Don't be so ridiculous.

Joel is almost home whilst plying his trade at Leeds.

Salford to Brisbane = 10,237 miles.
Leeds to Brisbane = 10,200 miles.

Hope the info above leads to a more level-headed perspective on your part.

i get the motivation to try and play the good guy here, but there is a strong case of players needing to be careful what they wish for here because a contract that they don't have to honour, is also one that clubs don't have to honour.

And its not just the removal of that security that will be to their detriment. It increases the value of a player to a club to not only have him, but prevent anyone else having him. Having the player as an asset increases his value to a club, not having him as an asset will reduce his value. Not to mention the value to the club of being able to plan on having a player, again without that a player is far less valuable to a club - and all these lower values would result for most players in a lower wage and less security. If a player can walk out on a contract on a whim, why not have them on a sporting equivalent of a zero hours contract? If the club get no security, why offer anything further than a pay as you play deal?

This may be a Randian wet-dream for the Murdoch-right, and in fact no doubt some of the very best players would make an awful lot of more money selling their services to the highest bidder every week, but for most players, including those of Segeyaro's level it would a gig-economy nightmare. Lets not forget Segeyaro took a wage from Penrith for nigh on year despite playing only 4 games, and prior to his cameo at Leeds last year couldnt find a gig in the NRL.

Well they've had to go out and spend money on Parcell so will be out of pocket.

Ateotd in sport if Club A wants to sign Club B's player then they offer a fee, that's all this is but has been complicated by said player & agent because Club A don't want to pay a fee.

I'm 100% with Hetherington on this one. Once you sign a contract you have both legal and moral obligations and if you're not prepared to match up to those there have to be consequences. Leeds aren't the bad guy here, and no amount of pursuing some form of compensation will make it so the club is in the wrong. Both sides signed a contract and only one was prepared to fulfil it. If it were the other way around and Segeyaro had been left without a club and none wanted to take him do you think his lawyers would have just gone 'Oh well, let's be the bigger men in this and forget it'? No, they would have demanded full payment of his remaining contract.

A stand needs to be taken for the good of the sport.

^^^^^ It's as simple as that

Excellent post

This I guess is also Gary Hetherington's point of view on the matter.If we get dry bummed with this Segeyaro contract dispute then the flood gates will be open and plenty more clubs will have to suffer the consequences down the track.
A stand needs to be taken here.

Cronulla need to agree a transfer fee if they want him,if they don't wish to pay one then IMO they can get f**ked

Bang on! 100% correct. I genuinely have trouble understanding how others have a different view point.

Me too. There is no other way of approaching this situation.

So if nobody is prepared to pay a fee then what do Leeds gain other than my dad is bigger than your dad?

If most on here think it will make players see out their contracts I personally don't agree - we have seen with Carroll, Buderus and Eastwood the exact same scenario i.e. I want to cut my contract short and the reaction of the club to be very different. All the above made the same commitment as Segayaro and failed to come good on their word

In Segeyaro's case he went runnning to the press to try and force Leeds' hand, Buderus etc. didn't do that and I think if Segeyaro had kept this behind closed doors with GH and the club and asked if he could leave that way he may well have gotten his wish or at least stood a better chance than the tactic he went for.

Leeds still stand to make a transfer fee, if not now and if not Cronulla then someone will need a hooker sometime this year through injury to a starting 9 or planning for their squad for 2018.

different scenarios.

Carrol had a 2-4 year deal with a return to Nrl clause after two years, and he informed the club half way through season 2 that he was returning to Brisbane.

Buderus asked for a release for one final hurrah, if Newcastle had not come calling or a deal could not have been done he would have stayed, and being a model professional would have given is all.

similar to Eastwood, lad not happy but put in a shift and would have played on if deal was not done. was honest and upfront about it.

segayero as not been professional or honest upfront, just acted like a spoilt brat who wants his own way.

Scott Donald also reneged on his contract early.

he did as he went to join the police, but again all above board and done through the right channels and went with the clubs blessing.

The point is you will always get overseas players who will not see their contract out regardless of the example you set with Segayaro

Graham Murray is seen as a club legend but he did the same - an NRL club knocking and off he went taking with him arguably one of the best players in the whole competition.

