- Apr 9, 2012
- 12,814
- 14,595
Expect yourself to be corrected by the all knowing 1910 ......:001_rolleyes:
cue 1.....2.......3........
[OFFICIAL] Anthony Milford to Broncos
- Thread starter Big Pete
- Start date
- Status
Expect yourself to be corrected by the all knowing 1910 ......:001_rolleyes:
cue 1.....2.......3........
- Feb 27, 2010
- 30,045
- 12,321
That would be a pretty cruel thing to do though, after taking Milford. :shady:
- Feb 27, 2010
- 30,045
- 12,321
Move on, both of you!
KingWebcke
QCup Player
- Aug 4, 2013
- 537
- 175
Do you really think "Hoffman does his job"? If Barba doesn't come I wouldn't be happy at all to see Hoffman back at fullback in 2014, no matter how well he is playing this year on the wing. I still remember him playing fullback in 2012 and it fills me with dread to imagine him returning there.
I want to see a fullback who can pass a bit rather than someone who returns kicks really hard but kills so many plays by failing to pass. I'd much rather Milford at fullback and try to continue Hoffman's development into a world class winger or (hopefully) centre!
Alec
International Rep
- Mar 4, 2008
- 19,413
- 12,537
Agreed again. I find Hoffman to be a bit ordinary there other than in defence. He doesn't exactly have the best kick returns, doesn't pass the ball and doesn't really seem to have support play either. I'd keep him on the left wing for next year regardless of who signs.
lynx000
State of Origin Rep
- Jul 28, 2008
- 6,592
- 8,816
Well, they are screaming about being compensated for losing Milf, I say we give them Wallace, Maranta, Lui, Prince & FIH in exchange for for Milford, Edrick Lee & Worm
worm of the north
NYC Player
- Aug 5, 2013
- 111
- 64
My Dad is sick too.. So I'm ripe for the taking..
broncos4life
International Captain
- Oct 5, 2011
- 26,663
- 27,317
Fair trade
broncos4life
International Captain
- Oct 5, 2011
- 26,663
- 27,317
I hope your dads not actually sick, cos that was hilarious lol
- Feb 27, 2010
- 30,045
- 12,321
No need for that.
Of course, you know we can't talk to you officially until the Greenhouse puts you on the market, but I think loosing Milf should be enough emotional turmoil for you to ask a release from the Greenhouse on compassionate grounds. Ask your agent, he'll know a way to screw the GH over for sure! :thumbup1:
- Mar 5, 2008
- 9,586
- 8,889
I'm interested in the fine print of the so-called "get out" clause in his contract, maybe the sub-clauses which are the map to "get out" of Canberra which the Raiders seem to be relying on by refusing to agree to the activation of the "get out" clause.
You would think that if the Raiders were bound by a legal contract for Milford's services, they wouldn't risk breaching the contract and risking damages for breach of contract.
Something doesn't seem right in all this ... almost like there's a missing piece to the Milford jig saw
- Feb 27, 2010
- 30,045
- 12,321
As someone said before, there is no such thing as mutual agreement early termination clauses. Early termination by mutual agreement doesn't require a clause!
Clauses are always for one sided termination, and companies are generally the ones including them.
The onus of the question is the legal interpretation of the clause, which is obviously the Raiders last thread of hope.
They need to put up a fight and save face with their fans, whom by the looks of the Greenhouse, also believe in fairies and the Easter Bunny.
Meanwhile, the Broncos are sitting back waiting for what inevitably will come... :winky:
Clauses are always for one sided termination, and companies are generally the ones including them.
The onus of the question is the legal interpretation of the clause, which is obviously the Raiders last thread of hope.
They need to put up a fight and save face with their fans, whom by the looks of the Greenhouse, also believe in fairies and the Easter Bunny.
Meanwhile, the Broncos are sitting back waiting for what inevitably will come... :winky:
Last edited:
worm of the north
NYC Player
- Aug 5, 2013
- 111
- 64
Fairies yes!! But don't be silly.. We all know that bunnies don't lay eggs!!
My guess is the problem with the clause is that his dad has actually improved so they'd challenge it on that basis, if he was getting worse they wouldn't have a leg to stand on but if he's improving then its pretty sus especially with the timing of everything else
- Apr 9, 2012
- 12,814
- 14,595
It is a convincing argument and it's not one I haven't considered. I prefer Hofman on the wing compared to fullback as well.
TBH...I'm banking (that's right, I said BANKING) on Ben Barba turning up next year. As much as I've described his weaknesses, there has been IMO substantial improvement in all the areas I've criticised him on. Barba is exciting and a match winner. I hope he continues to improve under the high ball.
Milford and Barba in the same team?
WOW !!
- Feb 27, 2010
- 30,045
- 12,321
I don't think that matters.
He is still ill, needs 24/7 care and Anthony realises that being there for him and his mom is more important than footy at Canberra, which is probably the whole reason the clause was inserted in there in the first place when he re-signed with the Raiders. Improvement is relative. He may not be in imminent danger, but can still be a very high risk. Isn't that sick enough?
I wouldn't be surprised if he wanted this well before anything was mentioned in the press, and asked his agent how to make it happen. The agent probably unofficially enquired with the Broncos whether they would accommodate Milford, and not being entirely stupid, especially under the current circumstances, the Broncos opened the door.
You can argue that the father should be relocated to Canberra, but the clause says that Anthony can be released to be with a ill relative, not the ill relative has to move to Canberra.
Besides, relocating someone with a heart condition that requires 24/7 care is not an easy enterprise. You cannot take the risk of a long car trip (what if something happens on the way?), and you certainly cannot fly anyone in such a condition.
Trying to take such a person from their comfort zone with their family around, because you want a young footy player to play for you isn't a great look to be honest.
Whether the Broncos ethics are at stake is entirely dependent on how this whole thing was initiated. As much as we like to speculate, only the interested really know, and it's not like the Broncos have the habit of going around poaching NRL young stars from other clubs either. This generally happens to us more often than not... :glare:
- Mar 5, 2008
- 9,586
- 8,889
Well, what interests me then is why, if the father's health is that bad, and Milford so wants to put family first and be with his dad, why doesn't he just down tools and head north? I mean, he has a unilateral early termination clause in his contract. His manager has said it is being activated, so, well, yes, I'm waiting .....?
Where are you?
Where are you?
- Status
