https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... x-27906916 if wakefield are no longer in SL then the SL get out clause does not stand does it so is a fee due what are chances of Wakey paying this.

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... x-27906916 if wakefield are no longer in SL then the SL get out clause does not stand does it so is a fee due what are chances of Wakey paying this.

Wakefield have a millionaire owner so if they want him make them pay a decent fee for a 30 try a season winger. If they won't come up with the goods, stuff 'em! Unfortunately due to that statement i can't see Walmsley playing for Fax again. He says he loves Halifax, but not enough apparently, to honour his contract. There will be other clubs in for him i'm sure but it's a sad indictment of where we are when a club like Wakefield can outbid us.

I wouldn't sell him to anyone in the championship. He can either see out his contract and then go were he wants or find a super league club who are happy to do a deal for him.

That’s the same link that was posted in the other thread and changes nothing.

Wakefield aren’t a Super League club so they can’t trigger any release clause.

Fax aren’t bidding against Wakefield to sign him he’s already a Fax player who has 12 months left on his contract and well done to them for getting that in place, but there aren’t many clubs in the Championship who have a millionaire backer who’s new on the scene ready to spend who could compete with them and is just a true reflection of the financial status of the majority of clubs below Super League rather than some slur against Fax.

The club know better than anybody what he’s capable of and all the pro’s and cons and implications on and off the field of whether he stays or goes but if he does any club who he goes to will have to pay.

As it stands because Wakefield are classed as a SL team until the SL contracts expire for the season they would have to pay the fee that is in his contract and as Fax have allowed him to speak to Wakefield it looks like we are quite willing to let him go. The issue looks to be that Wakefield are purposfully waiting until they are not classed as a SL team to avoid paying this fee in the hope that they can unsettle him and Fax will eventually let him leave for pennies(or at least a lot less than the fee in the contract). Fax now have to hope that there is interest from another SL team(by all accounts there isn't more than likely down to this fixed fee) otherwise things could get messy.

I can see this one going to a tribunal where the likely outcome would be a ruling in favor of Wakefield as they are able to offer him full time employment and better facilities. Either way Fax are looking likely to get screwed over.

It must be a SL team who triggers the release clause as per the signed contract.
If Wakefield are judged to be a Super League team when they have made their approach which officially must be through the club then they must pay the sum specified in the contract.

They can’t have it both ways and say they are SL so can trigger the release but then they aren’t SL so don’t have to pay the fee it’s is all part of Walmsley’s contact, without the fee there is no release.

My take on this, is that Wakey have failed to sign Walmsley whilst they were SL so now that status has passed, the SL clause is no longer applicable, irrespective as to whether they "started" talks or not - surely that's irrelevant, it's not written down in black and white!

But if Walmsley doesn't want to stay then just let him go to Wakey, as long as they pay through the nose to sign him. We don't want players who don't want to be here, no matter how good they are.

Yes this has been previously mentioned in the other Walmsley thread, there is the legal side regarding the contract ( which as per usual with the RFL isn’t clear ) and the personal side regarding the player involved to take into consideration.

If he is offered more money he will move to another club regardless of whether it is championship or SL. It’s his job and we all want to be paid more.

His contract runs for another 12 months.

Wakefield are not bothered about the clause as they won't be planning to pay much of a fee if any. By approaching Halifax they found out that they could trigger a clause that could release him, by doing that they have also found out the players intentions and the past couple of weeks and more than likely the next couple of weeks until their SL status expires will be spent by them trying to unsettle him in the hope that he asks for a release, afterall he has already expressed this desire publicly which is perfect for Wakefield. Fax are now in a tricky situation as they know Wakefield have no intention of paying the amount stated in his contract but they also know they have a player who is wanting to leave and maybe tempted to accept a much lesser fee rather than go down a messy tribunal route which historically does not favor clubs in our position.

Very scummy what Wakefield have done but also very smart and there isn't usually a happy ending for the selling team at this point.

Seen that Wakefield now favourites to sign Mcgilvray - don't know how many wingers they want but gave me a bit of hope they might be looking elsewhere. Off course they may want both!

Matthew Shaw has spoken to Fax, Walmsley and Wakefield and in the linked article at the beginning of this thread this is what he says and it's clearly all about the release clause.

And with the amount of the transfer fee inserted on the original documents Wakefield have triggered it, that part is not in dispute, Fax are disputing their right to do so based on the interpretation of their current Super League status.

[iQuote "But Walmsley is under contract and while [uWakefield had activated a release clause in his contract,[/u Halifax have contested the interpretation of the clause, resulting in no agreement being reached at this stage.

