Oh it was bad enough last year, half the RL press were saying we were guaranteed SL and the best thing to happen to RL in decades, the other half were saying we were a bunch of cheats, going to implode and all our players were leaving. No doubt this year will be even worse (it's certainly started out that way), still it's a travesty the way The Championship has been ignored in recent years and they say all publicity is good publicity.

The Rangi, Ridy & Ryan issue is a complicated one. The full back position is open with Gregg out but for me he's one of our best players & once he's back he'll take his position again. Though people have always tipped Brierley moving to Full Back he's never really played there while Pownall started his career there & is the usual replacement when McNally is out. Agree with you Alan that Ridy is the only organiser, he's one of those players you can't really see what he does but we always look a much weaker team when he's not on the pitch doing it. Interesting idea about moving Rangi to hooker, but with Higham being one of the few players to stand out in our disastrous Super 8s campaign he'll find competition for that position just as strong as at half back. For me I think the only option is rotation, rotate them all round and see how they all play alongside each other, any of the pairings should be good enough to beat most Championship teams and hopefully Jukes should have a much better idea of what works best once the business end of the season comes round.

rotation is the obvious answer its a long season and unlike last year we don't want to be going into the play offs with player carrying injuries

For me, rotation is a must. That way we would be ready, should any of the three - heaven forbid - get injured. I wish some of our players had been rotated last season - we may just have been a bit fresher come the Qualifiers, and the likes of Ben Reynolds would have slotted in better when it mattered.

Agree with you about McNally. Although I would like his defence to be consistently stronger, he has proved to be our most potent attacking weapon, time and again.

It could work by having a half on the bench and the rest forwards. When Higham needs a rest Rangi moves to Hooker. That then gives a whole new dimension, and very dynamic aspect to the side for that period, and ensures that your most pivotal players are on the field maximum amount of time, but in different roles giving the opposition a dilemma as to how to defend depending on who is where at the time. Rangi has done it before and it has produced some good results. I, obviously don't know the strengths/weaknesses of the squad, but its an idea that could be used and would still leave the fullback position for a specialist player of that position. Only a thought, don't shoot me!!

From an outsider looking in but also a lawyer, I find the idea of an "unenforceable contract clause" an interesting one, and a novel one. A clause is a clause. That doesn't mean Ryan wants to activate it, of course, but a clause is a clause. I'm not aware in law that an "unenforceable contract clause" exists, as otherwise it would not a be a clause and would not be in a contract, because a contract is an agreement based upon specified stipulations. If Ryan stipulated that the clause be in there (perhaps his agent was worried that Rowley would be poached by a Super League club and wanted Ryan to have a chance to follow him) as a condition of him signing the contract, of course its enforceable.

As for, "he's not allowed to leave, and no one is allowed to talk to him" suggests that the contract is very much enforceable.

Good luck for the season anyway. It will certainly be interesting! See you in the Million Pound Game.

Great call

Unfortunately or fortunately for you we wont be playing in the Million Pound Game this year, have a great season and see you in August/September, if not before!

In the interview Derek said he'd consulted a lawyer and the wording of the clause meant it was unenforceable, without knowing the wording or having any legal knowledge I've no real idea what that actually means in the real world. What he also said though was that the RFL have a bank of approved contract clauses and only the ones included can be used, if a club & player want to add one they have to appeal to the RFL to include it in their list, "Player X can become a free agent if coach Y leaves the club." isn't included. So if they could try to wrangle the legal issues of the clause it's still unenforceable under the RFL rules.

"He's not allowed to leave and no one is allowed to talk to him." to me suggest we don't want anyone making illegal approaches to one of our best players the week the season starts, understandable really.

If DB asked Ryan and he didnt want to leave it would be a non issue and not worth contacting a lawyer about. The statement suggests to me he wants out.

Hmm, I see it more as Derek wanting to clarify that clubs are not able to talk to one of our star players on the verge of a crucial season.

Ryan needs to be fully concentrated on playing for Leigh so Derek needs to snuff out the rumours from the press that he is fair game and anyone can try to come in and take him. Hence talking to a Lawyer to help warn people off.

Spot on. Derek negotiates contracts & transfers if there's a clause in a player's contract left over from before he got involved that he wasn't aware of it's only natural he'd want it clarifying so he knows exactly where he stands.

