Fifita to lawyer up
- Thread starter mearsey
- Start date
- Status
immortalbulldog
Eternal Doggy
- Joined
- May 20, 2008
- Messages
- 4,846
- Reaction score
- 688
His manager said in smh today there will be no legal action as it was mutual. Even if it wasn't its hard for them to claim that now that he's publicly stated that it was
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 18,161
- Reaction score
- 3,171
Like you said, also can't the club and/or player decide not have a contract bound before round 13 or something?
If he does lawyer up what is he going to sue/claim for since nothing happened or maybe he really wants to join the Dogs now lol?
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 15,663
- Reaction score
- 11,345
As gallen said fifita needs to be micro managed the guy is getting some bad guidance and has no morals ,thank god we arent getting him
Mr Invisible
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2008
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 47
If what I'm hearing is correct:
1. Fifita shot his mouth off
2. Businesses who were putting up the $$$ for third party agreements went "F this moron", and withdrew the third party offers.
So as we already know, media just make shit up or blow it out of proportion in order to make a story.
.............
1. Fifita shot his mouth off
2. Businesses who were putting up the $$$ for third party agreements went "F this moron", and withdrew the third party offers.
Ch7 reported that tonight. That they went to the NRL trying to claim we were over the cap and offered them far less. Of course this could be Ch7 talking our their arse as well. I mean, according to some silly bitch on Ch9 who talked out her arse, Alex McKinnon was a quadreplegic (the Knights have since dismissed this).
So as we already know, media just make shit up or blow it out of proportion in order to make a story.
.............
beastwood89
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,808
- Reaction score
- 2,983
Andrew Fifita asks NRL to investigate breakdown of Canterbury deal
Calls for investigation: Sharks prop
Andrew Fifita's management team has asked the NRL to investigate why his multi-million-dollar contract with Canterbury failed to come to fruition as it emerged that the Test prop knew the deal was on the verge of collapse when he made his controversial comments about wishing he'd signed with rugby union.
Representatives for Fifita met NRL officials at League Central on Tuesday to outline elements of the deal that Canterbury allegedly failed to honour after having reached agreement three weeks earlier, when the player signed a memorandum of understanding with the club.
It is understood the shortfall was worth up to $1 million over four years, with Fairfax Media told that the long-form contract Fifita received last Thursday was worth $335,000 under the salary cap and $250,000 in third-party agreements.
Advertisement
Driven to distraction: Cronulla have opened the season with four consecutive losses. Photo: Getty Images
Those amounts increased over the term of the contract, which had been widely reported as being worth $3.4 millon over four years.
Fifita, who announced he had agreed to a deal with Canterbury on Twitter after the Sharks round-one match against the Gold Coast, was the subject of widespread condemnation after he told an AAP reporter last Friday he had regrets over his decision to join the Bulldogs and would have preferred rugby instead.
But it is understood those comments were a reaction to what he felt was a shortfall in the money promised.
If Fifita's intention was to force Canterbury's hand, he was successful, as the parties officially walked away from the deal on Monday.
However, the 24-year-old is unlikely to be able to earn the same amount he had expected to receive from the Bulldogs as rival offers were believed to include $650,000 per season from South Sydney and $700,000 per season to remain with Cronulla.
A teary Fifita told Cronulla teammates on March 10 that the Canterbury offer was too good to refuse and the Bulldogs confirmed his signing two days later.
Canterbury chairman Ray Dib was adamant the decision for his club and Fifita to go their separate ways was mutually agreed as the best decision for both parties.
"I found Andrew Fifita's management to be very professional, very commercial, very amicable and very fair - it was a pleasure dealing with them and I sincerely mean that," Dib said on Tuesday.
"I heard [it said] on talkback radio, 'We can't accept that the Bulldogs went in there and spoke to his manager and they were happy to go their separate ways, it just doesn't make sense'.
"I know it seems too simple but it is what happened . . . both parties . . . it is amazing when you get two parties together who act for the player's welfare and the club's welfare what you can come up with."