As per the RFL's supplement clause bank, clause 10.4 states: "If you receive an approach from a Super League Club, the Club agrees to enter into negotiations with the Super League Club (on your behalf) in good faith with a view to reaching an agreement for your release and transfer to such Super League Club and the Club agrees that it will release you provided that the transfer fee is at least [insert amount."[/i End quote.

Wakefield are a SL club until their SL status expires official regardless of confirmation of their relegation, I am not quite sure what Fax can be disputing. At this point if Wakefield wanted to pay the release clause they would have signed him but the simple fact is they think they can get him for next to nothing. I don't really trust what Shaw writes when it comes to Fax as they are reluctant to speak to him because of what they see as numerous breaches of trust so I hope what he has wrote isn't true otherwise it looks like Fax have been blindsided by Wakefields actual intentions.

So Matt Shaw is making it all up and he's spoke to no one but if what he says is true then Fax have been screwed anyway!

Wakefield are a club who have been relegated but are still in Super League so they can activate a release clause that they have no intention of honouring and are just stalling for a couple of weeks until their not a Super League club and can get him for nothing.

Fax aren't disputing anything and their making no attempt to keep hold of a contracted player who has been one of the most prolific try scorers in the division for a number of years and are prepared to let him go to a rival club for next to nothing, I mean why would they wouldn't they!

And if it goes to a tribunal Fax are sure to lose.

So thanks Wombat, who can we get to replace him?

I think with some people thinking that Wakefield were still not classed as a SL club only last week suggests that some people do not fully understand the situation. It'll all come out in the wash as they say.

It's really quite simple and in many ways the exact opposite of what some people think they understand about it.

And anyone who states they had ever even heard of the RFL's supplement clause bank, clause 10.4 and understands the interpretation of it and how it applies in the current context of Fax, Walmsley and Wakefield well all I can say is, how, when to my knowledge it's never happened in these circumstances before!

Both clubs are in negotiations, Wombat is awaiting the outcome and Matt Shaw is accurately reporting the situation.

Fax have Walmsley signed for another 12 months, he can only be released if a S L club meets the terms, including paying the fee recorded in it, the fee can't be circumvented and still somehow trigger the release.
As a minimum Fax will receive that amount should Walmsley leave.

On seeing the terms that's what Wakefield think they have done.

Fax would prefer to keep him instead of having the money and the only way they can do that is by disputing the interpretation of the clause and have nothing to lose by doing so.

The next move will be down to Wakefield, will they withdraw the offer and look elsewhere, increase the offer or choose to go to tribunal with the current offer, in any case Fax will not be letting Walmsley leave for nothing.

So the question is on miraculously finding out about this release clause and triggering it, why have Wakefield not signed Walmsley yet? Wakefield could have signed him weeks back, there is literally no grey area for the interpretation but as of yet despite wanting to leave Walmsley has yet to sign a contract with them. Wakefield have done the hard work now and the next step will be waiting for Walmsley to put in a transfer request. Why pay a fee when you can unsettle a player and get him to leave for next to nothing. As they say there are non so blind as those who refuse to see.

Probably worth adding that the fee would be around 10-20k that is in the contract and yet Wakefield are stalling on that, I mean come on, its not rocket science, they probably want to pay about 3-5k at most.There is nothing new going on here, this sort of stuff has gone on for decades and I would love for Fax to be on the right side of one but we won't be.

Well back to my blind and lack of understanding opinion.

Matt Shaw reported on the release clause being the sticking point and I choose to believe him over posters pure speculation on here, that being the case.

1.) Wakefield can't claim to be a Super League club and trigger the release clause but say they won't pay, the two are bound together and are legally binding, no grey area it's in clear sight written down in black and white.

2.) Without triggering the release clause Wakefield have no basis for signing Walmsley.

3.) And if they haven't triggered it Fax have no reason to be in negotiations with them in the first place and would just tell them to sod off, again it's in black and white, the clause states that negotiations will take place between the two clubs involved IF it's been triggered.

Has it never occoured to anyone that Wakefield's approach coincided with being relegated so maybe they wouldn't have been as interested in Walmsley had they stayed in Super league!!?
Additionally when they did finally decide to make an enquiry because to us he's a valuable player who's under contract Fax naturally don't want him to go to them and are disputing their Super League status, who of us wouldn't do so?

So we now have Wakefield saying they were a Super League club when they made the approach and that's their interpretation.
Fax are saying your not a Super League club now and won't be when Walmsley will be playing for you next season and that's our interpretation.
The grey area is regarding the rules ( who on here honestly knows how they apply in this situation?)
Likewise, who on here can't see that the reason for Fax to dispute them is perfectly understandable.

