who may be in and who may be out 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read what I wrote, you'd realise I'm not criticising Leeds for looking after number one. I'm just questioning whether the Super League project had succeeded.

That's another topic for another time though and, to be honest, I'm past caring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read what I wrote, you'd realise I'm not criticising Leeds for looking after number one. I'm just questioning whether the Super League project had succeeded.

That's another topic for another time though and, to be honest, I'm past caring.

fair enough it just seems that if say leeds or warrington sign a player its unfair to the rest of the league for some reason but if the likes of hull sign 8 or 9 players theres nothing wrong with it here i should state i dont mind how many players hull sign within the cap limits of course.

super league as a project dont make me laugh it came about as a means of saving the top teams from ruin by excepting the sky deal and had nothing to do with anything other than that . you can call it super league or premiership or any other name you want all it is of course is the top division in the game in this country in a dog eat dog pro sport just like any other sport

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NRL's cap seems to be far more effective at levelling out the comp and stopping the big clubs from cannibalising the rest.

If anything, it makes it harder for clubs to stay successful and keep successful teams together (see Melbourne).

The problem here is that the cap itself is above many clubs' means, whilst others at the top (allegedly) cheat it as it's not as assiduously policed here.

As a result, we're left with a five or six team super league with another 7-8 fillers living hand to mouth.

The ideal is for those 7-8 to raise their standards but IMO it's an impossible gap to bridge without a sugar daddy as they're so open to predators.

I'll be the first to acknowledge that Salford are the main architects of their plight due to consistent mismanagement.

However, it's difficult for a club to maintain momentum when every time it produces a star there's an inevitability that they will lose them.

In the past three years Salford have lost Myler, Turner, Ratchford, Smith, Holdsworth, Moon and Gleeson to bigger clubs. We've also shot ourselves in the foot by losing the likes of Alker and Cashmere.

What incentive is there to build from the ground up without any realistic possibility of progression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a difference between sining an out of contract player and one with plenty still to run.

There is a difference in timings as well, agreeing personal details with a player refusing to return for pre season.

Signing a player at the end of season giving a team time to recruit rather than start of the new season.

Never mind if the rumours are true I'm sure you can pick off the rest of the team cheaply in the next few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a club can't afford £1.6m in player wages when they are handed around £1.4m in central funding then it suggests they shouldnt be in SL.

Salford dont seem to put that much effort into anything (probably harsh) but even now they appear to be slowly declining without even keeping the fans up to speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017