LEICESTER TIGERS 2020/21 SQUAD/TRANSFERS/CONTRACT THREAD Part 2

[Tiglon]

I'm obviously not explaining very well. If they don't want to move on, I'm pretty sure it's a case of paying them the full term of their contract to leave.

Tigers: Please accept a contract on reduced wages
Player: No thanks
Tigers: Ok, you're stood down, don't come to training
Player: No worries
Tigers: You're free to find another club
Player: No thanks

Result: Tigers have to keep paying wages until end of contract or negotiate settlement.

[ABClub]

I take Tom Stepehenson from London Irish's leavers. Yes he's had injury issues but will cost next to nothing due to them and is still a huge talent. As a player to rotate with Scott and possibly Hardick at 12, hence managing his game time he could add something. If he does stay fit for a string of games then he could add a lot.

Injury baggage is never good but if a player's taking up little cap space it can be worth the gamble. Taity signed on a pay as you play deal after his career almost ending around at 25.

[Scott1]

I'm obviously not explaining very well. If they don't want to move on, I'm pretty sure it's a case of paying them the full term of their contract to leave.

Tigers: Please accept a contract on reduced wages
Player: No thanks
Tigers: Ok, you're stood down, don't come to training
Player: No worries
Tigers: You're free to find another club
Player: No thanks

Result: Tigers have to keep paying wages until end of contract or negotiate settlement.

But that means means the player cant play for another club then until his contract is up?

[Tiglon]

I'm obviously not explaining very well. If they don't want to move on, I'm pretty sure it's a case of paying them the full term of their contract to leave.

Tigers: Please accept a contract on reduced wages
Player: No thanks
Tigers: Ok, you're stood down, don't come to training
Player: No worries
Tigers: You're free to find another club
Player: No thanks

Result: Tigers have to keep paying wages until end of contract or negotiate settlement.

But that means means the player cant play for another club then until his contract is up?

Yes. But if you're in your 30's, disillusioned with the game after being treated so "unfairly" by Tigers, or perhaps were even contemplating retirement in a year or two anyway, maybe you just take the money for doing nothing. Unlikely, but possible.

[TigerFeetSteve]

I'm obviously not explaining very well. If they don't want to move on, I'm pretty sure it's a case of paying them the full term of their contract to leave.

Tigers: Please accept a contract on reduced wages
Player: No thanks
Tigers: Ok, you're stood down, don't come to training
Player: No worries
Tigers: You're free to find another club
Player: No thanks

Result: Tigers have to keep paying wages until end of contract or negotiate settlement.

But that means means the player cant play for another club then until his contract is up?

Yes. But if you're in your 30's, disillusioned with the game after being treated so "unfairly" by Tigers, or perhaps were even contemplating retirement in a year or two anyway, maybe you just take the money for doing nothing. Unlikely, but possible.

Possibly but I can't see all of them doing that. Do that and their careers are over as nobody will want them in a years time, I think all of them have more than a year left in them and given that type of behaviour would also limit opportunities for future rugby jobs like coaching or punditry. Long term I think doing that would be damaging for any/all of them.

[sam16111986]

I take Tom Stepehenson from London Irish's leavers. Yes he's had injury issues but will cost next to nothing due to them and is still a huge talent. As a player to rotate with Scott and possibly Hardick at 12, hence managing his game time he could add something. If he does stay fit for a string of games then he could add a lot.

Injury baggage is never good but if a player's taking up little cap space it can be worth the gamble. Taity signed on a pay as you play deal after his career almost ending around at 25.

Definitely be worth a punt. Minimal salary with an appearance bonus would work for us if we look set to lose at least two centres. He'd get the chance to remind people he's still about.

[sapajo]

I'm obviously not explaining very well. If they don't want to move on, I'm pretty sure it's a case of paying them the full term of their contract to leave.

Tigers: Please accept a contract on reduced wages
Player: No thanks
Tigers: Ok, you're stood down, don't come to training
Player: No worries
Tigers: You're free to find another club
Player: No thanks

Result: Tigers have to keep paying wages until end of contract or negotiate settlement.

But that means means the player cant play for another club then until his contract is up?

Yes. But if you're in your 30's, disillusioned with the game after being treated so "unfairly" by Tigers, or perhaps were even contemplating retirement in a year or two anyway, maybe you just take the money for doing nothing. Unlikely, but possible.

Nothing? I am sure Tigers could legally put them to work off the pitch.

[Jimmy Skitz]

But that means means the player cant play for another club then until his contract is up?

Yes. But if you're in your 30's, disillusioned with the game after being treated so "unfairly" by Tigers, or perhaps were even contemplating retirement in a year or two anyway, maybe you just take the money for doing nothing. Unlikely, but possible.

