robdylan

Sharks to play Alberts, Ludik regardless – updated


Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Lions, Original Content, Sharks, Super 14 on 19 Jan 2010 at 11:43
Tagged with : , ,

Brian van Zyl has gone on record saying that the Sharks will play Lions duo Louis Ludik and Willem Alberts in the upcoming friendly series against the Stormers and the Western Force, notwithstanding the fact that the Lions have yet to release the players.

The two have been the subject of a long-running contractual battle, with plenty of inane statements made in the press by the Lions administration, despite the players not having legally-binding contracts with the Johannesburg union. Both players moved to Durban in the off-season and have been training with the Sharks ever since. More pertinently, it’s the Sharks who are currently paying their salaries.

The Lions have, however, repeatedly refused all reasonable requests to issue release certificates for the pair and the situation is now completely farcical. Van Zyl insists that both the upcoming friendly series and the Super 14 are competition that do not fall under the sole jurisdiction of SARU. In this case, the release certificates, which are a SARU requirement, are not necessary and there is nothing to stop Alberts and Ludik playing for the Sharks in those competitions.

We await the Lions’ counter-argument with baited breath.

Update: An article on Rugby365 now suggests that SARU legal man Christo Ferreira has refused to intervene in the dispute, telling the Sharks and Lions to sort it out between themselves. He, however, points out that van Zyl is not correct in his assumption that the pair can play in the Super 14 (or pre-season friendlies) without SARU clearance.

Looks like this one’s going to arbitration.



99 Comments

  • although in Ludik’s case it’s academic, of course, because to my knowledge he is still injured.

  • Comment 1, posted at 19.01.10 11:50:26 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • ‘The Lions have, however, repeatedly refused all reasonable requests to issue release certificates for the pair and the situation is now completely farcical.’

    Beyond childish if you ask me!! :roll:

  • Comment 2, posted at 19.01.10 11:59:11 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • Bunch of twats! When will the Sharks release their official squad?

  • Comment 3, posted at 19.01.10 12:01:49 by Jarson's (X + V) Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition WinnerCompetition Winner
    JarsonXAssistant coach
     
  • @Jarson’s (X + V) (Comment 3) : mid-March, I reckon

  • Comment 4, posted at 19.01.10 12:15:13 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 1) : Rehabilitation of an injury of the sort Ludik has is an expensive proposition. My understanding is that the Sharks are currently and have been footing the bill for Ludik’s rehab for the past few months. I don’t think Ludik’s situation is academic at all considering the cost and time involved in his rehab.

    Shocking really that two supposedly professional organizations can not come up with an agreement. Also, if the contracts are not valid, then they are not contracted to the Lions so why do they need a release certificate. No contract, no release required. That is like saying Wikus needs a release from the Bulls to return to the Lions. Ridiculous, he is no longer contracted to the Bulls, just like Alberts and Ludik are no longer contracted to the Lions.

  • Comment 5, posted at 19.01.10 12:16:01 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 4) : Hopefully some time before the Super 14 final. :lol:

  • Comment 6, posted at 19.01.10 12:16:59 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 5) : well, I think the issue here is that there has been no definitive legal ruling as to the validity of the contracts. A precedent has been set, sure, but no actual ruling on this particular case. My gut feel is that this will go to arbitration. I think the Sharks need to push for that to happen as soon as possible.

  • Comment 7, posted at 19.01.10 12:22:19 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • Baited breath must smell. :twisted:

  • Comment 8, posted at 19.01.10 12:23:53 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 7) : damn right. no point in waiting until the 12th of feb which is only four weeks away. the coach needs to start preparing his combos now.

  • Comment 9, posted at 19.01.10 12:24:39 by try time Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • well talk about a lot rugby news for one day. things are hotting up.

  • Comment 10, posted at 19.01.10 12:26:27 by try time Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • rob is there any reason why you put the fixture list in that order?

  • Comment 11, posted at 19.01.10 12:28:20 by try time Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • sorry i meant super 14 log. :oops:

  • Comment 12, posted at 19.01.10 12:28:40 by try time Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 7) : The contract with the Lions is an exchange. In exchange for the rights to the players, the Union agrees to pay the players a certain salary. If the Sharks are paying that salary, and the Lions are not paying the salary outlined in the contract, does that not mean the Lions have breached the contract? Since the players clearly have breached their contract by moving and playing in Durban, the Lions have also breached the contract by not paying the agreed salary. Seems if both parties breach a contract that contract is not worth the paper it is written on. My opinion of course.

