Jump to content

Paul Vaughan To Super League


Recommended Posts


16 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

Unlikely any NRL team will take him after his recent sacking.

He is a good solid prop and would add value to any SL team. Was on a huge A$800k at St George. A humbling climb down in wages required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vaughan is a really good player and would go well in SL, but he's a serious liability off the pitch. The guys got the IQ of an amoeba and just can't seem to keep himself out of trouble.

Big risk for whoever signs him and one who definately needs a 'good behaviour' clause putting in his contract.

St.Helens - The Home of record breaking Rugby Champions

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, OMEGA said:

Once he’s served his 6 match NRL ban he’ll sign for another NRL club!

It’s likely the NRL will support its clubs now by refusing to register contracts of players that have been sacked for serious misconduct until at least their terminated contract was due to expire.

If that is the case, he’s waiting until 2023 to play NRL again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

Wigan?  Gossip is they’re after another prop and he would fit the bill.  Still the 8 matches to contend with though.

zak could take him under his wing and look after him too

see you later undertaker - in a while necrophile 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he has an 8 game ban- if a player is injured for 8 matches they dont go rushing for a sl contract- ok he has no club but the way the dragons are now and have been  treating players is baffling!

see you later undertaker - in a while necrophile 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

8 games.

His NRL ban, I thought, applied here as well. Same as Ben Barba.

Maybe Saints are in for him as well.  

That was a drugs ban and the rules here were different for that offence. Saints appealed and weren’t successful. Vaughan’s NRL ban will likely not be recognised by Super League either because of the bio security rules they have, whereas we have none at all, so it’s a murky one again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

That was a drugs ban and the rules here were different for that offence. Saints appealed and weren’t successful. Vaughan’s NRL ban will likely not be recognised by Super League either because of the bio security rules they have, whereas we have none at all, so it’s a murky one again. 

What were the actual Rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lowdesert said:

What were the actual Rules?

I seem to remember that an out of season positive drugs test wasn’t a ban here at the time, where it was in Australia, so Saints appealed Barba’s twelve game ban when he arrived but eventually lost the appeal and he served it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hela Wigmen said:

I seem to remember that an out of season positive drugs test wasn’t a ban here at the time, where it was in Australia, so Saints appealed Barba’s twelve game ban when he arrived but eventually lost the appeal and he served it. 

This was taken from an NRL press release at the time - "We will always uphold any ban imposed by the NRL under a reciprocal agreement between RFL and the NRL," a RFL statement said .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

This was taken from an NRL press release at the time - "We will always uphold any ban imposed by the NRL under a reciprocal agreement between RFL and the NRL," a RFL statement said .

And this is what McManus said; 

“The NRL itself stated that he would serve twelve matches when he returns to the NRL. That was formally stated by them.” 

“Most importantly, if that offence had been committed in this country, then there would have been no ban.

“For out-of-season illicit non-performance-enhancing drugs, there is no ban.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

And this is what McManus said; 

“The NRL itself stated that he would serve twelve matches when he returns to the NRL. That was formally stated by them.” 

“Most importantly, if that offence had been committed in this country, then there would have been no ban.

“For out-of-season illicit non-performance-enhancing drugs, there is no ban.

 

Never wrong are you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lowdesert said:

Never wrong are you?

I mean, I’ve provided the evidence that an out of season drugs ban in the NRL is not an offence that is punished with a ban in Super League, as I said further up when you questioned me on it, so, no, I’m not wrong on that point. 

A ban for bio security reasons in the NRL, like the out of season drugs ban, is not an offence that is punished with a ban here, so it wouldn’t be a surprise to me if any Super League club who did sign him, if any do, raised this point with the governing bodies of the sport, as Saints did with the Barba ban. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lowdesert said:

Wigan?  Gossip is they’re after another prop and he would fit the bill.  Still the 8 matches to contend with though.

If Wigan won't spend 250k py on George Williams, I can't see them paying big money for a prop who will likely disappear back to the NRL at the first opportunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.