GCBRONCO
International Captain
- Mar 4, 2008
- 22,671
- 21,145
Good news, despite our differences on Milford Bushman I'm glad to hear Lee is staying on longer at the Raiders.
[OFFICIAL] Anthony Milford to Broncos
- Thread starter Big Pete
- Start date
- Status
Good news, despite our differences on Milford Bushman I'm glad to hear Lee is staying on longer at the Raiders.
Alec
International Rep
- Mar 4, 2008
- 19,413
- 12,537
I'm still disappointed that our recruiters didn't spot him first, but I'm happy to give the Raiders a win. As much as I'd love to see Papalli or Lee at the club (they're already better than our current wing and 2nd row options IMO, pending Yow Yeh's return), we don't need them as much as Milford.
Alec
International Rep
- Mar 4, 2008
- 19,413
- 12,537
Oh, forgot about Hoffman. He could be the best winger in the game. Lee is better than our other options though.
- Jan 25, 2013
- 25,705
- 30,048
I get the feeling that Lee will end up being Sticky's trumped up superstar that he'll claim was a massive coup to retain. Which is somewhat true, the Broncos or anyone else would have done well to pick him up, but he's yet to do much in first grade and I'm sure would have been paid a monster share of Ferguson/Dugan's now spare cap space. Watch for this news to be dressed up by the Canberra media as they then claim that losing Milford (which they will) was better than if they'd have lost Lee.
Obvious bias aside I think Lee will easily surpass Hoffman as a winger in 2014(though he could be moved to his natural centre position). The guys a freak, fast, very tall (same build as Inglis at that age so should bulk up), amazing jumper being a former basketballer and a great offload and safe hands. Shame he's a Qlder he should be a mainstay at Origin level for many years.
Milf seems happy he's staying so hopefully helps with that fight.
broncos4life
International Captain
- Oct 5, 2011
- 26,663
- 27,317
Disagree
broncos4life
International Captain
- Oct 5, 2011
- 26,663
- 27,317
Eh, it was too early for us to sign him
Anyway. We prefer to sign your star wingers once they have played elsewhere first... They need to get that Canberra stank off them
If that's in reference to Vidot you really haven't watched him much have you
- Jan 25, 2013
- 25,705
- 30,048
Stuart has offered him $150k extra to play out 2014 with the Raiders and is working hard to get him to extend.
Broncos can do / announce nothing until 1st November and may well have nothing to update us with anyway.
Big Pete
International Captain
- Mar 12, 2008
- 32,225
- 26,005
- Thread starter
- #2,623
This is all hearsay.
Last year, Milford agreed to an extension of his contract under the proviso he could walk if things took a turn for the worst with his old man. An attempt to relocate Milford's immediate family to Canberra failed which prompted Tony to ask for his release. The Raiders refused to grant Tony his request and after a lot of bickering from both parties it appears Milford will remain a Raider until at least 2014.
Last year, Milford agreed to an extension of his contract under the proviso he could walk if things took a turn for the worst with his old man. An attempt to relocate Milford's immediate family to Canberra failed which prompted Tony to ask for his release. The Raiders refused to grant Tony his request and after a lot of bickering from both parties it appears Milford will remain a Raider until at least 2014.
Also, just to throw in my $2 worth on the contract registration issue.
Milford is contracted to the Raiders for 2014. Milford has sought a termination by consent. If the Raiders refuse to consent to an early termination of his contract, Milford would need to breach/repudiate his contract with the Raiders to sign with the Broncos for 2014.
Among other things, that contract no doubt contains a clause stating that while Milford is contracted to the Raiders he cannot play rugby league, or rugby union, or perhaps any other professional sport. It might even go so far as to say that if you repudiate this contract you agree not to play professional sport for any other club in Australia for a period of x years/12 months.
That said, you can't make him play. Hence the option to sit out until 2015.
This is a restraint of trade clause that others have mentioned above. It's often inserted into other employment contracts to stop employees from stealing trade secrets/clients after you leave the company.
The general rule is such clauses are prima facie void unless they:
1. protect a legitimate commercial or other interest;
2. do not go beyond what is reasonable to protect that interest;
I am not sure if the restraint of trade clause has been tested in Australian in the context of a rugby league contract.
Also, the NRL refusing to register his contract, could also be seen as an indirect restraint of trade. You play for the Raiders, or you don't play at all. The NRL does play a bit of a quasi-judicial function here, essentially determining whether or not a contract is lawful before registering it. They hide behind the purpose of keeping the level playing field and the probity of the salary cap, but really they like playing the all knowing master.