  • Comment 13, posted at 19.01.10 12:33:58 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @try time (Comment 12) : completely random, I assure you :)

  • Comment 14, posted at 19.01.10 12:34:19 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 13) : well, the Lions didn’t stipulate any remuneration on the contract (allegedly) which in itself invalidates it. But we need to remove the allegedly from that sentence.

  • Comment 15, posted at 19.01.10 12:35:50 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 14) : Interesting, switch the Sharks and Hurricanes on that log, and all of a sudden it doesn’t look random at all. Kiwi teams, Aussie teams and finally SA teams. :lol:

  • Comment 16, posted at 19.01.10 12:38:05 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 16) : dude… are you vinnige_fanie on Keo?

  • Comment 17, posted at 19.01.10 12:42:18 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • Honestly it seems to me that rugby contracts are not worth the paper they are written on. I have never seen so many contracted professionals negotiate new contracts with competitors while still under contract. This does not seem to happen in other sports, certainly not in the North American big four (gridiron, baseball, basketball and ice hockey). Players play out their contracts, and if a team wants a contracted player, they negotiate some sort of a trade with the contract holder. It is every month we hear of a new rugby player trying to get out of a signed contract.

  • Comment 18, posted at 19.01.10 12:42:20 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 17) : :lol: nope, sorry Rob, I have no alter-egos online or elsewhere. I am what I am, nothing to hide here. If I post there, it will be as Dancing Bear. Although posting there is extremely unlikely.

  • Comment 19, posted at 19.01.10 12:43:58 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 17) :

    which thread??

    I’m in the mood for trolling!!! :roll:

  • Comment 20, posted at 19.01.10 12:47:41 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 18) : Agree, why have contracts if nobody honours them , then you guys get upset at the Lions for “being Childish”. The point is a contract is a contract and I will be the first to admit that the Lions stuffed up big time in terms of the morons who contracted their players but somewhere along the line SA Rugby is going to have to enforce contracts.

  • Comment 21, posted at 19.01.10 12:48:09 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 21) : I’m not upset at the Lions, and I agree, a contract should be honoured by both parties, and if one party fails to honour said contract, the other party has the right to prevent them from utilizing their skills for a competitor.

    What I don’t understand is why SARPA does not insist that all players sign a standard contract, and any changes to that contract has to be approved by SARPA. Obviously salaries are different, but the contract does not need to be different for a player on one union compared to another union. Once you have consistency, it will be much easier to enforce the contracts.

  • Comment 22, posted at 19.01.10 12:53:22 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @wpw (Comment 20) : Where has TGHMBM been lately?

  • Comment 23, posted at 19.01.10 12:54:48 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 23) :

    BM??

    Benny McCarthy?? :lol: :mrgreen:

  • Comment 24, posted at 19.01.10 12:58:11 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 17) : I didn’t think it was you, but the guy was going on about the weather near Virginia…

  • Comment 25, posted at 19.01.10 12:59:31 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @wpw (Comment 24) : Ja, that’s it, either him or Brian Mujati! :lol:

  • Comment 26, posted at 19.01.10 13:00:11 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 22) : Dancing bear, it was just a dig at my stormers adversary WPW calling the lions Childish :twisted: I totally agree with you and one wonders why both SA rugby as well as the players association have not demanded that this be put in place, makes sense for both parties, and then the Lions wont have to pay all the hanger on, mates of mates lawyers fees!!

  • Comment 27, posted at 19.01.10 13:01:07 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 25) : :lol: you will never hear me talk of the weather “near Virginia”. I live in Maryland, it might border Virginia, but I have enough problems figuring out the weather in Maryland. :lol:

  • Comment 28, posted at 19.01.10 13:01:50 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 27) :

    Bru, what do the Lions achieve by refusing to issue the release certificates??

    The players don’t want to be there so let them go!!! :roll:

  • Comment 29, posted at 19.01.10 13:05:08 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 27) : In the four big sports in North America, the players association negotiates a contract with the owners of all the teams jointly for a period of time. This contract covers minimum salaries, playing conditions, training conditions, responsibilities of the players and the owner/club. A salary contract is then negotiated between the owner/club and player. This is essentially a contract that says the two parties agree to abide to the overall players contract and will pay the player said salary. This may include deferrals, signing bonuses, playing time bonuses, etc.

    If another owner/club would like the services of a player already contracted to another owner/club, they negotiate a trade with that owner/club. Rules of trades are covered in the overall players contract. Players and teams can agree to sign no trade clauses if they wish. In baseball, once a player has played for the same team for 5 years, they have the right to refuse any trade.

