Broncos Player Movements and Rumours 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would that be the case? If Boyd wants out if his contract why would the knights have to pay him? He is the one breaking the contract, therefor he is entitled to nothing. Contracts aren't paid in full if they're broken, they're paid in full if they're completed or the one who offered the contract (the employer) wants to break it. Otherwise you could get a job offer, sign it, then break it straight away and be entitled to a payout of the whole contract lol. Rinse repeat and never work a day in your life and be filthy rich.

If I remember correctly, the money has to be paid regardless of who breaks it.

If a club releases a player, they have to pay out the rest of the contract starting from that date.

Exactly. It's okay for a player to break a contract and play elsewhere, so long as it's for less money and the incumbent club doesn't have to chip in? Should have told Milford, he could have signed for the Broncos on $1 less and come home straight away.

The fact that the Knights held the belief that they didn't need to contribute to Boyd's pay packet means that things aren't as simple as you think.
 
How about this, Boyd tells Newcastle he is exercising the 'get out' clause, they say fine but you'll get nothing from us. Boyd says fair enough, I might just stay after all but , who knows what the future holds ? I may relapse you know, depression is hard to predict. I'll just have a think. Newcastle goes away and discusses the predicament , if he stays we have to pay him 600 k, he is going to be unhappy and he may only play a handful of games, hell, he may not even put in his best efforts, he might just hang around for the cash. Hang on, let's give Brisbane a call, see if we can work out a deal so we can save some cash..the rest is history.

Of course that's all conjecture and I know nothing for certain. It's just a scenario.

As for Bennetts honesty and integrity, well like anyone else, unless you( collectively speaking )can prove he has been dishonest you shut the hell up and keep your thoughts to yourself. I'd happily trust him with all my assests and I'd be certain he'd look after them. He's a man of principle.
 
How about this, Boyd tells Newcastle he is exercising the 'get out' clause, they say fine but you'll get nothing from us. Boyd says fair enough, I might just stay after all but , who knows what the future holds ? I may relapse you know, depression is hard to predict. I'll just have a think. Newcastle goes away and discusses the predicament , if he stays we have to pay him 600 k, he is going to be unhappy and he may only play a handful of games, hell, he may not even put in his best efforts, he might just hang around for the cash. Hang on, let's give Brisbane a call, see if we can work out a deal so we can save some cash..the rest is history.

Of course that's all conjecture and I know nothing for certain. It's just a scenario.

As for Bennetts honesty and integrity, well like anyone else, unless you( collectively speaking )can prove he has been dishonest you shut the hell up and keep your thoughts to yourself. I'd happily trust him with all my assests and I'd be certain he'd look after them. He's a man of principle.

A man of principle who has broken 2 of his most recent contracts. Sure thing.
 
It's not breaking contract if the other party agrees. And he had a clause to leave if Tinkler did. Besides didn't he finish his Dragons contract?

Breaking contract is doing what SBW did and running away.
 
Exactly. It's okay for a player to break a contract and play elsewhere, so long as it's for less money and the incumbent club doesn't have to chip in? Should have told Milford, he could have signed for the Broncos on $1 less and come home straight away.

The fact that the Knights held the belief that they didn't need to contribute to Boyd's pay packet means that things aren't as simple as you think.
You're getting all sorts of confused here.

If the CLUB wants to break a contract with a player, they have to pay the contract out or cover any lost wages from the players next contract for the years that they are breaking the contract for.

If the PLAYER wants to break a contract, the club generally doesnt have to pay anything. They don't even have to let the player break it. This is what happened with Tallis at St George. He wanted to break it, Saints wouldn't let him, so he just sat the year out while getting paid by the club because they couldn't force him to play. Same with Milford - his get-out clause must not have been met, so Canberra stood firm and wouldn't release him.

He clearly didn't execute the Get-Out Clause, otherwise there would have been no need for a release from his Newcastle contract. The clause terminates the contract, no release necessary. Bennett himself even mentioned that the release was taking longer than expected, further proving my point.
 
Last edited:
You're getting all sorts of confused here.

If the CLUB wants to break a contract with a player, they have to pay the contract out or cover any lost wages from the players next contract for the years that they are breaking the contract for.

If the PLAYER wants to break a contract, the club generally doesnt have to pay anything. They don't even have to let the player break it. This is what happened with Tallis at St George. He wanted to break it, Saints wouldn't let him, so he just sat the year out while getting paid by the club because they couldn't force him to play. Same with Milford - his get-out clause must not have been met, so Canberra stood firm and wouldn't release him.

He clearly didn't execute the Get-Out Clause, otherwise there would have been no need for a release from his Newcastle contract. The clause terminates the contract, no release necessary. Bennett himself even mentioned that the release was taking longer than expected, further proving my point.

Seriously dude its over, just get over it, it does not matter who is right or wrong the matter has been resolved.
 
Seriously dude its over, just get over it, it does not matter who is right or wrong the matter has been resolved.
Oh I forgot, are we not allowed to discuss things on a forum anymore? Am I not allowed to explain something to someone who doesn't know it?

Get over yourself.
 
Oh I forgot, are we not allowed to discuss things on a forum anymore? Am I not allowed to explain something to someone who doesn't know it?

Get over yourself.

Yes you are allowed to discuss, but you are spamming this thread with your opinion and this subject, go and make a threads about player breaking contracts and transfers if you want to keep talking about it.
 
Last edited:
I am kinda surprised we haven't chased Jake Mamo. I can't find anywhere saying he is contracted for next year. He would be a perfect for our backline. I really rate the kid does anyone know if he has re signed with Newcastle ?

1 Boyd
2 Mamo
3 Copley
4 Hodges
5 Vidot
 
He won't be leaving Newcastle.
 
There are alot of rumours floating around that we will be signing either Merrin or Folau.
 
Unless we want to get rid of some nuffies like Thaiday, can't see how we can fit Merrin in.
 
There are alot of rumours floating around that we will be signing either Merrin or Folau.

If it's Folau, the rumour is that there's negotiations of a $1 mill per year deal. If he's coming here, you'd hope half of that would be covered by the NRL. Bennett wouldn't pay that much otherwise. But it's likely the Eels, spending Hayne's money.
 
Would Bennett move Boyd from fullback for Folau?
 
They play completely different roles, and I doubt Glenn is on a lot anyway.

Obviously Merrin is a far better player though. Far better than THaiday too.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Unread

Active Now

  • Broncosgirl
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.