Nothing? I am sure Tigers could legally put them to work off the pitch.

they have a playing contract, Tigers are not letting them train or play so no they can't

[Tiglon]

I take Tom Stepehenson from London Irish's leavers. Yes he's had injury issues but will cost next to nothing due to them and is still a huge talent. As a player to rotate with Scott and possibly Hardick at 12, hence managing his game time he could add something. If he does stay fit for a string of games then he could add a lot.

Injury baggage is never good but if a player's taking up little cap space it can be worth the gamble. Taity signed on a pay as you play deal after his career almost ending around at 25.

Definitely be worth a punt. Minimal salary with an appearance bonus would work for us if we look set to lose at least two centres. He'd get the chance to remind people he's still about.

Worth a gamble perhaps, obviously a talented player - I haven't seen him play this season though so can't judge current form.

[ABClub]

I take Tom Stepehenson from London Irish's leavers. Yes he's had injury issues but will cost next to nothing due to them and is still a huge talent. As a player to rotate with Scott and possibly Hardick at 12, hence managing his game time he could add something. If he does stay fit for a string of games then he could add a lot.

Injury baggage is never good but if a player's taking up little cap space it can be worth the gamble. Taity signed on a pay as you play deal after his career almost ending around at 25.

Definitely be worth a punt. Minimal salary with an appearance bonus would work for us if we look set to lose at least two centres. He'd get the chance to remind people he's still about.

Worth a gamble perhaps, obviously a talented player - I haven't seen him play this season though so can't judge current form.

He started 14 games in run of very good form for LI in the Championship before a horrible leg break - tibia and fibia - ruled him out for the season. That coming at the end of leaving Saints after two years out with a double leg break and foot injuries.

He was coming back well when playing this season starting 9 games in the Prem and Challenge cup. He played nearly a 1000 minutes first team rugby, all in starts, in the Championship prior to the leg break. He'd also played close to 600 minutes this season, all starting again, prior to the postponement. So given his awful luck with the double leg breaks his playing record in the last two seasons isn't non existent.

[ABClub]

Also, in terms of the London Irish announcement mentioning that negotiations are on going with other players. Ruan Botha would be an absolutely ideal target for Tigers if he's one of them.

[Johnnyg]

Yes. But if you're in your 30's, disillusioned with the game after being treated so "unfairly" by Tigers, or perhaps were even contemplating retirement in a year or two anyway, maybe you just take the money for doing nothing. Unlikely, but possible.

Nothing? I am sure Tigers could legally put them to work off the pitch.

they have a playing contract, Tigers are not letting them train or play so no they can't

Refusing to allow them to train or play puts at jeopardy future earning capacity and future international caps and ancillary earnings related to playing, which are all clearly anticipated when the contracts were signed. It’s likely that the players can simply walk away as tigers have repudiated the contract; take another contract at the best available but much lower salary and simply sue Tigers for the balance. What Tigers seek to do is simply unacceptable legally, I.e to say we won’t let you play unless you agree to tear up your perfectly enforceable existing contract. It is perfectly moral in current circumstances but the Covid issue does not make existing contracts in any way unenforceable. Impecuniosity is no reason to avoid a contract.
The players have very very strong legal cases.
And I can say this with authority.

[sapajo]

Yes. But if you're in your 30's, disillusioned with the game after being treated so "unfairly" by Tigers, or perhaps were even contemplating retirement in a year or two anyway, maybe you just take the money for doing nothing. Unlikely, but possible.

Nothing? I am sure Tigers could legally put them to work off the pitch.

they have a playing contract, Tigers are not letting them train or play so no they can't

So they are not contractually required to do anything at all apart from training and play? So they visit folks in hospital, visit schools and grass roots clubs, community events,sponsors events, hospitality events, kit launches for free?

[sapajo]

Nothing? I am sure Tigers could legally put them to work off the pitch.

they have a playing contract, Tigers are not letting them train or play so no they can't

Refusing to allow them to train or play puts at jeopardy future earning capacity and future international caps and ancillary earnings related to playing, which are all clearly anticipated when the contracts were signed. It’s likely that the players can simply walk away as tigers have repudiated the contract; take another contract at the best available but much lower salary and simply sue Tigers for the balance. What Tigers seek to do is simply unacceptable legally, I.e to say we won’t let you play unless you agree to tear up your perfectly enforceable existing contract. It is perfectly moral in current circumstances but the Covid issue does not make existing contracts in any way unenforceable. Impecuniosity is no reason to avoid a contract.
The players have very very strong legal cases.
And I can say this with authority.

So you believe Tigers never sought and obtained full specialist
legal advice before they embarked upon this action I for one would be staggered if they did not.

[Jimmy Skitz]

Nothing? I am sure Tigers could legally put them to work off the pitch.

they have a playing contract, Tigers are not letting them train or play so no they can't

So they are not contractually required to do anything at all apart from training and play? So they visit folks in hospital, visit schools and grass roots clubs, community events,sponsors events, hospitality events, kit launches for free?

they may have hospitality clauses and PR clauses in their contract however why would the club put them forward when not allowing them to train or play