Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:49 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

So easy in your black and white world - unfortunately the world is mostly grey.

If we make a mistake about a job what do we do we go and find another one. When you hand your notice in what invariably happens - yes the company suggests its pointless you being somewhere you don't want to be and lets you go.

Thanks for the education old boy.

I wonder if you'd be as forgiving if it were Leeds who were trying to palm him off without recompense because a better option suddenly became available.
I can almost see the meltdown now from you and Alex Jones, sorry William Eve, should that have happened.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:59 pm  

FlexWheeler wrote:

If he doesn't want to come back then let him rot for 2 years playing park [footy] in Wollo[n]gong or wh[er]ever until his contract ends.

Even playing that level would still be a higher standard than playing for Leeds in SL.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:04 pm  

William Eve wrote:

Even playing that level would still be a higher standard than playing for Leeds in SL.

Wow, do you right for TV?

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:06 pm  

Norman Stanley Fletcher wrote:

Surprising thing is, I agree with all of that.

Some fans are finally beginning to wake up!

Not really surprising after last season and the prospects for 2017.

TheSheeple or sheeple81 will no doubt beg to differ as they continue in their quest to sugar-coat as many turds on offer as possible, which in Leeds case will mean offering up plenty.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:09 pm  

Alex Jones wrote:

Some fans are finally beginning to wake up!

Not really surprising after last season and the prospects for 2017.

TheSheeple or sheeple81 will no doubt beg to differ as they continue in their quest to sugar-coat as many turds on offer, which in Leeds case will be plenty.

Please feel free to point to my sugar coating of this situation, last season's performances, the South Stand.....

or are you doing an Alex Jones / Sal Paradise and just making stuff up as you go along?

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:47 pm  

loiner81 wrote:

Thanks for the education old boy.

I wonder if you'd be as forgiving if it were Leeds who were trying to palm him off without recompense because a better option suddenly became available.
I can almost see the meltdown now from you and Alex Jones, sorry William Eve, should that have happened.

Leeds do this all the time - where did Achurch spend a lot of last season once Ferres was signed? If Leeds could have got rid they would just nobody was interested. You really do look at GH and Leeds through rose tinted glasses.

Isn't that the case in most working environments if something better comes along you are soon history - that's life its tough/brutal out there

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:12 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Leeds do this all the time - where did Achurch spend a lot of last season once Ferres was signed? If Leeds could have got rid they would just nobody was interested.

But the whole point is that even though we wanted rid we continued to pay him and demand his commitment to the club, thereby honouring his contract. We didn't just cancel his direct debit and tell him to do one.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:26 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Leeds do this all the time - where did Achurch spend a lot of last season once Ferres was signed? If Leeds could have got rid they would just nobody was interested. You really do look at GH and Leeds through rose tinted glasses.

Isn't that the case in most working environments if something better comes along you are soon history - that's life its tough/brutal out there

I must've missed that, apologies.

I'm assuming you've got a link to ANY news article that confirms Leeds ditched Achurch and didn't pay him last year after we signed Ferres?

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:46 pm  

HRS Rhino wrote:

But the whole point is that even though we wanted rid we continued to pay him and demand his commitment to the club, thereby honouring his contract. We didn't just cancel his direct debit and tell him to do one.

Spot on.we were stuck with Achurch and his inflated wages for at least 2 years longer than the club would have liked. We couldn't just release him it doesn't work like that,because guess what...he had a contract and we had to honour it!

It's a shame the players seem to able to use said contracts as toilet paper these days when it doesn't suit them.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:14 pm  

[youtube][/youtube]

Sal Paradise wrote:

Who said anything about bullying - it was obvious Leeds put pressure on him to sign. It was also obvious he only signed because he had limited options at the time and as soon as a suitable option came along he would be gone. Let's be brutally honest Leeds were desperate from him to sign because they also had zero options in that area and needed to be seen to be doing something about the squad.

I would agree if a player like Watkins was to leave then Leeds should be entitled to a fee after all they have developed him through the academy and invested heavily - what have Leeds invested in Segeyaro a couple of business class flights - seriously?

You seem to be avoiding the point that he has handled this episode in a completely dishonourable and cowardly way. Most people will understand that he would rather play in the NRL and have the bonus of being near his family and friends. This debacle has shown his real character.