Should be a cracker of a game. If Leigh come out all guns blazing and get Salford on the back foot early, then I think they have a great chance of getting the result.
We'll never hear the end of it if they do, mind

What precedent is that?

Bear in mind, hock wasn't a transfer. He negotiated an early release which sees him retaining a portion of his wage from Salford. He then signed with Leigh as a free agent.

If he's a free agent then Salford have no authority over him whatsoever. If Salford want to decide who Hock can and can't play against then they need to retain him as a Salford player. They can loan him to Leigh, or anyone else, if they wish and put whatever restrictions they want on who he plays against.

But if Hock is not a Salford player then Hock should be free to play in any game Leigh wish to play him in.

Otherwise you'll eventually have the ridiculous situation whereby half the league can't play against each other.

I expect he is free to play Salford under the rules of the game, I also expect he'll be liable to repay whatever severance payments he's received for it though. The clause only runs as lon as he's receiving his severance - the term of his original contract. If another club had paid Salford for him, perhaps this would have been negotiated around.

The fact that he was granted his requested release and not retained until Salford could sell him on is why it is on Hock and not his new club. Surely these details would have been discussed in any negotiations with his new club as both Gareth and his agent were aware of the stipulation. If they weren't mentioned when Hock signed with Leigh that is neither Salford's fault or concern, they surely weren't involved with those negotiations at all.


TLDR; If Leigh had been willing to pay for Hock, they could have negotiated around the clause. They were after him pre-season but weren't willing to pay a fee.

HA!

That isn't the case though due to the controversial 'secrecy clause' preventing Hock or his agent from mentioning the no playing against Salford stipulation.

If that's true it's obviously stupid. I presumed the secrecy clause was more to do with the severance payments. Whatever the truth, it will surely come out in time anyway, this seems destined for a courtroom.

I seriously doubt that kind of clause would be allowed in a termination agreement, otherwise every early release would include it.

Leigh must play him if they want to. I'm 99.9% certain this kind of clause would put Salford in breach of the operational rules and possibly be a restraint of trade.

And I'm 99.9% certain that neither of those things are true

Well if he sues Hock for 50k, he can then pay Puletua what he owes him

Wigan fan going supporting Leigh!

Salford by 20+

Great moves by the Leigh chairman. By concentrating the media on the Gareth Hock "will-he-won't-he" saga ha has taken all the attention away from the squad. GH won't play on Saturday but I think Leigh will have enough to beat Salford anyway. I hope for a Leigh victory. Centurions by 6.

It is a restraint of trade. But by definition every contract is a restraint of trade. The question is is it an unreasonable one. The answer there is clearly not. There was a fair agreement between the two parties . Hock got an early release from his contract and some severance (something Salford weren't obligated to provide) and Salford protected themselves from being disadvantaged by his decision to do that. Salford are perfectly able and justified in protecting their interests. There is also nothing within the operational rules to stop Salford having an agreement with Hock that he would face them until the end of his contract with them.

Salford have no right or recourse to stop Leigh picking hock, their agreement is with Hock. Should Hock choose to break his agreement with Salford he would be liable for any loss and compensation necessary arising from that. Hock would be, without a doubt in breach of contract with Salford. The decision is entirely with Hock. Leigh cannot force him to break his terms with Salford their recourse would be he presented his employment with them originally under false pretences.

so he has 2 contracts? what if Leigh pick him, he refuses, as Leigh werent aware, then surely hes up for a fine/disciplinary/dismisal from Leigh for failing to play to his contract with them....
im with HIM here, this could open a can of worms, it would appear that Salford effectively have him on loan to Leigh

It most definitely is unreasonable for Salford to release Hock (and his registration) but then put conditions on his registration by other clubs.

Salford are most likely in breach of the Operational Rules by placing such a clause in the termination agreement. This isn't like any other job like you or I would have. There are set terms and conditions by which players can be employed and also by which their employment can be terminated.

[iSection C1icon_razz.giflayers

The purpose of these rules shall be:
...
(b) To ensure the integrity and fairness of competitions;

(c)To encourage Clubs to develop, train and educate young Players without unreasonably restraining Players from moving freely between Clubs;

(d) To ensure that Players have security of contract and that Clubs have security of squad available to them to ensure that the competitions can take place in an orderly manner.

These regulations are to be interpreted and applied by reference to and in a manner that advances their purpose as set out above and when an issue arises that is not expressly provided for in these Operational Rules the interpretation and application shall be consistent with the purpose of these Rules.

