Nice www.leaguefreak.com/luke-walsh-c ... arly-5009/

Nice www.leaguefreak.com/luke-walsh-c ... arly-5009/

To be fair to Walsh, that article could just as easily have been written with a different spin under the headline "Luke Walsh may never return to the NRL".

No it couldn't. This is pretty stupid from the club if it's as simple as Walsh makes out. If we've given him a contract where he can walk out at a moments notice with no compensation for his remaining contract value then it's a daft move.

If he comes over and does well, he can then walk. If he comes over and doesn't do well, no NRL club will want him and we'll be stuck with him?

So how do Saints benefit from the above arrangement?

I would imagine there would be a fee involved to get an early release if a club comes in for him...Sam Tomkins had a clause that he could go anywhere at the end of 2013 but Wigan will still be getting a big fee for him.

This is probably common in a lot of contracts NRL players sign with SL clubs and would imagine it will be a bit more difficult than Walsh saying "I'm going, goodbye"

Don't most players have this in their contract including English one's

I knew about this and told a few posters on here via a pm. He's also already askd wheather he could stay in the NRL and saints told him we'd like him to 100% come over.

He told saints he would fully commit and agreed to come over.

Already asked if he can stay in the NRL? .....

St George wanted him and offered him a good deal but he kept to his word with saints.

I understand players wanting it in contracts and I can understand clubs giving it. But it puts SL clubs in a very awkward position if an NRL club gets an injury mid-season and they know they can just take whoever they like.

I'm not sure there is an easy solution, but can you imagine a SL club, suddenly losing their halfback with games to go before the playoffs as an NRL club have an injury crisis.

Like I say no easy solution and not just a problem that effects Saints.

I would question the motives of that site whenever Saints are involved.

What you have also got to consider is if an NRL club came in for him (after a mid-season injury) they would also have to fit him in the salary cap so they wont be offering him mega money (no matter how good he will be playing





).

Saints deny reports: www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3157

Saints deny reports: www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3157

Quote ="Blobbynator"Saints deny reports: www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3157'" Hmmm. It's not really clear what the club is denying there. That statement doesn't address the issue of a get-out-clause, which is what I understood the reports in Aus related to.

Quote ="Blobbynator"Saints deny reports: www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3157'" Hmmm. It's not really clear what the club is denying there. That statement doesn't address the issue of a get-out-clause, which is what I understood the reports in Aus related to.

Quote ="Dux"Hmmm. It's not really clear what the club is denying there. That statement doesn't address the issue of a get-out-clause, which is what I understood the reports in Aus related to.'" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3157 ST.HELENS R.F.C. would like to state that, contrary to incorrect reports in Australia, Luke Walsh has signed a two-year contract with the club, with an option for a further year, from 2014. Saints are looking forward to welcoming the Penrith Panthers' scrum half next season alongside his teammate Mose That sounds like a one year deal with an option for 2015.

Quote ="Dux"Hmmm. It's not really clear what the club is denying there. That statement doesn't address the issue of a get-out-clause, which is what I understood the reports in Aus related to.'" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3157 ST.HELENS R.F.C. would like to state that, contrary to incorrect reports in Australia, Luke Walsh has signed a two-year contract with the club, with an option for a further year, from 2014. Saints are looking forward to welcoming the Penrith Panthers' scrum half next season alongside his teammate Mose That sounds like a one year deal with an option for 2015.

Correct, the is a Clause but not sure what it is. Most Aussies have the clause in their contracts. Josh Perry defo had one.

I think its after the 1st year if a NRL club offer him more money and we can't match it that he can go. It will be something along those lines.

No, I think it's 2014-15, with an option for 2016. But my point was that the reports in Australia were about a get-out-clause, not about the length of his contract. There's nothing in the Saints statement that denies that he has a get-out-clause.

This all comes from st George trying to hijack the deal after he'd signed for saints.

That sounds fair enough.

=#FF0000Edited, that was offensive. Don't use it again on this board.

No, someone who has been around multi-million pound contracts long enough to see an ambiguous statement when he sees one.

Only a Wiganer could turn a statement detailing a two year contract with an option for a further year, into a one year contract with an option for a further year.

He can't find anything negative to say about him really. He's young (rogues loves calling us for signing old), he's on fire, he's cost us nothing (unlike wigans halves) and he's a good goal kicker.

The Saints statement is ambiguous.

Statements from Saints invariably are ambiguous.