Bulldogs CEO Raelene Castle said on Monday the club had no issue accommodating Fifita under the salary cap or negotiating third party contracts and insisted the amount offered was less than reported.
Fifita returned to Sharks training on Tuesday morning not looking like someone who had just lost a multi-million-dollar contract. The prop was at his jovial best, laughing and mucking around where those close to him believe he is most comfortable – on the football field. He yahooed when he beat winger Beau Ryan in a sprint and trained with energy throughout the two-hour field session.
Cronulla coach Peter Sharp said Fifita had been distracted by his contract situation but had trained as a “leader” on Tuesday.
“The best thing Andrew could do was get his mind back on footy,” Sharp said. “It hasn’t been on footy. He hasn’t been focused, it’s obvious in the way he has performed.
“At the end of the day, Andrew is going to be OK. We’d all like to be in Andrew’s position. If he focuses on footy and gets his mind back on the job, then everything looks after itself.”
Sharp and Sharks skipper Paul Gallen have called on the club to recommence negotiations with Fifita. The Australian representative knocked back an offer of about $750,000 per season for four years from the Sharks to switch to the Bulldogs.
“We’ll definitely be an option again,” Sharp said. “What decision he makes is up to Andrew. We can only put our case on the table and give him some love.
“It’s not all doom and gloom for Andrew. He is still in a good position. He is still a wanted commodity and a good footy player. He just needs to get his mind back on the job.”
Cronulla chief executive Steve Noyce said it was too early to begin negotiations with Fifita.
“The immediate concern is the short-term future and making sure he is OK,” Noyce said. “That’s what we have been looking at it. We haven’t taken it any further.
“He seems OK. Players are always good when they are with each other in the training and playing environment. That’s a good place for him.
Calls for investigation: Sharks prop
Andrew Fifita's management team has asked the NRL to investigate why his multi-million-dollar contract with Canterbury failed to come to fruition as it emerged that the Test prop knew the deal was on the verge of collapse when he made his controversial comments about wishing he'd signed with rugby union.
Representatives for Fifita met NRL officials at League Central on Tuesday to outline elements of the deal that Canterbury allegedly failed to honour after having reached agreement three weeks earlier, when the player signed a memorandum of understanding with the club.
It is understood the shortfall was worth up to $1 million over four years, with Fairfax Media told that the long-form contract Fifita received last Thursday was worth $335,000 under the salary cap and $250,000 in third-party agreements.
Advertisement
Driven to distraction: Cronulla have opened the season with four consecutive losses. Photo: Getty Images
Those amounts increased over the term of the contract, which had been widely reported as being worth $3.4 millon over four years.
Fifita, who announced he had agreed to a deal with Canterbury on Twitter after the Sharks round-one match against the Gold Coast, was the subject of widespread condemnation after he told an AAP reporter last Friday he had regrets over his decision to join the Bulldogs and would have preferred rugby instead.
But it is understood those comments were a reaction to what he felt was a shortfall in the money promised.
If Fifita's intention was to force Canterbury's hand, he was successful, as the parties officially walked away from the deal on Monday.
However, the 24-year-old is unlikely to be able to earn the same amount he had expected to receive from the Bulldogs as rival offers were believed to include $650,000 per season from South Sydney and $700,000 per season to remain with Cronulla.
A teary Fifita told Cronulla teammates on March 10 that the Canterbury offer was too good to refuse and the Bulldogs confirmed his signing two days later.
Canterbury chairman Ray Dib was adamant the decision for his club and Fifita to go their separate ways was mutually agreed as the best decision for both parties.
"I found Andrew Fifita's management to be very professional, very commercial, very amicable and very fair - it was a pleasure dealing with them and I sincerely mean that," Dib said on Tuesday.
"I heard [it said] on talkback radio, 'We can't accept that the Bulldogs went in there and spoke to his manager and they were happy to go their separate ways, it just doesn't make sense'.
