TOPIC:

Oh, and Ti Em, I am familiar with get out clauses as a general concept. Most WAFL contracts would have them in the event of a player being drafted, or moving interstate or country for work or other reasons. No contract ever drafted in the history of contracts has contained a get out clause purely on the basis that one party can get more money elsewhere.

Ted Nugent wrote: Oh, and Ti Em, I am familiar with get out clauses as a general concept. Most WAFL contracts would have them in the event of a player being drafted, or moving interstate or country for work or other reasons. No contract ever drafted in the history of contracts has contained a get out clause purely on the basis that one party can get more money elsewhere.

File that with every WAFL fan of other clubs supporting the MRP pig-headed stance. Release clauses don't give all the power to players. Rival clubs would firstly have to find out how much the player is paid to activate any release and a hefty transfer fee is usually predetermined and attached to it. They also have the option - perhaps something MRP are unaware of - of renegotiation if they value the player. I have not admitted that EFFC offered Leggett more either - though considering the small amount the player was getting at MRP in all likelihood he would get more not just at EFFC but any other WAFL club. Nor have I suggested that MRP should be forced to release Leggett from his contract - though I do think they erred by not moving him on once it was clear he was not going to come back.

there is also the option of a player fulfilling the contact he and the club agreed to.
it was Leggett who decided to bring a 3rd party into this, nothing to do with Perth.
no point dealing in hypotheticals about what can and cant be in contracts in this case.
the appeal was heard and dismissed - case closed move on.

MarkOlsen wrote: there is also the option of a player fulfilling the contact he and the club agreed to.
it was Leggett who decided to bring a 3rd party into this, nothing to do with Perth.
no point dealing in hypotheticals about what can and cant be in contracts in this case.
the appeal was heard and dismissed - case closed move on.

Maybe a third party got wind somehow that all was not well between player and club. Not too difficult to figure out how that might have come about. MRP failed to deal with situation effectively - that is totally their doing. You can't force a player to play for you even if you do have a contract. MRP may sure look stupid but they would of known that all along.

It seems to me that EF woes stem from the dumb stupid supporters they have.
You know, the ones that can't grasp concepts.
A bit like Tim I guess.
Sad really.

You Perth boys are a laugh.

You’ve fucked this up. EF never had Leggett. You guys did. And you’ve lost him. And EF will get him next year at half the price. Less the 7k EF got for Quill. And you wonder why you’ve been shit for so long.

Enjoy the trip back to the bottom where you belong

KCEF wrote: You Perth boys are a laugh.

You’ve fucked this up. EF never had Leggett. You guys did. And you’ve lost him. And EF will get him next year at half the price. Less the 7k EF got for Quill. And you wonder why you’ve been shit for so long.

Enjoy the trip back to the bottom where you belong

Mate the only things us Perth boys have a laugh at is your posts.
We are still waiting for “it will all come out in the wash”

Mate you don’t have Leggett either and who knows another WAFL club may white ant you and offer the gun half back flanker more money.

The PFC did not pay 7k for Quill and as far as Leggett goes take him 10k is still overs for him.

Too lazy to read 36 pages, but isn't Cody playing ammos at North freo this year?

Don’t waste your time on these oxygen thieves Ted. Just like the Dems in the USA after Trump took’em to the cleaners at the polls still can’t accept the umpires decision. Time to issue these flogs with a red card for dissent. Let them think they’ve had a win, they can coat it with as much sugar as they like but it’s still a turd.