[urlhttp://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/local/Eagles-issue-Barlow-ultimatum.6540354.jp[/url

just tell them to get lost... we dont need this disruption in the lead up the the final...

Funny how on saturday they were going to sue barlow for 1.13 million



Aston will probably get bored and go away when he starts thinking about next season

Why? The Sheffield club are quite within their rights to seek redress if they believe they have a legal case!! Why shouldn't they persue it?? Just cos Halifax are in a final does not preclude people from issuing legal actions!

Halifax have state all along that it has nothing to do with the club - it's between the player and Sheffield.

If Sheffield have a case, then let them present it! If not, let the matter go away!

Halifax knew the situation when they selected Sam on Thursday. By selecting him they did so in the knowledge that the player could be subject to legal proceedings. They made that choice.
Like I said, if it's just blustering from Sheffield, the matter will go away. If not, Sam will be embroiled in the legal process.

The supposed dispute is between the player and sheffield, so why are sheffield sending letters threatening legal proceedings to the club, and not to sam himself?

sore losers; trying to distract the player and the club in the most important week of the season. I hope this drives Barlow on to get MOM in the final

Unless they believe by playing Sam they have induced him to break a contract and as such are also liable, in which case they have written to the club.

As I said, just cos Fax are in a final does not exempt them from legal proceedings.
If it's a genuine and proven case, Fax and player will get sued, and rightly so if the evidence supports it.
If it's not a genuine case, it will go away, and rightly so!!

Playing Sam, Fax knew that they may risk some legal action afterwards. As stated - they made that choice.

Quote ="Rotherham Fev Fan"Unless they believe by playing Sam they have induced him to break a contract and as such are also liable, in which case they have written to the club. As I said, just cos Fax are in a final does not exempt them from legal proceedings. If it's a genuine and proven case, Fax and player will get sued, and rightly so if the evidence supports it. If it's not a genuine case, it will go away, and rightly so!! Playing Sam, Fax knew that they may risk some legal action afterwards. As stated - they made that choice.'" www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... field.html Looking at the Above, they dont have a case and are flying by the seat of their pants to get something back to ease the pain. All Aston needs to ease the pain is a nice fat Melton Mowbray to tuck into. Seriously though if they had a strong case then they would go through the courts for Maximum impact and Damage, rather than, come on then offer us some cash . As the RFL has stated there was nothing in the bylaws to stop Barlow playing, they can't come after halifax otherwise the RFL as the governing Body would surely have to intervene and impose fines etc.

Quote ="Rotherham Fev Fan"Unless they believe by playing Sam they have induced him to break a contract and as such are also liable, in which case they have written to the club. As I said, just cos Fax are in a final does not exempt them from legal proceedings. If it's a genuine and proven case, Fax and player will get sued, and rightly so if the evidence supports it. If it's not a genuine case, it will go away, and rightly so!! Playing Sam, Fax knew that they may risk some legal action afterwards. As stated - they made that choice.'" www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... field.html Looking at the Above, they dont have a case and are flying by the seat of their pants to get something back to ease the pain. All Aston needs to ease the pain is a nice fat Melton Mowbray to tuck into. Seriously though if they had a strong case then they would go through the courts for Maximum impact and Damage, rather than, come on then offer us some cash . As the RFL has stated there was nothing in the bylaws to stop Barlow playing, they can't come after halifax otherwise the RFL as the governing Body would surely have to intervene and impose fines etc.

Aston is an idiot, these kind of release clauses should not be allowed, if a player doesnt want to play for them and they want to sell him, that should be the end of it. Pursuing action against something they only invoked out of spitefulness only further increases the philosphy that Aston has a chip on his shoulder the size of Mont Blanc everytime someone wants to leave for another champiosnhip club, Grow up Aston. Your like a kid thats had his toys confiscated.
Protect your club by all means, but stop being petty, your losing as many friends as Halifax in this. Nobody will win this ultimately, money will be wasted on hearings, someone may get a verdict, but both clubs will get dragged through unnecessary publicity. Move on...

Not necessarily. The legal process quite often involves informal offers/requests first prior to the more formal and more expensive legal process commencing.
It's also not uncommon for the negotiating to continue running along side the formal process and a settlement arrived at, very often just moments before being heard in court! This is not unusual.

I don't know whether they have a case or not. If they have a written agreement that Sam does not play against them in 2010 and nowhere in the contract is the words "league programme" then Sam is at risk of being well well out of pocket.
The Fax club is a different issue. The RFL by-laws are not the law. Proving Fax induced him to break his contract is a much more difficult job in proving. Sheffield would have to prove the club (or it's agents) were aware of the clause in his contract, and deliberately encouraged him to break it to the detriment of Sheffield. - and there's the rub. That is much more subjective which a judge would use the "balance of probability" when making his/her decision.
It's not that simple. The legal process never is!

