TOPIC:

This is like '1907' all over again for the pfc, against the same club too.

FMD Leggett claims he has a valid contract with EF. Umm, you can only have one contract mate. The hearing took place yesterday but has been held over for two days . The arbitrator wants to see more detailed submissions. Whatever that means.

Depends if the original one is "valid" I guess DD?

Gutted JT didn't mention my day 1 welcoming haka as well DD....fingers crossed your day 2 closing Brittany spears dance with DF, STT, FF2 and Smokester has better luck...you using Dulux or British Paints mate?

Talk about skip the foreplay and just get straight into it, lets forget about a clearance just declare the Perth FC contract invalid and sign a new one with another club. This has go to be great news for players, contracted to their club seeking a bit of security then go and shop themselves around for a better deal and declare their current contract invalid. Happy days, or as they say across the ditch Freezin, sweet as bro!!

Very interesting test case this because I’d say WAFL contracts would be pretty standard and the blueprint might even be supplied by the WAFL themselves.

the only thing that should be open to 'arbitration' is how much ef are made to pay the pfc to release him from his contract.

I take that line that he has a valid contract with Perth

KCEF wrote: I take that line that he has a valid contract with Perth

If your club had any decency you would just take it in good faith if he has a contract he has a bloody contract. Unless it was written on a bloody napkin he has a contract. You are coming across as a very arrogant club which is no surprise since Bubble O Bill arrived.

DD wrote:

KCEF wrote: I take that line that he has a valid contract with Perth

If your club had any decency you would just take it in good faith if he has a contract he has a bloody contract. Unless it was written on a bloody napkin he has a contract. You are coming across as a very arrogant club which is no surprise since Bubble O Bill arrived.

Bullshit - what is coming across is that you need to work on your comprehension. Now re read the article - this time slower.

ArkRoyal wrote: the only thing that should be open to 'arbitration' is how much ef are made to pay the pfc to release him from his contract.[/quote

I agree. A contract is a legal document. Surely it is not within the jurisdiction of a WAFL arbitrator to judge on it’s validity or on the grievances of the parties to it.
If PFC stand firm on no release from the contract then end of story IMO.
As an aside, Leggett has claimed the club has breached the terms of the contract.
Could he be breaching the contract by not attending pre-season training ?

Chicken and egg Smoke, maybe Cody saw an issue with the contract that lead to him not attending training. Yes it should be within the WAFC's jurisdiction to check if a contract (a legal document) is right and proper, if it breaches the commercial contract laws in any way or either party is seen as breaching the terms of the contract then the Commish is the body to rule on it. I guess after that if the aggrieved party see fit they can take it to the civil courts.