Re: George Williams. : Thu May 27, 2021 10:02 pm  

Lord Tony Smith wrote:

We have put forward a great offer.

Maybe but he'll still return to Wigan.

Re: George Williams. : Thu May 27, 2021 10:07 pm  

Matt King's kitten wrote:

Maybe but he'll still return to Wigan.

Narrr

Re: George Williams. : Thu May 27, 2021 10:08 pm  

Matt King's kitten wrote:

Maybe but he'll still return to Wigan.

Perhaps. If he did fair play to him turning our offer down.

Re: George Williams. : Thu May 27, 2021 10:33 pm  

Lord Tony Smith wrote:

Perhaps. If he did fair play to him turning our offer down.

I just can't see Wigan giving up their first refusal clause and see him play elsewhere.

Re: George Williams. : Thu May 27, 2021 11:09 pm  

Lord Tony Smith wrote:

Perhaps. If he did fair play to him turning our offer down.

He’s done it before I think? Pretty sure we offered him marquee money before only for him to stay at Wigan. Maybe a kid on the way will make him think twice, but Wigan will be offering him a good package I’m sure - just not as much as us.

Re: George Williams. : Thu May 27, 2021 11:10 pm  

Matt King's kitten wrote:

I just can't see Wigan giving up their first refusal clause and see him play elsewhere.

Im not sure Wigan could match our offer - isn’t a first refusal option usually only if the club can match the best other offer?

I’m not 100% sure what ‘first refusal’ means in this case

Re: George Williams. : Fri May 28, 2021 5:27 am  

This ‘first refusal’ isn’t that at all.
It can only be a gentleman argument to talk with each other first, and GW doesn’t have to if he didn’t want, but that’s not in his interest.
There can’t be a contract with GW, he was sold for £150k.
Lets be wider minded, his agent would have been all over Fitzy like a 70s porno already.

Re: George Williams. : Fri May 28, 2021 6:29 am  

rubber duckie wrote:

This ‘first refusal’ isn’t that at all.
It can only be a gentleman argument to talk with each other first

I'm not sure the whole Leeds, Bradford, Harris saga supports that opinion - clearly it was a few years ago, but it cost Bradford big.

Re: George Williams. : Fri May 28, 2021 7:00 am  

rubber duckie wrote:

This ‘first refusal’ isn’t that at all.
It can only be a gentleman argument to talk with each other first, and GW doesn’t have to if he didn’t want, but that’s not in his interest.
There can’t be a contract with GW, he was sold for £150k.
Lets be wider minded, his agent would have been all over Fitzy like a 70s porno already.

It’s not worth the paper it probably isn’t written on. Nothing more than a line to try and appease the fans when these lads are leaving.

It’ll just come down to how strong his desire to go back to Wigan is. I don’t think it’s arrogant to say he’d sign for us if the offers were of the same value but that sounds unlikely.

Re: George Williams. : Fri May 28, 2021 7:06 am  

shinymcshine wrote:

I'm not sure the whole Leeds, Bradford, Harris saga supports that opinion - clearly it was a few years ago, but it cost Bradford big.

I suppose it would depend on the specifics of the ‘first refusal’ clause. If that isn’t a defined standard for all first refusal clauses then there may be some scope for us signing him.

I don’t think it would stand up in court if you tried to get away with paying someone 3 times less than they’re worth because they agreed to play for you a few years back. As stated they were compensated for Williams by Canberra which suggests they didn’t lose out when he left.

I’ll bet there would be some legal argument for restricting earnings etc. Then again this is an ultra capitalist world we live in. Amazon fulfilment will probably step in and loan Wigan their lawyers