JAC (the fox) to maybe leave the storm

Pretty much all other teams when receiving a request for compassionate bye bye - Immediate grant given.

The storm: Only after one more season (2020) and only if they get just as good a player in return. (smh)

So as mentioned elsewhere... the fox wants out.




Now I'm not fully against the storm not wanting to be out of pocket here.... but I just can't remember another club denying the request for 12 months. He's also an Aust winger...so just what player would they accept in return? ($$$)

I see some parts of the media are trying to link the situation with the afl process, if only the games and rules were the same, they may have a point. It doesn't sound as compassionate as it's being made out to be.

Anyway...there you go.


edit: Sorry @40 nil . I was trying to merge my thread into yours, stuffed it up, dunno how to split 2 threads (that's something smart like @Jethro would know) and so I tried to remember what your thread title was. Just in case you're like wtf happened to my title? Plus it's late.
 
Last edited:
So the storm want: a player of equal value, or salary cap relief, or a transfer fee. How exactly would salary cap relief work??
 
What's the bet he goes to Souffs, who will they medically retire and then long term re employ this time to accommodate him?
 
This’ll test V’landys out. It’s the number one gripe in the game atm. Players breaking contracts at will. Ryan Matterson is a good example.
As much as I hate the Storm, the trend needs to stop. Im not saying JAC is not genuine in his request. But player agents are pond scum, and would sink to any depths to get their player (and themselves) a better deal.
 
player agents are pond scum,

images-1.jpeg
 
This’ll test V’landys out. It’s the number one gripe in the game atm. Players breaking contracts at will. Ryan Matterson is a good example.
As much as I hate the Storm, the trend needs to stop. Im not saying JAC is not genuine in his request. But player agents are pond scum, and would sink to any depths to get their player (and themselves) a better deal.

What I hate is that players want to go on "compassionate grounds" yet they also always get a better contract.

Bring in a rule that says you can't accept a contract for a greater value than the one you have for the length remaining on that contract. How many would want to move then?
 
What I hate is that players want to go on "compassionate grounds" yet they also always get a better contract.

Bring in a rule that says you can't accept a contract for a greater value than the one you have for the length remaining on that contract. How many would want to move then?

True, but the new club would just work their magic with third party payments or alternatively what we know as 'the roosters way of doing business.'
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

2025 Ladder

Team P W D L PD Pts
1 Raiders 21 17 0 4 168 38
2 Storm 20 15 0 5 248 36
3 Bulldogs 19 14 0 5 122 34
4 Panthers 20 12 1 7 119 31
5 Warriors 19 12 0 7 26 30
6 Broncos 20 11 0 9 104 28
7 Sharks 20 12 0 8 43 28
8 Dolphins 19 10 0 9 171 26
9 Roosters 19 9 0 10 20 24
10 Sea Eagles 20 9 0 11 -10 24
11 Tigers 20 8 0 12 -121 22
12 Dragons 19 7 0 12 -58 20
13 Cowboys 20 7 1 12 -177 19
14 Knights 20 6 0 14 -152 18
15 Eels 19 6 0 13 -153 18
16 Titans 19 5 0 14 -153 16
17 Rabbitohs 20 6 0 14 -197 16
Back
Top Bottom