(Not that it matters but as far as I'm concerned that's my opinion as well, their not a Super League club now and as regards the clause ceased to be when they were confirmed as being relegated, the rest is irrelevant.)

Of course we all know of wheeler back handed dealings in the past but in my opinion this situation is different.

As far as I know there has never been a confirmed relegated Super League club who have triggered a release clause under this rule with this set of circumstances so if this scenario has gone on for decades post who it was and what the outcome was.

Fax and Wakefield are reported to still be in normal negotiation mode, Walmsley himself made reference to this when he said he hoped a deal could be reached or as speculated by an outsider who has actually spoken to no one is the following back handed scummy approach.

Hello Halifax it's Wakefield here, can we sign Walmsley from you for next to nowt, sorry for being a bit late with the request but we've cunningly found out that there is a release clause in his contract and don't want to pay the fee so we thought we'd put it out there, maybe unsettle him a bit, you know how it works can we come maybe have a chat about it.
Yes tomorrow will be fine, see you then, oh hang on could you drive over here so we can screw you some more, you can, great catch you later.

Don't think Wakefield have announced any new signings - not even officially confirmed Powell as coach - presumably all down to the fact that transfer of the club to new owners has still not been completed. I'm sure several transfers including Walmsleys will have been provisionally agreed but can't bee announced until ownership situation resolved.

Could be and good points, change of ownership certainly affected our recruitment last year as will a change of coach and for Wakey being relegated no doubt affected retentions / incomings and if Walmsley is going should hear something more on it when he comes back from holiday.

The situation above is as cut and dried as it can be. Wakefield are a SL club until their players SL contracts expire for this season.

I think the only interpretation up for debate is what angle Wakefield are using to achieve their desired goal which is to sign Walmsley for as little money as they can. I do think this is the part where people are getting confused as to what is actually going on, and in my eyes it is very scummy what Wakefield are trying to do and I will say that until proved otherwise, but Wakefield could sign Walmsley today if they liked(presuming end of month contract expiry as mentioned above but the same applies before last weeks Grand Final) as long as firstly, Walmsley agreed personal terms(maybe this is holding it up?), and secondly they were willing to pay the fee that is in Walmsley's contract. The fact that they have yet to announce his signing suggests to me Wakefield don't want to pay that fee and I would go so far to say that they are pretty confident that they can get Walmsley to force a release and they can negotiate a lesser fee with Fax knowing they will not want to keep an unhappy player.

How often will you see a player coming out in the press basically saying he wants to leave and then goes back on that and ends up re-settling at his current team? Another interesting angle is that it may be in Walmsley's best interests to wait a couple of weeks and then London officially become a SL team and could be another possible destination for him and could give him some negotiating power of his own. If I were him that would be my play, this would also be a good thing for Fax as well in regards getting more money for him.

But Walmsley isn’t a Wakefield player so what applies to their current squad can’t be applied to him and my understanding is that the SL season ended on the 14th with the grand final and their players contracts became null and void after they were confirmed relegated and their last game which was before that date, either way it doesn’t change what angle Fax are disputing it from whether their right or not is irrelevant that’s the point you apparently don’t understand.

Concerning that I’m not confused at all, this thread was started with the Matt Shaw link which specifically says what the sticking point is mentioning the exact sub rule that covers it and that is what I am basing all my comments on and my opinion is that out of everybody who has said anything about it I choose to believe him.

If it was something other than that why would he not simply say so?

If you want to say me basing a discussion on the original link equates to not understanding, being blind and he can’t be trusted and you know better and post multiple speculative alternatives with no factual evidence to support it that’s your choice but it’s not mine.

On Wakefield talking to Walmsley again as per the terms of release rule no club can make a direct approach to the player and offer personnel terms, negotiations must take place between the two clubs and once they reach an agreement then the buying club can speak to him, of course if it gets to that stage there won’t be a problem as Walmsley himself said he wants to go full time to have a better chance of getting into SL but if you accept he said that then you must accept what he said about the clubs reaching an agreement in the same interview he can’t sign until that happens or whilst he’s away in Europe.

If you want to speculate and say Wakefield are playing for time it could well back fire if a current SL club comes in and legitimately triggers the release so if they really want him would they take the risk over 10 or 20 grand when they have a millionaire backer?
And it could be Fax playing for time putting the pressure on Wakefield knowing that they can’t get less than what’s already been offered or could even get to keep him.

