Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:49 pm  

William Eve wrote:

Should be interesting to see how this latest spat involving GH plays out.

GH keeps repeating his mantra that Segeyaro "terminated the contract" by not returning, but Leeds allegedly stopped paying him his salary before he was due to return?

"Allegedly"? Clear cut then?

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:08 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Key word WAS......that WAS before he opened his mouth and said he wouldn't return.

Is that when the club may have told him to return earlier than Jan 3rd, 2017 according to your fertile imagination?

Leeds invited offers from the NRL for Segeyaro on 5th Dec, 2016 when GH placed a £250,000 transfer valuation on him.

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:16 pm  

Clearwing wrote: "Allegedly"? Clear cut then? It is understood Leeds terminated Segeyaro’s contract once he formally alerted them he would not return to England. He was expected back for pre-season training in the new year. Regards, CHRISTIAN NICOLUSSI, Rugby League, The Daily Telegraph December 6, 2016 7:24am Who does like to begin sentences with "It is understood..." Ain't that right, Illy?

Clearwing wrote: "Allegedly"? Clear cut then? It is understood Leeds terminated Segeyaro’s contract once he formally alerted them he would not return to England. He was expected back for pre-season training in the new year. Regards, CHRISTIAN NICOLUSSI, Rugby League, The Daily Telegraph December 6, 2016 7:24am Who does like to begin sentences with "It is understood..." Ain't that right, Illy?

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:20 pm  

William Eve wrote:

Is that when the club may have told him to return earlier than Jan 3rd, 2017 according to your fertile imagination?

Leeds invited offers from the NRL for Segeyaro on 5th Dec, 2016 when GH placed a £250,000 transfer valuation on him.

Yes and that was a couple of weeks after he said he wouldn't return.

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:24 pm  

Jonesy's a Legend wrote:

sounds like chicko's agent sam ayoub is warming up for a "dick measuring contest"

This is Ayoub's argument...

'Segeyaro claims he doesn’t require a release from Leeds, because he technically doesn’t have a contract with the English club for 2017.

The hooker agreed to a two-deal extension with the Rhinos in September, but it’s understood these negotiations were not finalised.

Segeyaro’s management claim Leeds haven’t notified the RFL about Segeyaro’s uncompleted deal and are playing hard ball over parting ways.

“We will go through the appropriate channels to resolve the issue but we are totally confident that James is not contracted to Leeds in 2017,’’ Segeyaro’s agent Sam Ayoub said.'

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:28 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Yes and that was a couple of weeks after he said he wouldn't return.

So, just to confirm the exact window regarding your fertile imagination.

Segeyaro announces on 26 Nov, 2016 that he's not returning to Leeds.
GH announces on 5 Dec, 2016 that Segeyaro is available for transfer for a fee of £250K.

Therefore, the club may have told Segeyaro to return to the club early during that 9 day window above, but he didn't return early, and certainly not by the 5 Dec, 2016, hence the termination of his contract, yes?

We can bin Jan 3rd, 2017 as an irrelevance then?

OK.

If you say so

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:32 pm  

Anyhow, whatever happens, none of this appears clear cut or slam dunk to me.

But then again, I don't profess to be a lawyer on these contractal matters of employment.

An undisclosed fee announcement would be very welcome in terms of moving on

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:42 pm  

William Eve wrote:

We can bin Jan 3rd, 2017 as an irrelevance then?

No we just shouldn't make out that it was some sort of concrete date that wasn't subject to change given the circumstances........not unless you're trying to troll and find fault with Leeds for everything.....oh wait it's you.

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:01 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

No we just shouldn't make out that it was some sort of concrete date that wasn't subject to change given the circumstances........not unless you're trying to troll and find fault with Leeds for everything.....oh wait it's you.

There's nothing concrete about your fertile imagination regarding some other earlier imaginary date Segeyaro may have been told to return by. The only concrete evidence is that he was due to return on Jan 3rd, 2017 and there are umpteen references to that date.

Let's see what happens if the case goes to court or employment tribunal.

A more clear cut case would have involved terminating his contract on Jan 4th, 2017, once it was clear he wasn't returning as he was contracted to do.

Re: Player | James Segeyaro : Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:24 pm  

William Eve wrote:

There's nothing concrete about your fertile imagination regarding some other earlier imaginary date Segeyaro may have been told to return by. The only concrete evidence is that he was due to return on Jan 3rd, 2017 and there are umpteen references to that date.

Let's see what happens if the case goes to court or employment tribunal.

A more clear cut case would have involved terminating his contract on Jan 4th, 2017, once it was clear he wasn't returning as he was contracted to do.

I know there's nothing concrete about him being asked to return early....that's why I said it was a POSSIBILITY, that the mere suggestion bothered you is you problem.

The January 3rd date will have just been one verbally agreed upon anyway, seriously doubt that date was in his contract so the idea Leeds couldn't terminate before then is silly.