  • Comment 30, posted at 19.01.10 13:08:22 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @wpw (Comment 29) : Wes that is exactly my point why have contracts if players just duck when things are not to their liking and as I said before the Lions stuffed up but Luddic and co signed a contract and were paid by the lions so have to honour the contract not just duck when they feel like it!!

  • Comment 31, posted at 19.01.10 13:09:12 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @wpw (Comment 29) : Wes, I agree with you, that the players don’t want to be there, but they players did sign a contract with the Lions, and whether they want to be there or not, should honour the contract. The fact the Lions contracts have so many holes and issues is a whole other problem. Hence my argument they are not actually contracted to the Lions because the contract is no longer valid. Therefore, no need for a release certificate.

  • Comment 32, posted at 19.01.10 13:10:30 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @wpw (Comment 29) : Boet. I think the Lions are a special case though. If they let all the players go who didn’t want to be there they would have Carlos Spencer left. :lol:

  • Comment 33, posted at 19.01.10 13:10:51 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 30) : In other words a professional sport, where parties honour contracts, we still have a way to go and this could still bite us in the arse and I am talking about Sprinbok rugby, not only the Lions. The last thing we need is a player sitting on the sideline, like Fourie did last year with a dispute. Hence the standard contract.

  • Comment 34, posted at 19.01.10 13:13:25 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 30) : Oh, also, owners/clubs are no allowed to negotiate with contracted players. The players contract states that a few months prior to a contract ending (I believe it is 5 months), the player may start negotiating with other teams as well as his team to either extend his contract or sign a new one.

  • Comment 35, posted at 19.01.10 13:14:02 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 33) : Klempie is big bek now things were like that at the Bulls when the Chips were down, never mind. I will admit you are the best run union in SA. Just not sure about your coach :lol:

  • Comment 36, posted at 19.01.10 13:16:14 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 34) : The thing that always gets me in the North American sports is that after a player signs a contract and ends up playing extremely well, they all want to re-negotiate their contract for more money. However, when a player is either hurt or does not play well, you never hear of the owner/club trying to re-negotiate the contract to pay them less. :lol:

    In baseball, there was an absolute explosion in salaries in the late 80s and early 90s. I remember a player signed a 10 year contract for a million dollars a year in 85 which was a huge amount of money. By 1990, that was a rather small salary for a super star. He so wanted to re-negotiate his contract, but no luck. He chose the safety of a 10 year contract, and as a result lost out on several million dollars. Such is the way of life. :grin:

  • Comment 37, posted at 19.01.10 13:19:15 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 31) : @Dancing Bear (Comment 32) :

    You can say what you want about WP Rugby but at least we managed to get Munster to pay us so that JDV could join them earlier than expected.

    His contract with WP ended AFTER the CC but they wanted him ASAP. I think we pocketed something in the region of 1.2 million rond!!! :cool:

  • Comment 38, posted at 19.01.10 13:19:23 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • @wpw (Comment 38) : WPW, then that was handled professionally by all three parties. Good for WP, Munster and JdV. Munster wanted his service early, and came up with an appropriate fee to terminate the contract early, and both JdV and WP agreed. Now wouldn’t it be nice if every transfer were handled like that?

  • Comment 39, posted at 19.01.10 13:22:32 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 39) : The Sharks and SARU did the same thing negotiating to get Smit out of his French contract early. I am fairly sure that SARU and the Sharks gave the Frienchies a fair chunk of change for that.

  • Comment 40, posted at 19.01.10 13:24:27 by Dancing Bear Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Dancing BearTeam captain
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 36) : Plum’s okay. He just needs to lose the conservative streak.

  • Comment 41, posted at 19.01.10 13:37:23 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @wpw (Comment 38) : Wes I am not arguing with you, the Lion’s union is just as guilty as the players, I have always supported the union, where I live, when I was at Stellenbosch I was a huge WP supporter, and that’s why I have never lived in Pretoria would really burn my arse to support the Bulls :mrgreen: but the point is and as Dancing bear says, as long as all parties act professionally, and that in this case that includes the sharks, who negotiated with players who were still under contract, just because they knew they had flawed contracts, does not alter the fact that they did it, and for that reason I think the Lions are quite within their rights to take as long as they like to release them, childish as it seams!! Obviously the Sharks are going to carry on regardless, but that will not help bring about a solution to players and unions acting dishonorably and one day the shoe maybe on a different foot.