I think the Raiders would fail in enforcing a restrictive covenant against Milford, particularly because they appear to have acted unconscionably in not honouring the Halo sickness clause. The NRL might wave its big stick "for the good of the game" or some other ridiculous arbirtary reason which will
I don't think we will see this one played out in Court at all and I don't think Milford would be willing to roll the dice, even if his prospects were very good of success - if he's wrong, then really the only option is to sit out... bit awkward going back to training with a club you now hate and have been fighting in Court for months. You look at the interests of the parties - Milford wants to be with his father but not at the expense of sitting out 2014. The Raiders just want to stop leaking talent.
So it probably comes down to what's going on in Milford's head and whether he has the guile to put the Raiders threats to one side and run the gauntlet. He asked for the release after getting flogged by Melbourne. Can Ricky Stuart can talk him down?
I think the Broncos offer a much better proposition as a professional sporting club and a better environment than Canberra and one closer to home.
The Broncos are a club with the calibre to make him a superstar. Broncos players are first picked in Origin sides, despite their shortcomings - do you really see Gillett playing Origin if he was not at the Broncos? The Raiders have consistently shown their inability to manage their talent (Carney, Dugan, Ferguson), especially in the small town fish bowl of Canberra.
The Broncos can nurture Milford. They can build a personal brand for him like Karmichael Hunt, Israel Folau. The Raiders will use him up and spit him out.
Despite 2013 season results, the Broncos are still the biggest club in the competition. The club that plays every Friday night, not at 9:30 on Saturday night on Foxtel.
Come play with the big boys.
Or flail around with topsy turvy Ricky Stuart and the Raiders trying to relive the glory days.
Milford is contracted to the Raiders for 2014. Milford has sought a termination by consent. If the Raiders refuse to consent to an early termination of his contract, Milford would need to breach/repudiate his contract with the Raiders to sign with the Broncos for 2014.
Among other things, that contract no doubt contains a clause stating that while Milford is contracted to the Raiders he cannot play rugby league, or rugby union, or perhaps any other professional sport. It might even go so far as to say that if you repudiate this contract you agree not to play professional sport for any other club in Australia for a period of x years/12 months.
That said, you can't make him play. Hence the option to sit out until 2015.
This is a restraint of trade clause that others have mentioned above. It's often inserted into other employment contracts to stop employees from stealing trade secrets/clients after you leave the company.
The general rule is such clauses are prima facie void unless they:
1. protect a legitimate commercial or other interest;
2. do not go beyond what is reasonable to protect that interest;
I am not sure if the restraint of trade clause has been tested in Australian in the context of a rugby league contract.
Also, the NRL refusing to register his contract, could also be seen as an indirect restraint of trade. You play for the Raiders, or you don't play at all. The NRL does play a bit of a quasi-judicial function here, essentially determining whether or not a contract is lawful before registering it. They hide behind the purpose of keeping the level playing field and the probity of the salary cap, but really they like playing the all knowing master.
I think the Raiders would fail in enforcing a restrictive covenant against Milford, particularly because they appear to have acted unconscionably in not honouring the Halo sickness clause. The NRL might wave its big stick "for the good of the game" or some other ridiculous arbirtary reason which will
I don't think we will see this one played out in Court at all and I don't think Milford would be willing to roll the dice, even if his prospects were very good of success - if he's wrong, then really the only option is to sit out... bit awkward going back to training with a club you now hate and have been fighting in Court for months. You look at the interests of the parties - Milford wants to be with his father but not at the expense of sitting out 2014. The Raiders just want to stop leaking talent.
So it probably comes down to what's going on in Milford's head and whether he has the guile to put the Raiders threats to one side and run the gauntlet. He asked for the release after getting flogged by Melbourne. Can Ricky Stuart can talk him down?
I think the Broncos offer a much better proposition as a professional sporting club and a better environment than Canberra and one closer to home.
The Broncos are a club with the calibre to make him a superstar. Broncos players are first picked in Origin sides, despite their shortcomings - do you really see Gillett playing Origin if he was not at the Broncos? The Raiders have consistently shown their inability to manage their talent (Carney, Dugan, Ferguson), especially in the small town fish bowl of Canberra.
The Broncos can nurture Milford. They can build a personal brand for him like Karmichael Hunt, Israel Folau. The Raiders will use him up and spit him out.
Despite 2013 season results, the Broncos are still the biggest club in the competition. The club that plays every Friday night, not at 9:30 on Saturday night on Foxtel.
Come play with the big boys.
Or flail around with topsy turvy Ricky Stuart and the Raiders trying to relive the glory days.
- Jun 12, 2013
- 14,515
- 17,952
IMO, if push came to shove, Milford would back down first and stay at the Raiders but it's absolutely in his best interest to move back to Brisbane and play for the Broncos.
- Status
