Regarding Josh Addo Carr

Should Josh Ado Carr be sacked?

  • Yes

    Votes: 151 48.7%

  • No

    Votes: 159 51.3%
  • Total voters
    310
Status
Not open for further replies.
Moedogg said:
Rava is completely useless and not worth minium wage let alone 400k.
Click to expand...
Rava is completely useless this year but last year, less so.

U do the deal and its $ for $, we save $200k plus we have the new Skelton. Mebbe good for running around in reserves but if he can give us some 2023, a bargain.

Don't see a downside here except he had a player option so he's signed to 2026. So you have 2 years of whatever u get.
 
TwinTurbo said:
How many reasons do you want;

The cost of defending it would be many multiplies of the cost of paying the fine.

Defending it would mean it would drag on for months, more media shit fests, team mates getting harassed for comments, family being scrutinised,
Rothfield organising a cherry picker outside his house etc

Even if innocent the chance of a successful defence are miniscule

If he defended it and it went to court and he lost it would be on his record, pay the fine cop the licence suspension and it's not.

Plenty of innocent people take the easy guilty plea rather than waste time, spend a lot of money and risk the penalty being increased (the NRL Judiciary relies on that every week).



Team First
Click to expand...
Don't need any reasons. If you take the guilty plea to avoid money, time, whatevs, doesn't change the key fact that you are guilty.

And in context of the original post, you got done, you lied about it, you are now guilty for whatever reason. From a team perspective, the rest becomes very very easy.
 
Doogie said:
U muppet - he paid $600 odd dollars to avoid being charged per NSW laws. If he was innocent, why pay the $600?

JAC. U Fck up. U lied about it. See ya.
Click to expand...
You're right. We'd better nip this criminal element in the bud before he starts influencing other players. If we don't act now, next time it might be Max King getting done for jaywalking or something.

PS I'm sure Gus would have been thrilled if he'd taken it to court and put the club through months worth of additional negative headlines.
 
Johnnny2233 said:
He must of done something really bad cause compared to Trindall and Latrell this is a nothing im
Guessing they don’t want this shit at our club Wilson is young and fast anyway.

JAC won’t play soo anyway his days are done one year he is battered but he can be lethal I just don’t want this backfiring on us.

no doubt he will go to parra Souths or st g but if Ben hunt comes in happy
Click to expand...
Club comes 1st but
It would be sad to see him go !
 
Last edited:
Flanagun said:
You're right. We'd better nip this criminal element in the bud before he starts influencing other players. If we don't act now, next time it might be Max King getting done for jaywalking or something.

PS I'm sure Gus would have been thrilled if he'd taken it to court and put the club through months worth of additional negative headlines.
Click to expand...
Some people might find the goal posting shifting annoying bro. I don't, find it entertaining because it means you actually do not have a solid argument.

Fact. Guilty. Fact. Lied about it. Fact. Club made clear many times club first, don't lie about shit. Fact. Not first time either.

You can move the playing field if you want. Still doesn't change the facts.

See ya JAC. Was good while it lasted.
 
Doogie said:
Some people might find the goal posting shifting annoying bro. I don't, find it entertaining because it means you actually do not have a solid argument.

Fact. Guilty. Fact. Lied about it. Fact. Club made clear many times club first, don't lie about shit. Fact. Not first time either.

You can move the playing field if you want. Still doesn't change the facts.

See ya JAC. Was good while it lasted.
Click to expand...
Who is shifting goal posts? You're the one misrepresenting my argument. All I'm arguing is it isn't a sackable offence... and by the sound of things the club (or at least its legal team) may well agree.

PS don't recall the club issuing a public statement about lying prior to the JAC incident. If you could post a link to said statement, that would be rad!@
 
Flanagun said:
Who is shifting goal posts? You're the one misrepresenting my argument. All I'm arguing is it isn't a sackable offence... and by the sound of things the club (or at least its legal team) may well agree.

PS don't recall the club issuing a public statement about lying prior to the JAC incident. If you could post a link to said statement, that would be rad!@
Click to expand...
Your argument is that it isn't a sackable offence. Anything is a sackable offence if you choose to make it. Thats what that 'bringing the club into disrespute' clause in every contract is there for.

What legal team? Pretty damn obvious that if you sack him you pay out and its off your cap. $600k down for nothing. If you can trade him, you can at least recoup some of this cash. Which goes to my first point, its about the club, not JAC.

You don't have an argument. You have an opinion. And its wrong. See ya JAC.
 
Doogie said:
Your argument is that it isn't a sackable offence. Anything is a sackable offence if you choose to make it. Thats what that 'bringing the club into disrespute' clause in every contract is there for.

What legal team? Pretty damn obvious that if you sack him you pay out and its off your cap. $600k down for nothing. If you can trade him, you can at least recoup some of this cash. Which goes to my first point, its about the club, not JAC.

You don't have an argument. You have an opinion. And its wrong. See ya JAC.
Click to expand...
Lol in what world do people get paid out the full term of their contract after getting sacked?
 
Flanagun said:
Lol in what world do people get paid out the full term of their contract for getting sacked?
Click to expand...
Every corporate world because to avoid unfair dismissal, you agree to it. And its not hard to get a 'disrepute case' tied up in legals for yonks.

Oh - JAC has been allowed by the Dogs to talk to other clubs. Guess the club agrees with me. Sucks to be you.
 
Doogie said:
Every corporate world because to avoid unfair dismissal, you agree to it. And its not hard to get a 'disrepute case' tied up in legals for yonks.

Oh - JAC has been allowed by the Dogs to talk to other clubs. Guess the club agrees with me. Sucks to be you.
Click to expand...
Lol if only all employers gave their employees the courtesy of talking to other employers before "sacking" them.
 
Flanagun said:
Lol if only all employers gave their employees the courtesy of talking to other employers before "sacking" them.
Click to expand...
Because players are not employees they are contractors per the CBA. And the club owns the contract.

Legally the club can just terminate it. Maybe without due cause there is some recourse but the moment JAC went lining, the cause is there. But you know this, you're just trolling.

See ya JAC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top