In legal terms that means "if it came to a legal fight, I think we'll win", which is different to "unenforceable".

It comes down to two things really:
1. Does Ryan want to activate the clause?
2. If he does, does Derek want to fight it, knowing that the player wants to activate it?

My suspicion is that he won't want to activate it, for no other reason than the season is so close, so his choice of team, if there was a choice, would be limited, as opposed to "let's see who comes in for me later in the season".

On the other hand, he shone in a team that shone. His agent might be fearful of the year ahead and worried that he won't. If he can learn to read Rangi, however, and get in the gaps he'll create, he should have a ball this year!

Perhaps its just DB's choice of words, Hock had a clause in his leaving agreement, that Salford said meant he couldn't play for anyone against Salford, the actual wording we are lead to believe said something along the lines of "He couldn't play for Salford City Reds against Salford City Reds" therefore DB said if Rowley wants to pick him he can play for Leigh against Salford, Hock duly played and that was the last we heard of it.

Perhaps the clause in Ryan's contract is written in similar gibberish, and that's why DB is saying that it is also unenforceable.

In the interview, the owner categorically stated that all the legal ramifications were irrelevant as Ryan =#FF0000WANTS TO STAY and is very happy to play for the new coach.

The owner is however rightly pursuing the legal implications of who leaked confidential contract details to the press.

Do we all believe Ryan genuinely wants to stay? I'm not so sure reading interviews over the last 6 months in various publications.

Care to post a link to any interview where Ryan give any indication he's even thinking about leaving? Ryan clearly wants to stay, has said so regularly and knows he would be setting back his career to go anywhere (think a top SL team would send him on DR to League 1/ a lower Championship team, a lower SL team would be a gamble considering that's where Leigh are aspiring to be soon, anywhere else would clearly be a backwards step). Can't believe anyone still gives these monthly rumours that Ryan is leaving any credence at all after so many (every single one) have proved to be utter rubbish.

I'm not sure what else can be said, by Ryan or the club, to convince folk who would rather stir it up than believe what they are told. I believe, like the owner has categorically stated, that Ryan is happy to stay at Leigh.

The owner accepts, like most of the rest of us, that there may be an issue to address, come the end of this season, if we do not achieve promotion to SL. Meanwhile, let's leave Ryan and the club to get on with the business at hand - i.e. playing consistently well enough to ensure there isn't an issue over Ryan's future, come the end of this season!

I think Ryan is a fantastic player a game changer, of course like most Leigh fans i would be sad to see him leave. But to be honest im sick to death of all the speculation which Ryan could put to bed quite easily. No player is bigger than the club!! if he does want to leave lets get as much money as we can for him and wish him all the best.

We're all sick to death of all the speculation which is why it's annoying when Leigh fans say "If he wants to go let him." when Ryan Brierley is leaving rumour number 21,576 comes up. I don't know how many times people can say "Brierley is leaving" and him not or how many times he can say he's enjoying playing at Leigh he's going to be playing at Leigh next year before people get the message [size=150[u=#FF0000Ryan Brierley is NOT leaving Leigh[/u







[/size

Did you post that just so you could use your little head banging wall graphic?? Or is your knicker elastic chaffing? Idiot

It is neither, it is having an opinion and emphasising the point, if you can't accept that then it is you who is the idiot.

Great post caslad75



So nice to see a considered & informed opinion from one of Tigers many RL savvy fans, unfortunately there are a few who pop up on here to spout nonesense & vitriol, glad your not one of them.

FWIW, I also believe that Ryan want's to help take the club to SL & has a clear passion for both playing for Leigh & for the fans of Leigh.

While Ryan is a Salford fan like his Dad & would like to play SL for them one day, currently he would only end up playing for survival with the Reds, unless of course they can turn it around this year.

I don't expect Ryan to go anywhere this year, but as you quite rightly say, should Leigh not achieve SL this season then he would probably reconsider his options.

Well firstly your owner has stated that there is no get out clause in Brierley's contract, so why would he be pursuing the legal implications of a leakage of this information by presumably somebody what has or has not witnessed this contract, that is of course whether you believe there is one, oh and just one other thing how do you know the owner however right or wrong for that matter is pursuing it legally.

Firstly DB hasn't said there isn't a clause he said its unenforceable.

And secondly so far everything DB has said has happened

Hope that helps