Quote ="Him":2a32qfg2Are you going to do your usual and twist the debate all over the place? If so then I won't bother any further after this post.
If not...'"
:2a32qfg2setting yourself up for your get out. Smart.
Quote :2a32qfg2Players do agree to monitoring by the RFL, clubs and other agencies. They also agree to abide by certain rules of the competition. That's how the RFL can enforce fines or the player has to leave the competition. '"
:2a32qfg2and...
Quote :2a32qfg2I didn't say the player had to lodge all his contracts with the RFL. I didn't say the player had to lodge ANY contract with the RFL. Nor did I say it would be any benefit to him. '"
:2a32qfg2then a player can have multiple contracts without him having broken a rule.
Quote :2a32qfg2The breach isn't a breach just because the player tells the RFL. It's a breach the second that contract is signed and not declared to the RFL by the club
The player would only be punished if it were proved that he knew his "other" contract was not declared to the RFL. Ie that the player knew a breach had occurred but did nothing about it. '"
:2a32qfg2but hang on, you have just said
Quote :2a32qfg2I didn't say the player had to lodge ANY contract with the RFL.'"
:2a32qfg2So which is it. Does the player need to ensure all his contracts are lodged with the RFL or not? And why and how would he agree to such a thing considering his contract is with the club? The same club who are trying to pay him more money to avoid these rules.
Quote :2a32qfg2In the case of Puletua it might have persuaded him to tell the RFL. Or it might not but I can't see how it would do any harm. Of course in the Puletua case he didn't tell the RFL. Instead it came out in his tribunal with Salford.'"
:2a32qfg2You think Tony Puletua didnt declare this other contract to the RFL because if he did he wouldnt be punished, and that if there were the threat of punishment this would have persuaded him to do so?
Quote :2a32qfg2I never said it would be easy to prove. I stated it wouldn't be. But in the rare case where it could be proved, I don't see a problem with punishing a player who is proved to have knowingly colluded in a salary cap breach.'"
Other than the Salary Cap specifically not being a restriction on players and as such not applying to them, and the RFL holding no power or jurisdiction over Tony Puletua at this point and it not actually achieving anything.
What's wrong with you?