C1:1:7 Players’ agreements may be terminated by Club or Player in accordance with the procedures for termination as set out in the Standard Player’s Agreement from time to time and there shall be such rights of appeal as set out in the Standard Player’s Agreement.

C1:1:8
SUPPLEMENTAL CLAUSES

C1:1:9 Other than clauses from the Supplemental Clause Bank, no additional clauses may be inserted into a Player’s Full-time or Part-time Contract and no additional agreements may be entered into between a Club and a Player (or any Relative or other associated party of a Player or any Related Party of a Club) with the intention of amending the terms of a Full-time or Part-time Contract or the rights of a Player under a Full-time or Part-time Contract (including the salary payable) or which ultimately have the same effect on the Player. [/i

You cannot have clubs releasing a player and then deciding who he plays for. Salford can try to pursue Hock if he plays but I reckon they'd come up against anti-competition and sports laws and any financial benefit they may receive if they happen to win such a case against would be very much offset by the financial implications of breaking the Operational Rules and a fine or worse from the RFL.

Not to mention it appears as if they are about to be sued by Puletua. This kind of reputational damage won't help them get top players.

That would depend on Leighs agreement with Hock but yeah I expect not being available to Leigh would breach his contract with them.

Salford aren't being unreasonable at all. Their alternative was to not release Hock at all and he doesn't play for anyone. Hock made a legally binding agreement to secure a benefit for himself. It is a contract. A fair one. Both parties received their consideration. That hock went on to make further agreements with other parties is irrelevant.

All the operational rules are fine but Hock wasn't transferred to Leigh. He left Salford and then joined Leigh. If Leigh didnt want to sign a player with such restrictions s they shouldn't have signed Hock. If they weren't aware of these conditions then their complaint lies with Hock for misrepresenting his ability to fulfil that contract.

Salford haven't put any such clauses in Hocks playing contract. They have within a compromise agreement. An agreement between a none player and a business.

Regardless of his agreement with Leigh. Hock needs to abide by the terms of his contract with Salford. Just like Leeds couldn't stop Harris playing for Bradford. They could sue him for breaching their contract with him.

Looks like Hock will play! Today Leigh Centurions issued a short statement on the situation which reads: “Folllowing recent media speculation surrounding Gareth Hock’s availability for the Ladbrokes Challenge Cup Fifth Round tie against Salford Red Devils on Saturday 18 April 2015, Leigh Centurions and Gareth have sought legal advice and on the basis of that advice consider that Gareth will be available for selection for the match. “The club are looking forward to what promises to be an exciting cup tie for both teams.” www.leighreporter.co.uk/sport/le ... -1-7209494

Looks like Hock will play! Today Leigh Centurions issued a short statement on the situation which reads: “Folllowing recent media speculation surrounding Gareth Hock’s availability for the Ladbrokes Challenge Cup Fifth Round tie against Salford Red Devils on Saturday 18 April 2015, Leigh Centurions and Gareth have sought legal advice and on the basis of that advice consider that Gareth will be available for selection for the match. “The club are looking forward to what promises to be an exciting cup tie for both teams.” www.leighreporter.co.uk/sport/le ... -1-7209494

For Hocks sake lets hope it wasn't Chris Caisley they consulted

Hock won't play. This circus is just to put bums on seats. He'll withdraw at the 11 hour.

Cant see hock playing, would think it would have been part of severance from Salford that he can't play against them until his contract would have ended.

Either way, hope its a good game, whats parking like around there?

Do we know who the ref is for this game yet?

inb4 Joe Cobb

Phil Bentham

The official car park is free, has spaces for around 900 cars, but as there is only 1 way in or out (onto Atherleigh Way) it could take a while to get off it. If I was you, I would drive into the town centre (a579) it goes across the by-pass (fire station on the left, you need to turn right here), that you can join from the east lancs road (a580). If you have travelled this route, then after about 1 mile (shortly after Pennington Park - watch out for a sneaky speed camera on the bend) then look for either, schofield, etherstone, or diamond street (all on the left hand side and within the next 200 yards) there is a large housing estate (no permits required), with roads aslo running accross from etherstone to diamond st. IT IS A 5 MINUTE WALK TO THE GROUND. If you go over a bridge, then you have gone too far, and will be in the town centre. Safe journey.....but hope you don't enjoy the game too much (sorry couldn't resist)