Nathan Tinkler - what is that stink?

[fitz]

What everyone who is a Knights supporter needs to understand is that Nathan Tinkler has made many offers but his demand remains the same - control of the Knights NRL license.

No assurances have been made that the Knights will remain in Newcastle.

No assurances have been made about the Membership of the Knights retaining any level of democratic say in the running of their Club.

No assurances have been made about the corporate and administrative structure of the Club under his ownership.

Many have said that the Newcastle Knights fans are selling their soul for a pot of gold.

I reckon they're selling their soul for a crock of $hit.

 

[Murphy]

he will be like a cyclonce he will hit hard and someone will have to clean up his mess

 

[ben]

the board members in attendance at mondays meeting were asked if they support tinklers takeover bid and 4 out of the 6 did, 2 were'nt there though. So to me at best the board is split 50/50 worst, they are in support of it.

Compensation sounds like the likely avenue to take. If we had to swap Snow for some newcastle players I would go for Junior Sau (I think thats his name) and Uate. Both together may have a similar value to what the knights value snow at.

Any word yet AS?

 

[gando2230]

Has any one actually heard N.Tinkler talk, it seems he is hiding behind
the Telegraph.

 

[teflon77]

the board members in attendance at mondays meeting were asked if they support tinklers takeover bid and 4 out of the 6 did, 2 were'nt there though. So to me at best the board is split 50/50 worst, they are in support of it.

Compensation sounds like the likely avenue to take. If we had to swap Snow for some newcastle players I would go for Junior Sau (I think thats his name) and Uate. Both together may have a similar value to what the knights value snow at.

Any word yet AS?

Seriously mate there is no way in the world they would make that trade.

 

[ABshark]

the board members in attendance at mondays meeting were asked if they support tinklers takeover bid and 4 out of the 6 did, 2 were'nt there though. So to me at best the board is split 50/50 worst, they are in support of it.

Compensation sounds like the likely avenue to take. If we had to swap Snow for some newcastle players I would go for Junior Sau (I think thats his name) and Uate. Both together may have a similar value to what the knights value snow at.

Any word yet AS?

Who said anything about a 'trade'? Ridiculous idea.

And the two Knights Directors who didn't declare that they would vote for the proposal indicated that they were waiting to see the agreement- so they weren't voting against it as such either.

 

[Blix]

They need 75% as well dont they

 

[A.Snowden]

I don't know why the sharks would be compensated or given a trade, he is not walking out on a contract. He would be simply signing another one to play elsewhere. And newcastle would let Uate go as much as they would let Gidley go mate haha.

I also think the Tinkler deal will go through. Apparently he has revised his offer to guarantee the 10 mil for 10 years and put more emphasis on Juniors than his original deal.

 

[stevie013]

im not sure he will get the 75% tbh. one of the directors i know at a bowling club up north is part of the 'old boys' brigade at newcastle, and they dont like the take over bid at all and are drumming up support behind the scenes against the proposal. so it will be an interesting vote either way.

 

[ben]

Seriously mate there is no way in the world they would make that trade.

Maybe not, but why not aim high.

Who said anything about a 'trade'? Ridiculous idea.

And the two Knights Directors who didn't declare that they would vote for the proposal indicated that they were waiting to see the agreement- so they weren't voting against it as such either.

Noone has said anything about a trade. The idea came about through people posting how a similar situation was resolved between melbourne and the cowboys. Also we avoid a legal issue in regards to a verbal contract and we it would be less messy than if we had to legally force Kade to play for us - Ridiculous how??

I don't know why the sharks would be compensated or given a trade, he is not walking out on a contract. He would be simply signing another one to play elsewhere. And newcastle would let Uate go as much as they would let Gidley go mate haha.

I also think the Tinkler deal will go through. Apparently he has revised his offer to guarantee the 10 mil for 10 years and put more emphasis on Juniors than his original deal.

Sharkies would have to be compensated if it was decided that Kade had already agreed to a verbal contract melbourne style.

 

[teflon77]

Noone has said anything about a trade. The idea came about through people posting how a similar situation was resolved between melbourne and the cowboys. Also we avoid a legal issue in regards to a verbal contract and we it would be less messy than if we had to legally force Kade to play for us - Ridiculous how??

It's ridiculous because the similar situation was actually between Melbourne and the Gold Coast wherein Steve Turner had actually signed a contract. There have been many other examples in the recent year or so when players have backed out of verbal contracts without compensation...Luke Lewis to the bunnies, Nathan Smith to the Raiders and Greg Inglis to the Bronco's spring to mind.

So no they wouldnt. I don't agree with it mate but we wouldnt have a leg to stand on.

 

[Capital_Shark]

Signed contracts hardly mean much - verbal agreements aren't worth jack.

 

[Ryan]

It's ridiculous because the similar situation was actually between Melbourne and the Gold Coast wherein Steve Turner had actually signed a contract. There have been many other examples in the recent year or so when players have backed out of verbal contracts without compensation...Luke Lewis to the bunnies, Nathan Smith to the Raiders and Greg Inglis to the Bronco's spring to mind.

