Jump to content

Interesting piece with Adrian Lam on SL poaching Championship players


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Its a difficult square to circle Harry. Clubs like short contracts because they don't tie them to players long term, the cost of that is that players are always liable to be lured by long term contracts elsewhere.

Ultimately many players aren't paid lots, I don't blame any of them for choosing the most financially beneficial and secure route.

I only spoke about this at the game at Leigh yesterday, prior to reading this thread, in that as soon as the 'legal approach' window opens I expect to see some movement from SL clubs in the direction of quite a few of the Leigh player's - there is some very good individual talent there - I also suspect it has also crossed Mr Lam's mind hence the report in LRL, and has stated earlier in this thread is there any coincidence with Mr Powell's show at the Leigh game yesterday and being a week away from window, I suspect not.

Edited by Harry Stottle
Link to comment
Share on other sites


16 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'd love to see some examples of players who this has happened with, as I can't quite recall any. 

If Harry Kane couldn't walk out on his contract, then I dont see how rugby league players can. 

If they're out of contract at the end of season, or the current club has AGREED to a buyout clause, then there's nothing to see. 

It is not about walking out of the contract Toby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Compensation for junior development is a valid subject and indeed football has a significant agreement on this, so I certainly think rugby league should consider it too. (I don't know for a fact that it doesn't already) 

But this is a different point to the one Lam is making, which is that players can arbitrarily break their contracts and leave mid season after just 6 months at the club. I'm struggling to see how this happens. 

There is a compensation formula in place, whether that is sufficient is another discussion. If a club doesn't think this is adequate they can seek an operational rules tribunal to decide.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bigbaldnmad said:

Doesn't really give championship clubs wanting to build towards super league a hope in hell, especially without being able to run academy.

Nail hit quite squarely and firmly on the head.

Edited by Harry Stottle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Tbf there is a difference if this is happening mid season.

That said I can't think of a player who this has happened to in season? A player can speak to anyone about their contract for next year if they are out of contract - they don't earn enough to risk leaving it till the off season. 

Fages walked away from Salford because he had an offer from Saints and wouldn't see out his contract, he refused to play.

We have a few examples of players moving mid season and under contract.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't Championship clubs already do this to League 1 clubs?

Players have always moved mid-season, both between and within divisions. 

The "selling" club is under no obligation to let a player go and if they do, cam demand a transfer fee.

Strange article from Lam,

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Red Willow said:

Fages walked away from Salford because he had an offer from Saints and wouldn't see out his contract, he refused to play.

We have a few examples of players moving mid season and under contract.   

Tbf that wasn't clean cut, there were several players unhappy at Salford around contract breaches and unpaid wages. I believe Salford eventually did get a fee anyway. 

But that seems an exception rather than the rule

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

It is not about walking out of the contract Toby.

The article seems strongly to suggest that,say, O'Donnell could have signed a contract to play for Leigh until the end of 2022, yet could be playing for a SL club in a few weeks and there's nothing Leigh can do to stop that.

It's perfectly possible I've misinterpreted that (or it's wrong), but I'm still looking for an explanation for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Tbf that wasn't clean cut, there were several players unhappy at Salford around contract breaches and unpaid wages. I believe Salford eventually did get a fee anyway. 

But that seems an exception rather than the rule

it is all about power clubs in the lower leagues have none.

Fages was before the major issues, and used it as an excuse, there wasn't a breach on his wages.

It happens to lower clubs/less financially well off in "Transfers" club with more money unsettles player and then pushes through a transfer. It happens every season. Luke Yates had 2 years to run on his when he signed for Huddersfield. yes Salford received a fee but he was still approached as was the coach who was under contract.

The club has to agree to transfers but in the case of championship clubs etc they don't have power to refuse.

Look at the London thread on here, Bronco's "signed" 10 players from Skolars, do you think they wanted that to happen? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Red Willow said:

it is all about power clubs in the lower leagues have none.

Fages was before the major issues, and used it as an excuse, there wasn't a breach on his wages.

It happens to lower clubs/less financially well off in "Transfers" club with more money unsettles player and then pushes through a transfer. It happens every season. Luke Yates had 2 years to run on his when he signed for Huddersfield. yes Salford received a fee but he was still approached as was the coach who was under contract.

The club has to agree to transfers but in the case of championship clubs etc they don't have power to refuse.

Look at the London thread on here, Bronco's "signed" 10 players from Skolars, do you think they wanted that to happen? 

I do get what you are saying, but the informality of contracts lower down the Leagues work both ways. Clubs like them because they aren't tied to players, and for players at that level there's more flexibility. Some of the sums we are talking about there are barely hundreds of pounds a month. 

Higher up the leagues in more formal pro-contracts, this is what Agents are paid for. 

Ultimately money talks and it is a short career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Red Willow said:

It happens to lower clubs/less financially well off in "Transfers" club with more money unsettles player and then pushes through a transfer. It happens every season. Luke Yates had 2 years to run on his when he signed for Huddersfield. yes Salford received a fee but he was still approached as was the coach who was under contract.

The club has to agree to transfers but in the case of championship clubs etc they don't have power to refuse.

Look at the London thread on here, Bronco's "signed" 10 players from Skolars, do you think they wanted that to happen? 

Here's an alternative example though, one which seems to contradicts the assertion that championship clubs "don't have the power to refuse". James Harrison had a great spell with Featherstone from 2019 onwards and his contract ran until the end of 2021.

In 2020 there was lots of reported SL interest (see the article below as an example) but Featherstone said they weren't prepared to let him go unless they were offered "silly money" as a transfer fee. So he played out his contract in 2021, signing for Warrington from 2022.

https://www.totalrl.com/featherstone-turn-down-interest-from-castleford-in-prop/

My question is, why isn't this the case with the Leigh players Lam is talking about?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

Here's an alternative example though, one which seems to contradicts the assertion that championship clubs "don't have the power to refuse". James Harrison had a great spell with Featherstone from 2019 onwards and his contract ran until the end of 2021.

In 2020 there was lots of reported SL interest (see the article below as an example) but Featherstone said they weren't prepared to let him go unless they were offered "silly money" as a transfer fee. So he played out his contract in 2021, signing for Warrington from 2022.

https://www.totalrl.com/featherstone-turn-down-interest-from-castleford-in-prop/

My question is, why isn't this the case with the Leigh players Lam is talking about?

Probably because they do have a 'get out clause'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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