It will always be with the clubs blessing when they have a replacement already, and are happy enough to release.

Segayaro was world class, and saved us from relegation. The club therefore knew the importance of keeping him. They also knew he wanted to be in the NRL if he could, but chose to forget that bit.

Without Segeyaro, Leeds would have finished bottom of SL and they may well have struggled to emerge from the Middle 8's with any dignity either.

Yes and as pointed out with other examples there's nothing wrong with that if the player/coach goes out it the right way.

- Segeyaro went public when he didn't need to.
- He painted a picture that he was left alone to look at 4 walls every night when the club worked the balls off to make him welcome and happy.
- His agent is now claiming the contract was finalised.

All things he didn't have to do, so when people say he made one mistake by signing a new contract.....no he made a few mistakes now in how he's tried to force a move.

End of the day he could've been a Cronulla player 2 months ago had he, Cronulla and his agent gone about it professionally.....but they've chosen not to.

Agreed. No problem with that.

None the less, if GH so chose, he could sue Segeyaro for breach of contract.
The reason he hasn't is that he'd only be awarded sufficient damages to the amount that the club's out of pocket as a result of JS's actions.
Which would, in all probability, amount to the sum of f*** all. Even without knowing the ins and outs of the respective contracts of JS and Parcell, it's entirely possible that the club may be better off.
Instead, GH has preferred to prevent JS from plying his trade by playing the registration card.

This is where I do have a problem: this restriction - of dubious legality - wouldn't apply to anyone in pretty much any other walk of life.

You talk some cr*p Gotcha , the club never chose to forget anything . Both parties agreed a deal and signed the contract . End of story .

I agree Segeyaro hasn't covered himself in glory but the approach of the club doesn't show them particularly in a good light.

I am sure he told GH at their meeting in Australia that he wasn't going to return yet GH announced to all and sundry he was.

GH has history in that respect - his pronouncements on the stadium redevelopment when he knew it wasn't going to happen just to sell a few ST's is but one example.

GH is cutting his nose off to spite his face just like he did when Iestyn went to RU.

Nobody wins here and as has been mentioned the club is preventing somebody from plying their trade - morally someone has to take the higher ground and move on.

The club didn't know he wanted to be in the NRL? yet he had a clause when he came over saying exactly that. I think you need to see the reality.

They haven't forgotten that, it's just clear that the deadline to go had passed.

It's not about who "wins". It's simply one club wanting a player but not wanting to pay a fee, that Segeyaro has muddied the waters with his course of action doesn't change that.

Want a player, pay a fee, simple as that. Leeds "not in a good light"? They're asking for a transfer fee, that's all, that's not a bad light, that's totally reasonable and on the Cronulla forums I've seen most fans whilst wanting Segeyaro to join have actually applauded Leeds and GH for the stance they've taken and said fair play to them.

Segeyaro has prevented himself from plying his trade by his actions. Cronulla are stopping him from plying his trade by clearly going after him and then bailing when a fee was needed.

I'm also sure that when Segeyaro was in Yorkshire meeting with GH to agree his deal he wasn't the confused, lonely homesick guy he made himself out to be later.

If Leeds had turned down offers then I could understand the argument that we're being harsh, but Cronulla haven't even been in touch or offered a penny.

To be fair, I don't think the Sharks have done anything wrong, the blame is all on Segeyaro. The Sharks have simply approached his manager, but have maintained all along that they can't and won't pay a fee - they've put it back to Segeyaro and his management that the offer is there if they can agree a release with Leeds.

But, despite this all being Segeyaro's doing, I personally would still sooner we just cut ties. He's a young, misguided bloke who's made a bad decision - that happens in life. For me, like I said earlier, life is more important than rugby league - let him go on his way. In reality, Leeds have lost nothing and are in exactly the same position they'd have been in had he bailed before the September deadline. I'd no doubt have a different view if it was mid-season or mid-contract, but it's not, it was a couple of weeks later before his contractual obligations had begun.

What if sageyaro had badly injured himself playing under contract do you think this misguided player and his advisors would have waivered his wages?