I would ask for £500k. Young player, international with a four year contract. Make them pay otherwise they'll think they can get all our players on the cheap.
Didn't Wigan get £750k for Tuigamala. If that's the case I'm upping the half million to threequarters of a million.

If a free-spending club like Toulon paid only £300K for Sonny Bill Williams (who was also a young international into a five year deal) then we have no chance of getting £750K for Joel Tomkins who isn't fit to lace SBW's boots in terms of ability.

w

Let him rot in the U21s?
Don't be stupid
We should be doing all we can to get him to stay, and if he does we should make the most of him (AT SECOND ROW)

"Get rid and get the kids in!"

Bottom line is if he wants to go he'll go with or without Wigans agreement. If there's no agreement on compensation then Wigan will have to sue either Joel or Saracens and that just means the solicitors get rich. reckon we need to draw a line under this and get on with next seasons preparation.

We don't hold all the cards, if Joel simply left Wigan and started playing for Saracens then the following would happen:

1. The RFU would not respect his RL registration;

2. Saracens and Joel would be liable in damages to Wigan for losses suffered by Wigan;

3. Those losses would be assessed at the value that would have been received by Wigan less the amount they would have paid him and/or the cost of finding a suitable replacement. In a salary capped sport like RL with its very modest wages Wigan would struggle to argue they had suffered a big net loss - by definition players just aren't a valuable commodity. (I'm not sure what people mean when they talk about the "value" of his contract, £320k is what Wigan would be paying him over the remaining 4 years, if he leaves then they obviously won't pay him that amount).

4. Wigan would be unlikely to get an injunction restraining Joel from playing for Saracens.

In Wigan's favour is that Saracens will not want this to go to court, they will want a clean exit and they will be prepared to pay for it, but Wigan's hand in the negotiations isn't as strong as many people think. I'd be amazed if we got £300k for him, even from a cash rich RU side like Sarries.

Good post Deano.

Not too sure how things are really. Sarries will want to minimise the money paid to Wigan, first for their own finances point of view, second in that Joel might bomb it in Union and Sarries might want to unload him pretty quickly on those kind of wages if he's in their reserves.
If they have paid a fortune then they will look foolish. If Joel walks out, Wigan will hold his registration so going to another RL club is out of the question. It hasn't worked out for Thornley and Joel knows it.

From the other point of view Wigan know Union in England can't produce quality backs. Foden is good, Ashton from RL as is Hape, Tuilagai is from Samoa and their only England Union back was Tindall which says it all. If Tindall hadn't gone Ricky Flutey would have. That would have meant three of Englands four 3/4 were Kiwis/Samoans. The Union young player of the year as you know is George Ford. Another one not produced by Union in England.

I do think IL's hand is strong. Union want to win the Union WC in 2015 and they know they need quality backs which at present they haven't got and can't produce themselves. Joel might be the first of a few to be approached but it could depend on how he and Eastmond go in their game.
If they both succeed then Union will be back big time. If they both disappear then that could put paid to raids for quite a few years.

I hope IL drives a hard bargain. Nothing less than £400k bearing in mind this is all about the money Union have that League hasn't!

No so.

The fact Sarries won't want to go to court makes Wigan's position [ivery[/i strong. They won't want to go to court not because they might lose and so would have to pay damages but because it would set a precedent for player contracts for any player in any sport including RU. It would in effect be like a new Bosmon ruling that said players can walk out on a contract at any time if compensation is paid regardless of the wishes of the club that holds their contract.

That is not in Sarries interests any more than it is Wigan's. Sarries do not want to be faced with French RU going after their players once they could see based on this case that it would be cheap to do so for example.

That doesn't mean they won't be daft enough to do it and not realise the implications but if it did go to court and went this way it [iwould[/i be setting a new precedent regarding sporting contracts. I do not think a judge would necessarily disregard the fact these are sporting contracts as opposed to normal employment contracts because of the implications I mention above. He could well rule in Wigan's favour or it would, as I said, set a new precedent.

So I think to suggest it is a forgone conclusion that Wigan will have to keel over for a relatively small fee because the courts do not offer a valid alternative is not correct.

If Joel had a few enemies around the town and the club wanted shut of him because his personal life was affecting team morale, then I'm pretty sure either him or his agent would be negotiating a pay-off based on the length of his contract.

For me, as soon as someone wants to pay Wigan the remainder of his contract then I'd let the lad leave. If he wants to leave that badly, then maybe he should buy his own contract out. If the figures quoted are correct, he'd make that back by the end of his 1st year.

Not sure I follow what you're saying about French RU - would the French RFU not respect an English RU club's registration?

I'm sure a judge would rule in Wigan's favour, by the way.

