: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:54 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

I do find this strange. I've always believed that if a player is injured the club should honour his contract. Players put their bodies on the line every time they take to the field. If they are injured in the process they shouldnt lose their livelihood.

It's a nice sentiment, however it's just not feasable in the modern game. The salary cap as it means clubs have to watch their spending and a player who can't play is just so much dead weight. Sorry if that that seems harsh but that's the way of the world

: Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:05 am  

SDB wrote:

Do we know where this whole "training" thing is gonna end up? Because surely when you sign a contract it is to "Play for the Bulls?" And then there is this 26 weeks release clause or whatever? Does that mean that aslong as a player can train he is still fullfilling his contract, regardless of whether or not he is training at his maximum and to the same level as the team. Yeah he may not warrent a place but in my opinion if he cant train with the squad he's not training! Bradfords eagerness to release him suggests to me there is something occuring inside Odsal. Im wondering just how good a half back your willing to pay for......

I did see Tupou, a couple of weeks ago at the gym at Bradford Uni, i know its not full time training but its a start!

: Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:17 am  

steamingbull02 wrote:

I did see Tupou, a couple of weeks ago at the gym at Bradford Uni, i know its not full time training but its a start!

I appreciate he may be training but I just don't understand what constitutes as "training." But then the RFL are taking a week to decide what it is.....My thoughts are though that its all well and good saying your training and then doing a few bench presses in the gym but although Yes its training, its not actually training (I know thats a confusing sentance!) For me if your training your out there with the players, doing everything the other members of the Squad are doing. I dont think Tupou is at this stage and I think realistically he needs to be sold to Wakefield to get some revenge on them for selling you Jefferies

: Fri Mar 20, 2009 1:37 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

I do find this strange. I've always believed that if a player is injured the club should honour his contract. ..

They have done, and argue they are doing. The question is whether the contract means what the Bulls argue, or whether it means what Tupou argues. Sounds like a pish-poorly drafted contract if "training" is relevant, but is not defined. On which basis I won't be surprised if we lose the argument under benefit of the doubt.

: Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:18 pm  

It sounds like Tupou is undergoing some sort of training regime - like lifting weights in the gym at the Uni. That shouldn't be a surprise - people who undergo surgery and then begin rehabilitation could - in some sense - be said to be 'training' within a week or two after the surgery

But that hardly constitutes training in any real Rugby League sense i.e 'in' training with the squad, doing all the various routines and having actual contact with others.

In any case, I thought the rule was that a contract could be cancelled if a player was unavailable for 26 weeks - whereas Tupou has been unavailable for 38 weeks already (that becomes 39 as of this weekend). It's not as if the Bulls have tried to pull the plug on the exact date, he's had an extra three months to get fit enough to play. I hope that this is taken into consideration in the eventual ruling.

: Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:24 pm  

They probably also want to take into consideration that while the sports centre is being rebuilt the gym at the uni is the least well equipped in the western hemisphere. He'll have at least an hour of enforced recovery time between machines.

: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:24 am  

Can we expect further news today? The RFL were making to be taking a week to consider what constitutes training.

: Wed Mar 25, 2009 2:05 am  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

Can we expect further news today? The RFL were making to be taking a week to consider what constitutes training.

Ah, but what constitutes a week?

: Wed Mar 25, 2009 7:40 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Ah, but what constitutes a week?

The RFL aren't sure so will be taking a week to discuss what a week is and at the end of the week they're going to have a vote. And some of them might abstane

: Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:33 am  

Roofaldo wrote:

The RFL aren't sure so will be taking a week to discuss what a week is and at the end of the week they're going to have a vote.

Ah, but what constitutes a vote?