  • Comment 42, posted at 19.01.10 13:38:49 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @klempie (Comment 41) : Klempie I am talking about the Bulls , I reckon your coach is living off the plans Meyer put in place, and fortunately you guys, have taken Meyer back, so Luddike wil be okay.

  • Comment 43, posted at 19.01.10 13:41:24 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 43) :

    bwahahahahaha

    Somebody thinks klempie is a Bulls supporter!!! :lol: :twisted: :mrgreen:

  • Comment 44, posted at 19.01.10 13:45:27 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • @wpw (Comment 44) : My BAD!! why did I think Klempie was a bulls supporter? Must be the sign!! My apologies?? I don’t wish that on anybody

  • Comment 45, posted at 19.01.10 13:49:24 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 45) : The “sign” is me giving the Bulls logo the bird. :roll: Dude how long have you been on this site?? :shock:

  • Comment 46, posted at 19.01.10 13:51:45 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 46) :

    hehehehe :lol: :grin:

  • Comment 47, posted at 19.01.10 13:54:15 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • @wpw (Comment 47) : He clearly has never seen one of my commentary stints when we play the Bulls. :grin:

  • Comment 48, posted at 19.01.10 13:55:04 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 46) : well, going on about your great love for Tshwaneonly serves to confuse people further

  • Comment 49, posted at 19.01.10 13:56:26 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 49) : Dude. Tuks is one of the coolest varsities in the country. You should know that.

  • Comment 50, posted at 19.01.10 13:58:42 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 49) : And I like Pretoria. Tshwane is for the birds.

  • Comment 51, posted at 19.01.10 13:59:11 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 46) : never botherd too look that clsely saw my least favourite emblem and ignored it, by the way I do think they are the best run union. :oops: :oops:

  • Comment 52, posted at 19.01.10 14:01:13 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @klempie (Comment 50) : not sure I would use the term “cool” to describe it. I did have fun there, though

  • Comment 53, posted at 19.01.10 14:01:53 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 52) : That is why I didn’t bat an eye-lid when you said my union is the best run union in the country. Cos the Sharks are! :mrgreen:

  • Comment 54, posted at 19.01.10 14:06:19 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 54) : yes – and we have the trophies to prove it :shock:

  • Comment 55, posted at 19.01.10 14:10:23 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @klempie (Comment 54) : They sure could do with a better recruiter, and better use of their youngsters. Your academy was ne of the best, but the sharks don’t use them too well, what sort of message is sent to a young player when the likes of Luddic is brought in? I am joking just bitter about losing him!!

  • Comment 56, posted at 19.01.10 14:11:05 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 55) : Trophies are won on a bit of luck. The Sharks machine is as oiled as it can be. If you are getting regular playoff appearances and not winning then you cannot complain about the management of the union.

  • Comment 57, posted at 19.01.10 14:14:19 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 57) : yes you can – because the management should be contracting a mental coach to address the obvious deficiencies in the squad

  • Comment 58, posted at 19.01.10 14:22:40 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 58) : Kak. Mental coaches are a joke. The Proteas use one. Does it work for them?

  • Comment 59, posted at 19.01.10 14:29:58 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 59) : Plum, is that you?

  • Comment 60, posted at 19.01.10 14:35:06 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @klempie (Comment 59) : It worked for the boks

  • Comment 61, posted at 19.01.10 14:38:02 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
    WhindyCurrie Cup player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 60) : :lol: Does he not like them either?

  • Comment 62, posted at 19.01.10 14:38:16 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 59) : Imagine how kak they would be if they didn’t use one. :mrgreen:

  • Comment 63, posted at 19.01.10 14:39:35 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • @Whindy (Comment 61) : Did it? Or is it just that they have been a bit luckier than most? e.g. Januarie. Dunedin

  • Comment 64, posted at 19.01.10 14:41:38 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @McLovin (Comment 63) : Here’s a thought. Maybe they would be better! :shock:

  • Comment 65, posted at 19.01.10 14:42:23 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @klempie (Comment 59) : they are just kak, full stop.

  • Comment 66, posted at 19.01.10 14:43:06 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @klempie (Comment 65) : Maybe they’re just unlucky. :razz:

  • Comment 67, posted at 19.01.10 14:43:46 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 66) : They’re the second best side in the world. Let’s have a little perspective.

  • Comment 68, posted at 19.01.10 14:44:16 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @McLovin (Comment 67) : Exactly!