So no they wouldnt. I don't agree with it mate but we wouldnt have a leg to stand on.

Steve Turner didn't sign anything with the Titans:

Steve turns on Titans

* Karl deKroo
* From: Herald Sun
* August 16, 2006 12:00AM


IN-FORM Storm winger Steve Turner performed a stunning about-face last night, turning his back on the Gold Coast Titans to remain with Melbourne for the next three years.

Turner, 21, was unveiled in June as a key signing for the new Titans franchise which enters the NRL in 2007.

Incredibly, the former junior Kangaroos representative was never asked to sign a contract or letter of intent with the Gold Coast and he has had a change of heart.

"Steve came to us a few weeks ago and told us that he desperately wanted to stay," Storm chief executive Brian Waldron said last night.

"We subsequently found out he hadn't signed any agreement and as a consequence of that we offered him a new three-year deal which was accepted today.

"We have spoken to the NRL about it and given no contract had been registered, there shouldn't be a problem."

The decision is set to spark outrage on the Gold Coast, but Turner said he was hopeful the Titans would understand his position.

"Over the past few weeks I have got itchy feet and I realised I didn't want to go," Turner said.

"I have spoken it over with my girlfriend, Kate, and she didn't want to go either.

"I had a chat to them (the Titans) yesterday and told them my reasons.

"From there I've left it with my manager. I know they won't be happy, but I just hope they can understand my decision. I really wish them all the best for 2007."

Gold Coast chief executive Michael Searle could not be contacted last night.

Waldron said he could understand the Titans' position, but said they had only themselves to blame.

"If he had signed a contract, then it wouldn't be an option," Waldron said.

"But the kid came to us and we see that as a great endorsement of what we are trying to build at this club.

"We were in a similar position when we thought we had signed (Parramatta prop) Fuifui Moimoi a year ago.

"We thought he was coming here but there was a problem with his manager. It became clear he wanted to stay with Parramatta and we decided it was fair and reasonable."

A Penrith junior, Turner was signed by Storm in 2003 as a replacement for foundation fullback Robbie Ross.

He battled injury in his first two seasons and Billy Slater and Greg Inglis surpassed him in the fullbacks' pecking order.

Used this season as a winger, Turner has proven a sensation, starting all 21 games and scoring 13 tries.

"I feel like I am playing the best footy of my career," Turner said.

"I have probably adapted to the wing better than most people expected.

"I am really enjoying playing out there and I realise that playing fullback isn't my priority any more."

The Titans have signed Storm hooker Nathan Friend and centre Jake Webster for next season. Turner had been expected to be their first-choice fullback ahead of British rep player Richie Mathers.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/steve-turns-on-titans/story-e6frfgbo-1111112154285

 

[ben]

Steve Turner didn't sign anything with the Titans:


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/steve-turns-on-titans/story-e6frfgbo-1111112154285

:

Cheers Ryan, what are your thoughts on Sharkies being compensated if it was deemed Kade was tied to a verbal contract?

Compensation or hold him to the contract I suppose are the only real options.

 

[Murphy]

let him go
would rather a quailty halve or centre

 

[Ryan]

:

Cheers Ryan, what are your thoughts on Sharkies being compensated if it was deemed Kade was tied to a verbal contract?

Compensation or hold him to the contract I suppose are the only real options.

NRL needs to be consistent, especially under these circumstances considering how Kade was approached/poached after a radio announcement.
I think the Sharks are entitled to compo as the Titans were, but how you put a value on it I don't know. No point trying to force a player to stay if he wants to be somewhere else. From what I remember Steve Turner was gonna be sitting on the sidelines for two years had the Storm not given Titans compo, and I think Tinkler\Snowden can be held to the same ransom. If I were the one negotiating compo on the Sharks behalf - I'd be going for 100% CA$H, not other players.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

Yeah but we're not the Titans we're the Sharks. The NRL would never side with us on anything.

 

[Ryan]

Yeah but we're not the Titans we're the Sharks. The NRL would never side with us on anything.

I don't think the NRL intervened while Searle sat back and let it happen.
Your management needs to push the issue and pressure the NRL for action & support. Raise the issue, use the Titans\Turner case as precedence, publicly voice the issue and fight it. Don't roll over and cop it like the donkey's did.

I remember the Titans battle got pretty ugly and public, but Searle didn't back off and got results in the end.....

 

[ben]

Its not up to the nrl, its the law. We could use the price we were going to pay him or the price tinkler was going to pay him as a value.

 

[Ryan]

Its not up to the nrl, its the law. We could use the price we were going to pay him or the price tinkler was going to pay him as a value.

Why would a cash-strapped club start a legal battle with an ego-driven man worth $600M?
All the NRL has to do is say something like "We will not register Kade Snowdens contract until the dispute is settled with Cronulla" - Same support as what the Titans got, cost nothing - maximum results.