General The Boyd vs Metcalf debate

[VB89]

Ultimate twist of fate....

Tanah ACL this weekend lol.
Magic Round, game on the line with a minute to go and Boyd tanks it, and then does his ACL haha.

Pure nightmare fuel

God this is what i'm actually worried about. We've had so many injuries in the halves over the last couple years.
Imagine having both Metcalf and Boyd and come playoffs we don't have either available :S

This whole situation seems way too premature (from both camps). I would understand at season end if this conversation happened, but Luke has not even been available to play. I trust Boyd to do well but I'm not sure I see him being a Dally M level player either

 

[snake77]

79 pages of Metcalf was all a bit tiring, but full mast for this little addition.

Everythings coming up Wahs if Metcalf can find a home with no to little freight for us 2027 onwards.

I know the usual way it works in the NRL is the club is responsible for the players contract value if they move them on. So, they often pay a portion of the salary if the new club cannot fit them in under that value.

However, this is a unique situation. 2027 is for his new contract.

In a contract, two parties have an obligation to fulfil. Metcalf is leaving before the contract has started. Usually, a player is partway through the contract and has met some of their obligations.

 

[Garry Saloon]

Nothing was reneged on.

Nothing written in stone. But we all know he wanted to be seven and we wanted him as seven.

 

[Garry Saloon]

The immediacy of all of this stinks.

I think it's great. Did we really want the halves conundrum hanging over us all season? The matter is settled and we can focus on our maiden premiership now.

 

[Garry Saloon]

Do I get an apology from those of you who gave me shit when I highlighted how poor Metcalfs body language was pre-match when the cameras showed him next to Tanah Boyd about a month ago?

No.

 

[Garry Saloon]

Question. Would anyone on this sub who is upset at what's happened/at Metcalf actually have picked him ahead of Boyd or Chanel this week? Didn't think so. Good outcome imo

 

[sup42]

LM wouldn’t last a month there

Those fans are feral

Yeah it is interesting that Metcalf has taken this step in the fashion he has.

You can already imagine the fans of other clubs shying away from a Metcalf signing based off their perception of his attitude, the NRL fanverse is already rabid with Galvin entitlement and Luai mercenary vibes.

He has balls, I will give him that, he could have taken the easier "compassionate release" route.

 

[sup42]

Question. Would anyone on this sub who is upset at what's happened/at Metcalf actually have picked him ahead of Boyd or Chanel this week? Didn't think so. Good outcome imo

The poll is at 92% for Boyd, which is previously unheard of around here for any player poll.

I can think of two people that have said in threads they would prefer Metcalf over Boyd. One is dying on a hill somewhere, hope someone has gone to check on him.

 

[Emerald]

Ultimate twist of fate....

Tanah ACL this weekend lol.
Magic Round, game on the line with a minute to go and Boyd tanks it, and then does his ACL haha.

Pure nightmare fuel

Ultimate twist of fate....

Tanah ACL this weekend lol.
Magic Round, game on the line with a minute to go and Boyd tanks it, and then does his ACL haha.

Yeah, funny. Not.

Why focus on the worst case scenario?

I’m sure those guys at Mt Smart thought about all the possibilities, So if they thought the risk of an injury calamity messing everything up was a very important consideration, but they still took decisive action to cut Mets out of it, what does that tell us? They’re not stupid.

 

[defensivebomb]

I know the usual way it works in the NRL is the club is responsible for the players contract value if they move them on. So, they often pay a portion of the salary if the new club cannot fit them in under that value.

However, this is a unique situation. 2027 is for his new contract.

In a contract, two parties have an obligation to fulfil. Metcalf is leaving before the contract has started. Usually, a player is partway through the contract and has met some of their obligations.

If it is the player wanting a release from their contract, they would request that from the club, and all obligations from both parties would fall away.

Assuming this is all driven by Metcalf (which it appears to be), there would be no freight payable by the club. He'd request to be released from his obligations, and the contract would be dissolved.

Obviously different if the club was shopping him around

 

[Inruin]

So what happens if Metcalf goes to market and no clubs come back to him at his current Warriors contract price? I mean, its a fairly big risk for a club to put in $900k+ for an injury prone player that is still relatively unproven at 7. I'm sure there are probably a couple that may be desperate enough. Warriors don't have to and shouldn't be paying any freight whatsoever considering it is the player asking for the release.

 

[juju]

Anasta on 360 was saying LM and agent must have options already lined up - you wouldn't push it this far without them.
Anasta was also hinting at the work arounds of clubs not being able to speak to players under contract. He has that insider perspective being an agent.

I would say it's all but done & I can't see the Warriors paying any freight how this has played out.

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

View: https://youtu.be/x2JjLKWxUuY?si=Mb_W6Uh95iBL6iQ-

Kenty reckons the dogs are the front runners.

Mark my words, he will get injured very quickly, behind that pack.

 

[jonesy101]

NRL 360 said tonight Burton on S1m !!!

I'd forgotten last night when I posted that we'd signed Warbrick. Anderson won't be here to play reserve grade so we've actually got enough coverage with Warbrick, Ali, Anderson and AKP. Also Pompey can reliably slot into the centres.

 

[snake77]

If it is the player wanting a release from their contract, they would request that from the club, and all obligations from both parties would fall away.

Assuming this is all driven by Metcalf (which it appears to be), there would be no freight payable by the club. He'd request to be released from his obligations, and the contract would be dissolved.

Obviously different if the club was shopping him around

I understand that. More keeping the post brief.

When a player requests to leave, it is more likely that the club will not pay any freight. It is not guaranteed.

My point was that this is for a contract term that has not started yet. He extended for 2027 onwards, & we haven't even got there yet.

 

[defensivebomb]

View: https://youtu.be/x2JjLKWxUuY?si=Mb_W6Uh95iBL6iQ-

Kenty reckons the dogs are the front runners.

I'd say this is the perfect opportunity for Gould to restore his reputation for screwing up the Dogs by pushing Galvin into #7

In fact, I would think that is what would get the deal done, regardless of whether it is the right thing for the player and club. It's what is best for Gould. The fact that it would be good for the player / club is an added bonus

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

I'd say this is the perfect opportunity for Gould to restore his reputation for screwing up the Dogs by pushing Galvin into #7

You mean Galvin into 6, right? He already plays 7.

 

[defensivebomb]

Yep, I mean, when Gould put Galvin into 7, it screwed everything up.

By recruiting Metcalf into 7, Galvin goes to 6, and Gould fixes his mistake from a year ago and restores his reputation, and can sail off to the next club to "fix" when the time comes

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

Yep, I mean, when Gould put Galvin into 7, it screwed everything up.

By recruiting Metcalf into 7, Galvin goes to 6, and Gould fixes his mistake from a year ago and restores his reputation, and can sail off to the next club to "fix" when the time comes

Nope. My bad.

I didn't read properly.

Yeah, I agree. I still think Metcalf won't see the season out, unless their pack performs much better than it has been.