Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:24 pm  

William Eve wrote:

I think he was an essential temporary signing last season in order to stave off the threat of relegation for 23 rounds in 2017.

I agree that beyond that temporary shift of his last season, it made no sense whatsoever to try and extend his stay at Leeds beyond 2016. He never wanted to return. Most fans sensed that, and I'd be surprised if club management didn't also share the same view.

Poor management all round IMO and lots of faux outrage on display after the inevitable announcement that Segeyaro wasn't returning to the club.

Yes. I did mean the extended 2 year deal rather than the guest appearance at the end of the season, which I agree was much needed.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:30 pm  

Old Feller wrote:

The massive difference between the Sandow & Segayaro positions is that Warrington clearly wanted rid whereas Leeds did not.
Ergo Warrington did not mind him walking away from his contract since that would save them having to pay off him off.

Funny how William has only brought up Warrington/Sandow and not mentioned Cas/Solomona.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:36 pm  

William Eve wrote:

it made no sense whatsoever to try and extend his stay at Leeds beyond 2016. He never wanted to return. Most fans sensed that

We may not have been his first choice, but the responsibility is his - he signed a contract saying he WOULD return. However much you want to make it the clubs/McD's/GH's fault the people who are culpable are the player and his agent.

As with the rest of us, if you make a mistake you can have our sympathy (depending on how you conduct yourself) but you have to live with the consequences. It's a fairly basic life lesson.

I haven't been on this forum too long, so for my benefit are you able to direct me to a post where you've said anything supportive or positive about the club?

[Sits back, awaiting Sheeple-related reply.]

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:43 pm  

In GH's position if he decided at the end of Segeyaro's stay to NOT extend the deal because of concerns over him staying AND THEN Segeyaro returns to Aus, Barba doesn't get in trouble & Cronulla didn't have the space to sign him and Segeyaro remains a free agent by the time the season kicks off then the exact same posters who are criticsing GH for signing him would be ripping him for letting him go.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:52 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

In GH's position if he decided at the end of Segeyaro's stay to NOT extend the deal because of concerns over him staying AND THEN Segeyaro returns to Aus, Barba doesn't get in trouble & Cronulla didn't have the space to sign him and Segeyaro remains a free agent by the time the season kicks off then the exact same posters who are criticsing GH for signing him would be ripping him for letting him go.

^This^. Some people will only ever see the downsides.

[Ex-Swarcliffe Rhino]

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:06 pm  

That's why it's so easy to troll when EVERYTHING the club does is bad.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:30 pm  

HRS Rhino wrote:

^This^. Some people will only ever see the downsides.

The thing with this "inevitable" that people keep saying is this.....

Firstly, how many of the 16 NRL teams would actually want him? Most are happily sorted in the hooking position and he obviously wasn't going to return to Penrith. Realistically probably only a couple of teams were genuinely interested in him pre taking up the Leeds option.

Of those few teams presumably they didn't have the squad or cap space to fit him in. The only way that changes is if they have to release somebody in the off season. Not only did that happen but it just so happened to be at the club that was arguably the one most interested in him previously and furthermore the player they had to release is able to come back by Round 12 so they don't even have to go out and find a replacement for that particular position.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:59 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

The thing with this "inevitable" that people keep saying is this.....

You hadn't seen anything that said he won't be a Leeds player next season so you wouldn't be spending any time time fretting over something that's not happening?

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:10 pm  

Ex-Swarcliffe Rhino wrote:

That's why it's so easy to troll when EVERYTHING the club does is bad.

Not everyone is trolling.

For others, this was hardly a straightforward story going process. Player has return to NRL option up until absolute last minute before "committing" to Leeds for next two seasons. I've hired a fair few people over the years and one of the key criteria is "will this person follow through and actually turn up for work".
Personally I would have had no problems if we had said, no to signing him based on a belief he wouldn't commit. The problem is the club can't help but bulls**t and spin instinctively now. Pandering to a few who, you rightly say, freak out if everything isn't perfect has cost the club dearly in credibility.

Re: James Segeyaro : Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:55 pm  

DHM wrote: The problem is the club can't help but bulls**t and spin instinctively now. Pandering to a few who, you rightly say, freak out if everything isn't perfect has cost the club dearly in credibility. I think you're placing the cart before the horse there. Bulls**t and spin seems to me to be an essential part of the armoury of a control freak. It has been embroidered into the fabric of the club since 1996 since the arrival of you-know-who. An essential element of control freakery is to control the news and control opinion. The CEO has exercised his control more often than not through a combination of secrecy and spin. He likes to make announcements via nodding-dog local RL journalists which takes the fans by surprise. If any aspects of secrecy and keeping the fans in the dark is compromised by rumour, the CEO will have no qualms about entering into post-truth gyrating denial mode. This is a tragedy because other sports actively encourage rumour, gossip and transfer speculation. It fills column inches in the media and time slots on TV and generates interest beyond the already committed fans. Is it any wonder RL in this country has little to no media profile and incapable of generating any interest outside of it's own mainly small towns and villages with people like the aforementioned in charge of clubs?

DHM wrote: The problem is the club can't help but bulls**t and spin instinctively now. Pandering to a few who, you rightly say, freak out if everything isn't perfect has cost the club dearly in credibility. I think you're placing the cart before the horse there. Bulls**t and spin seems to me to be an essential part of the armoury of a control freak. It has been embroidered into the fabric of the club since 1996 since the arrival of you-know-who. An essential element of control freakery is to control the news and control opinion. The CEO has exercised his control more often than not through a combination of secrecy and spin. He likes to make announcements via nodding-dog local RL journalists which takes the fans by surprise. If any aspects of secrecy and keeping the fans in the dark is compromised by rumour, the CEO will have no qualms about entering into post-truth gyrating denial mode. This is a tragedy because other sports actively encourage rumour, gossip and transfer speculation. It fills column inches in the media and time slots on TV and generates interest beyond the already committed fans. Is it any wonder RL in this country has little to no media profile and incapable of generating any interest outside of it's own mainly small towns and villages with people like the aforementioned in charge of clubs?