"I know it seems too simple but it is what happened . . . both parties . . . it is amazing when you get two parties together who act for the player's welfare and the club's welfare what you can come up with."
Bulldogs CEO Raelene Castle said on Monday the club had no issue accommodating Fifita under the salary cap or negotiating third party contracts and insisted the amount offered was less than reported.
Fifita returned to Sharks training on Tuesday morning not looking like someone who had just lost a multi-million-dollar contract. The prop was at his jovial best, laughing and mucking around where those close to him believe he is most comfortable – on the football field. He yahooed when he beat winger Beau Ryan in a sprint and trained with energy throughout the two-hour field session.
Cronulla coach Peter Sharp said Fifita had been distracted by his contract situation but had trained as a “leader” on Tuesday.
“The best thing Andrew could do was get his mind back on footy,” Sharp said. “It hasn’t been on footy. He hasn’t been focused, it’s obvious in the way he has performed.
“At the end of the day, Andrew is going to be OK. We’d all like to be in Andrew’s position. If he focuses on footy and gets his mind back on the job, then everything looks after itself.”
Sharp and Sharks skipper Paul Gallen have called on the club to recommence negotiations with Fifita. The Australian representative knocked back an offer of about $750,000 per season for four years from the Sharks to switch to the Bulldogs.
“We’ll definitely be an option again,” Sharp said. “What decision he makes is up to Andrew. We can only put our case on the table and give him some love.
“It’s not all doom and gloom for Andrew. He is still in a good position. He is still a wanted commodity and a good footy player. He just needs to get his mind back on the job.”
Cronulla chief executive Steve Noyce said it was too early to begin negotiations with Fifita.
“The immediate concern is the short-term future and making sure he is OK,” Noyce said. “That’s what we have been looking at it. We haven’t taken it any further.
“He seems OK. Players are always good when they are with each other in the training and playing environment. That’s a good place for him.
The 2nd Spitter
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Messages
- 1,185
- Reaction score
- 556
He will argue the Memorandum of Understanding was binding on the Bulldogs -- this argument is likely to be unsuccessful on four grounds;
1. It's difficult to argue MoU's are binding in employment situations
2. Castle made it sound there were outstanding terms to be agreed upon and finalised;
3. The relationship between the player and the club takes effect only when the contract is registered with the NRL;
4. It could be argued that Fifita acted in bad faith by (a) disclosing the agreement with the Bulldogs before details were finalised and made public, (b) announcing that signing with the Bulldogs was a mistake.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 19,405
- Reaction score
- 3,622
Didn't the Bulldogs announce his deal publicly weeks ago?
How can they can him if he was excitedly posting it?
He might have a point but if he didn't sign on the dotted line then its up to the dogs what they do with their moola.
How can they can him if he was excitedly posting it?
He might have a point but if he didn't sign on the dotted line then its up to the dogs what they do with their moola.
The 2nd Spitter
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Messages
- 1,185
- Reaction score
- 556
Edit: no, from what i understand, he first announced it when he started crying "good bye" in front of his teammates before the Round 1 game or maybe it was training.
His best argument is estoppel -- that he placed reliance on the MoU that stopped him from negotiating with other clubs and the ARU. (i don't want to be putting ideas in his lawyer's/agent's head). However, to me its a weak argument because Cronulla's offer is probably still on the table somewhere AND nothing is preventing him grovelling back to the other clubs/ARU.
It wasn't the dogs it was him that released that information.
Raysie
Kennel Addict
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2010
- Messages
- 7,999
- Reaction score
- 6,682
Seeing as nothing is final until the Round 13 deadline, what would the case be?
If a player can run away from a contract, which Milford will more than likely do with the Broncos within weeks... What's the problem with the club doing the same? You can't have it both ways.
If a player can run away from a contract, which Milford will more than likely do with the Broncos within weeks... What's the problem with the club doing the same? You can't have it both ways.
- Status