Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Dec 09, 2022 7:14 am  

cosmicat wrote:

James batchelor was offered a reduced deal that’s why he walked another local player turned he’s back the club

Batch wanted to leave before he eventually signed his last deal.

He felt his time was up at the club 2 years ago after watching his brother develop in a different environment.

KR offered him a good deal and a 4 bed house and he was very impressed by his conversations with Willie Peters.

Whoever is feeding you this information is way off the mark.

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Dec 09, 2022 8:00 am  

The Avenger wrote:

But, if I disagree with the club on the principle or morality of holding back 2 kids who want to leave I must have an agenda against the club, that’s pathetic!.

If your referring to Vastman stupid estimation then your as daft as he is

As I've told you already paying the bills trumps principles every day of the week, not sure where you get to hold the high ground regarding morality, once again it does not pay the bills, your clueless as to the ins and outs of this contractual business regarding these 2 lads, and like one or two more are using it to cause some embarrassment to the club, which has now embarrassed yourself by now saying that you know more than anybody on here regarding the law on the situation, and you call other people pathetic.

I notice that along with a couple more on here when you've lost your credibility you revert to playground insults, very classy .

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Dec 09, 2022 11:13 am  

On the subject of "principles" - we have the high ground here.

We are following, not disregarding the rules. That's a principled approach.

You would lack principles if you attempted to subvert or bend the rules.

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Dec 09, 2022 12:41 pm  

chissitt wrote:

As I've told you already paying the bills trumps principles every day of the week, not sure where you get to hold the high ground regarding morality, once again it does not pay the bills, your clueless as to the ins and outs of this contractual business regarding these 2 lads, and like one or two more are using it to cause some embarrassment to the club, which has now embarrassed yourself by now saying that you know more than anybody on here regarding the law on the situation, and you call other people pathetic.

I notice that along with a couple more on here when you've lost your credibility you revert to playground insults, very classy .

some big and yet completely inaccurate assumptions mixed in with lies in that post old lad

Talking of grouping posters together, you and a couple of others need to realise that people have differing opinions on certain subjects that doesn’t mean they are against the club or it’s owners.
Theres a band of nuthugging sycophants on here that think the club and its owners are beyond reproach and try to shut down any conversation that runs contrary to the clubs party line, that’s what’s pathetic

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:48 pm  

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... ngId%7E%7D Glad they have got things sorted, I expect they will be back soon with the respective clubs who wanted them but didn't want to pay a fee.

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... ngId%7E%7D Glad they have got things sorted, I expect they will be back soon with the respective clubs who wanted them but didn't want to pay a fee.

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Jan 27, 2023 1:45 pm  

Khlav Kalash wrote:

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/super-league-departures-club-left-26087783?utm_source=leeds_live_newsletter&utm_campaign=rugby_league_lve_newsletter&utm_medium=email&pure360.trackingid=%7B%7ETrackingId%7E%7D

Glad they have got things sorted, I expect they will be back soon with the respective clubs who wanted them but didn't want to pay a fee.

Seems the club are the only party to lose out in the end on the surface.

At least they have 2 wages each coming in and I’m happy they are sorted but it seems likely the club will pay for 2 players and not be able to play them.

There’s no fault in this episode though and I suppose it’s just a principal and rules thing.

If it was me I would t rush to sign for another UK club and I’d happily look for alternate like these two and get double income.

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:16 pm  

Surely they have now signed for another club we won't be paying them anymore?

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:17 pm  

upthetrin92 wrote:

Surely they have now signed for another club we won't be paying them anymore?

We still have to pay them.

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:42 pm  

BarnsleyGull wrote:

We still have to pay them.

How i read it is they only have to pay them if we wish to retain the registration which would entitle compensation if they signed for a RFL Member club, if they stop paying them that waives the compensation if they then sign back in the UK.

I could be wrong but thats how i understood it

Re: Shaw and Croft : Fri Jan 27, 2023 3:28 pm  

Wildcat_1 wrote:

How i read it is they only have to pay them if we wish to retain the registration which would entitle compensation if they signed for a RFL Member club, if they stop paying them that waives the compensation if they then sign back in the UK.

I could be wrong but thats how i understood it

I’m guessing a few SL clubs or top champ clubs are interested but aren’t willing to part with the fee to Trinity.

Let’s not forget that these two last have been developed through the academy and into the first team with time and effort. The club I believe wanted to keep them also but the financial package couldn’t be agreed.

If we waver it the all the hard work of raising 2 good young players just gets wasted into nothing.

Seems like a no win situation for the club.