But if I were Sarries I would offer say £200k to settle Wigan's claim, if Wigan refused the offer and took the case all the way to court and were not awarded more than £200k by the court then Wigan would normally be liable for Sarries' costs (in addition to having to pay their own) incurred after the date of the offer.

That's why Wigan aren't in a strong position. The player just isn't worth much, you couldn't argue otherwise in court given the (relatively) small amounts British RL players like Joel are paid. If IL fights this he could end up with a legal bill bigger than the compensation for Joel leaving.

This whole situation is getting tiresome. The club should release an official statement either confirming or denying the talks. Everyone seem to know its true anyway through word of mouth but it would be nice to hear from the club on the matter.

We need an announcement that an announcement will soon be announced.

The question running around in my head is why sign a 5 year deal, knowing that if a bigger offer came in ie. RU or NRL for that matter, that you would want to leave?

Is there something going on behind the scenes at Wigan making the players feel un-easy or unhappy?

Maybe I'm just thinking too far outside the box but IMHO something just isn't right about him signing a 5year deal and then not long down the line wanting to leave.

I wouldnt read that much into it mate, Money talks. Also given the fact that since he signed that new deal hes now won everything worth winning in the English game and feels like he needed a new challenge?

Hopefully as someone has posted his friends and family have had words with him and managed to talk him out of it though

I don't know, for me it seem's dodgy, the 5 year contract signing was announced on 04/02/2011 and we're now 25/10/2011 so in just under 9months somethings changed from what Joel said;


I agree money talks but from that, to me it seems like he's implying that money doesn't matter, I want to play here.

It's the same story with Sam Tomkins;

Changed suddenly to;


Now that's a far cry from "I can't see myself playing anywhere else."

Its easy to say that money doesnt matter when you're already on 80k a year and not being offered anymore, but when they are throwing the figures rumoured at him everything goes out the window.

Strange one this as was full steam ahead a few weeks ago yet has all gone quiet so could be anything for you guys.

A) Pure rumour and he's staying.
B) You won't let him go until star replacement is announced.
C) Simply still hagling a fee with Saries (player may not be forcing the issue).
D) Everyone's on holls and will be sort with when get's backed



Personally I hope it's A as he is a cracking player with huge potential and I don't want to see him leave our sport (not that I'd in anyway blame Wigan if he did leave btw).

I've found a problem with this. It's probably just a rumour. Will we get compensation then?

Wigans position is very poor.

Let's assume JT want's to go and Sarries want to pay £100k. Wigan want £300k.

What can Wigan do? Refuse to sell to Sarries, (even assuming that they are allowed to). JT effectively refuses to play (wasting both money and CC space).

I fail to see how Wigans hand is strong in this one.

Wigan Observer tonight reckon the fee is £250-000 and will be sorted in the next few days, well that should get us a decent centre if they aren't going to play Josh there.

Well if Sarries don't pay up, why should Wigan release him? Thats like you wanting to sell your house for arguments sake, £100,000. But someone only bidding £75,000 for it, are you really going to take less then the valuation? No. Until you get the right offer, why should you accept? Exact same with Wigan and Joel. This is all pure speculation mind you, anything could be going on with it now.

If he wanted to leave he shouldn't of signed a 5year deal. Simples.

Not selling your house wouldn't have a detrimental effect on your livelihood though. You would simply ask for a price and if it wasn't forthcoming then you'd stay with the status quo.

The problem Wigan have is that if we refuse Joel a transfer because we haven't got what we feel is value for money then he may refuse to play or play poorly. That has a detrimental effect on results, performances and team morale overall.

£250,000 is probably a reasonable amount considering the arguments about the strength of our position in these negotiations.

You don't get this do you?

That analogy simply doesn't work.

Ok let me put it another way, using the example I gave.

Option 1 - Wigan take £100k, benefit from not paying JT's salary, benefit from not having JT's salary count on the Communist Cap.

Option 2 - Wigan get no transfer fee, have to pay JT's salary even though he doesn't play and have it counted on the Communist Cap.

Now what's your point again?

If he doesn't play then he's not fulfilling his side of the contract and Wigan will sue him.

If Joel has sounded out a move to Union I would let him go, no point trying to talk him out of it otherwise he might regret not going in the future. I'd let him figure it out for himself and when he is playing for Bedford on loan in the middle of winter he will want to come back, he will come back unfit, unskilled, overweight and a mere shadow of the player he once was and will always regret going, he will leave Wigan to go to someone like Salford or Widnes and spend the rest of his career jumping from club to club.

I wouldn't blame any player anymore for going for the big money and more publicity I really wouldn't but respect the Wigan name/brand/club/staff/tem mates and fans and do it before pre-season so we can replace the player and get ready for the new season without rocking the boat ala Ashton and Eastmond.

If he's going then go asap, he's a good player but I won't lose any sleep over him going.

If he stays then well done lad, we're right behind you.