What I'm stuggling with is the notion that Aston (or the club) shouldn't seek redress if they believe they were wronged or that it's somehow Aston's fault that it will disrupt Fax's plans for the final - If he believes he has a case, he should persue it. If not, he will look daft and the case collapse in the fullness of time - which will probably be well after the 2011 grand final!!!!

[url=http://www.thestar.co.uk/rugbyleague/Eagles-poised-to-sue-rivals.6539906.jp[uEagles Poised To Sue Rivals[/u[/url

More garbage before we play our final.

I don't think taking legal action is about morals or principle in this case. Sheffield have been crying to the various press outlets all week and they've made their point, let people make up their own minds if it really was about the rugby.

Barlow playing didn't affect the overall result and it's just going to cost both clubs money and then what? Probably animosity between the fans and board members and nothing more.

but with all due respect Dors, and 'm not looking to play the opposition fan on a wind up here, the decision is Mark Aston's decision to make - not yours or the Halifax club or for people to "make up their own minds"!
You may well wish for the matter to disappear although exactly how much disruption it will cause I'm not sure. I'm not that convinced it will cause that much bother.

The decision is Mark Aston's. If he believes his club has been disadvantaged, regardless of the result or how the game panned out, he has a right to persue that! Regardless of what other motivation he may have.

double post!

seems a very strange statement from Sheffield - if you were that bothered about the contract before the match - Sheffield should have issued an injunction on Sam before the match forcing him to watch from the sideline - as the result was so one sided after the event I would be very surprised if Sheffield can prove any direct loss through an alledged breach of contract - just looks like more bile from Mr Grumpypants in the lead up to Sunday - file in a recepticle of choice!

I totally agree it's just that I'm just having a hard time believing it's about the "integrity of the game".

lol what a baby, you just know he's doing it this week to try get maximum destructiveness to our grand final week to the players and club, I've no respect for the guy full stop now, pathetic person.

He may well be all those things waddy-fax. It doesn't stop his legal right to proceed tho does it?? He may well feel so aggreived by Sam's actions and Fax's willingness to play him despite an agreement/contract etc, that raising the issue now may well have an effect on the teams prep for Sunday! - again, this is Aston's legal right to do so!

If he's no case, he's going to look really daft. If he has, Sam will pay the price. Fax as a club may also get dragged in.
It will fade out of the news by tomorrow evening, popping up occasionally as progress on the case is reported. Fax fans will lose interest over time and when a decision is made, no bug_ger other than Sam is likely to give a toss!

Exactly. All this crying to the media and the 'won't somebody think of the children!' approach at the moment is just pathetic. These things take a long time to do, I think Aston thinks something will happen this week if he carries on. As you say, it'll be some random evening in 4 months time where Barlow finds out he's been fined 10p or something and no one will care.

Plus it seems to have brought our players together more than making them worry. There's some right banter between them re:this on facebook!

No case to answer - Barlow paid to get out of the contract with the provision for not playing against sheffield in normal course of league games. 'Normal course' being the operative as anything other (ie play offs) could not have been determined at time of agreement.

Barlow honoured his agreement and did not play in the away LEAGUE game (as promised), a game we won easy.

The balance of consideration is too high to expect Barlow to miss 2 games against Sheff AND settle his contract early.

This precident is also set in football where managers would not expect players to miss games they previously were unaware of.

END OF!

Would Aston be ranting and raving if they had won and have it interfear with there Finals preparation . I think not

well you say that, but that's not necessarily the case.
Of course the 'contract' - once it's existance is proven, then the wording is subject to legal argument over the next 12 months or so. If the words 'league programme' is written into what is now an alleged contract, that Barlow and Fax are indeed home dry.
If it's not and it just says throughout 2010, that definition will be the clause subject to legal argument of which a judge will preside over before making his judgement. Whether the fact that Sheffield v Fax in the play offs could be foreseen at the time of signing is largely irrelevant to the case.
And it's not legal precident in this case. A case like this is judged on it's own virtue and on the evidence presented for reasons explained to me that I can neither remember or reliably understand!!
My feeling is that a contract will exist, Aston will have taken legal advice but may not be that confident it wholly supports his case - just my feeling!!

well no he wouldn't. But as it's him that's taking the action why would he. He'd wait until it's best for him and his club to do so !! Don't understand your point.

IMO Sheffields case if they have one, has been weakened by agreeing that Barlow could play in the 9's against them. Surely if they were "that" bothered, they wouldnt have allowed him to play in them games either.

I'm advised that would NOT weaken a case! What does is the subjective wording - that's open to legal argument!!

Oi, its not fair if you are commenting AND getting advise on it!

Is there not a key phrase in that article or am I missing something?



[i"Just before the transfer deadline, the Eagles cancelled Barlow's contract and he signed for Halifax".[/i


I don't understand where the arguement is.