Likewise if you speculate he can demand a release then as far as I’m concerned it would be demand and be dammed, your our player, your in breech of contract and your going nowhere otherwise you could open up the floodgates for an endless repeat episode in the future with anyone else with all the disruption that could cause.

Stepping away from Matt Shaw and the link I personally think it highly likely Walmsley will end up at Wakefield or somewhere else, Liam Finn admitted it would be hard to keep hold of him but at least for the fee specified in the release clause in my opinion.

PS. I have to edit about 20 times because when using an iPad it writes what it wants or the page fails before finishing .

We know how this goes so I am stepping out. There are a lot of things not correct in the above.

Quote ="Greg Florimos Boots"We know how this goes so I am stepping out. There are a lot of things not correct in the above.'" My last attempt based on what we actually do know as fact. 1.) This threads discussion was based on this link. https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... x-27906916 2.) In that link Matt Shaw said this regarding Wakefield [i" Walmsley is under contract and while Wakefield had activated a release clause in his contract." 3.) Halifax have contested the interpretation of the clause, resulting in no agreement being reached at this stage[/i 4.) This was said about the clause. As per the RFL's supplement clause bank, clause 10.4 states: [i"If you receive an approach from a Super League Club, the Club agrees to enter into negotiations with the Super League Club (on your behalf) in good faith with a view to reaching an agreement for your release and transfer to such Super League Club and the Club agrees that it will release you provided that the transfer fee is at least [insert amount."[/i 5.) This is what Walmsley said. "Discussing the interest, [i"I just want to get myself into a full-time environment, whether that is Wakefield or any Super League team. If a deal happens I'll be blessed and happy. I want to get into a full-time team and push for Super League and I think it's my best chance to make it to Super League. I love Halifax and I've loved my time here, but I did the same to go from Whitehaven to Halifax and I think I've got to do the same now if I want to take another step in my career."[/i Based on this article it's all crystal clear. 1.) Wakefield have activated the release clause which includes the Fee. 2.) Halifax have contested the terms of the release based on their interpretation of Wakefield's Super League status because they have been relegated. 3.) Walmsley regarding the above hopes a deal can be done between the two clubs so he could get closer to his SL dream and even acknowledged that this could be first going full time with Wakefield to "push for SL" or to any existing SL team. (Even he doesn't think Wakefield are in Super League at this point in time!!) Against that you have a poster who having spoken to none of the those involved completely ignores all the above and comes out with multiple unsupported alternatives which have no basis in facts and are purely products of their imagination whilst claiming others lack understanding and are blind. My opinion is, my conclusions of what is going on are based on the journalist instead of the fantasist.

Quote ="Greg Florimos Boots"We know how this goes so I am stepping out. There are a lot of things not correct in the above.'" My last attempt based on what we actually do know as fact. 1.) This threads discussion was based on this link. https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... x-27906916 2.) In that link Matt Shaw said this regarding Wakefield [i" Walmsley is under contract and while Wakefield had activated a release clause in his contract." 3.) Halifax have contested the interpretation of the clause, resulting in no agreement being reached at this stage[/i 4.) This was said about the clause. As per the RFL's supplement clause bank, clause 10.4 states: [i"If you receive an approach from a Super League Club, the Club agrees to enter into negotiations with the Super League Club (on your behalf) in good faith with a view to reaching an agreement for your release and transfer to such Super League Club and the Club agrees that it will release you provided that the transfer fee is at least [insert amount."[/i 5.) This is what Walmsley said. "Discussing the interest, [i"I just want to get myself into a full-time environment, whether that is Wakefield or any Super League team. If a deal happens I'll be blessed and happy. I want to get into a full-time team and push for Super League and I think it's my best chance to make it to Super League. I love Halifax and I've loved my time here, but I did the same to go from Whitehaven to Halifax and I think I've got to do the same now if I want to take another step in my career."[/i Based on this article it's all crystal clear. 1.) Wakefield have activated the release clause which includes the Fee. 2.) Halifax have contested the terms of the release based on their interpretation of Wakefield's Super League status because they have been relegated. 3.) Walmsley regarding the above hopes a deal can be done between the two clubs so he could get closer to his SL dream and even acknowledged that this could be first going full time with Wakefield to "push for SL" or to any existing SL team. (Even he doesn't think Wakefield are in Super League at this point in time!!) Against that you have a poster who having spoken to none of the those involved completely ignores all the above and comes out with multiple unsupported alternatives which have no basis in facts and are purely products of their imagination whilst claiming others lack understanding and are blind. My opinion is, my conclusions of what is going on are based on the journalist instead of the fantasist.