  • Comment 69, posted at 19.01.10 14:45:15 by klempie Reply

    klempieTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 15) : According to my source, the GLRU had already negotiated remuneration for 2010, with Ludik and Alberts.

  • Comment 70, posted at 19.01.10 14:52:09 by boepie Reply

    Under 19 player
     
  • @boepie (Comment 70) : rugby365.com :) Nice source

  • Comment 71, posted at 19.01.10 14:56:15 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Dancing Bear (Comment 13) : The players were the first to breach the contract, by not showing up for work, by which the GLRU have suffered some losses. every contract has a clause, stipulating how there will be dealt with “breach of contract”, in terms of losses and damages suffered by both parties. In Afrikaans it’s called “skadevergoeding”. The Lions have invested lots of money in those two players, and developing them into the players they are today. The GLRU probably feel that the least those two could have done, was to keep to their part of the agreement. I don’t have a problem with players moving around, but there are rules, which must be adhered to, by all parties. Brian van Zyl denied rumours that the Sharks were negotiating with Alberts and Ludik, stating that both are “under contract” with the Lions.

  • Comment 72, posted at 19.01.10 15:03:59 by boepie Reply

    Under 19 player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 71) : Not my source, but maybe he saw it there! :lol:

  • Comment 73, posted at 19.01.10 15:05:12 by boepie Reply

    Under 19 player
     
  • @boepie (Comment 73) : quite possibly.

    They must let this one go to arbitration now and get it over with.

  • Comment 74, posted at 19.01.10 15:08:48 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 74) : I agree. I just hope the arbitrator is someone neutral this time, taking all facts into consideration, and making a fair judgement.

  • Comment 75, posted at 19.01.10 15:11:05 by boepie Reply

    Under 19 player
     
  • @boepie (Comment 75) : I don’t care who the arbitrator is, so long as he finds in favour of the Sharks :) :mrgreen:

  • Comment 76, posted at 19.01.10 15:12:30 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 76) : :lol: :lol: :lol:

  • Comment 77, posted at 19.01.10 15:15:51 by boepie Reply

    Under 19 player
     
  • Rob

    I believe Frikkie Erasmus is acting on behalf of the Sharks’ in this matter. :shock:

    ‘The Sharks management, with lawyer Frikkie Erasmus acting on their behalf, remain adamant that the pair don’t have legal and binding contracts with the GLRU and, having already joined the Durban-based franchise, are allowed to play for them.

    According to Erasmus, and the Sharks, the situation is similar to the one which saw Springbok Jaque Fourie move to the Stormers from the Lions – when Erasmus managed to win an arbitration case against the Lions.’

  • Comment 78, posted at 19.01.10 15:36:29 by wpw Reply
    Administrator
    wpwAssistant coach
     
  • @wpw (Comment 78) : Another Capetonian to the rescue :lol:

  • Comment 79, posted at 19.01.10 15:45:53 by Original Pierre Reply
    Author
    Original PierreSuper Rugby player
     
  • @wpw (Comment 78) : well, he’s acting on behalf of the players and the players want to be with the Sharks. So indirectly, yes.

  • Comment 80, posted at 19.01.10 15:47:18 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • Why don’t the Sharks take this one to arbitration, considering everyone is so sure that the contracts are not binding?

    Apparently, the situation is similar. Not the same, similar. Go to arbitration, or offer a transfer fee.

  • Comment 81, posted at 19.01.10 16:37:41 by Greg Reply

    GregSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Greg (Comment 81) : must say, Greg, I find it a little surprising that van Zyl and/or Strooli haven’t bothered to even pick up the phone and call Reynecke. I think you are spot on in that all the Lions really want out of this deal is some money.

  • Comment 82, posted at 19.01.10 16:55:54 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 82) : Money is not all this is about. If this kind of thing is allowed to just happen, there would be no control over any of the players in SA, which would be the killing blow to rugby in this country.
    Ja, the Lions have invested a lot of money in both those players, as both of them have had long term injuries in the past.
    If the Sharks and Frikkie Erasmus believe those contracts are invalid, they should contact the lions so that this mess can be sorted out, or go to arbitration.

  • Comment 83, posted at 20.01.10 09:56:52 by boepie Reply

    Under 19 player
     
  • @boepie (Comment 83) : I agree with you last sentence 100%. Let’s just go to arbitration and stop all the childish nonsense.

    As for the investment, well, that’s life. I guarantee you we have spent more money on guys like Alex Kock and Warren Whitely who have some through our Academy, not to mention Dusty Noble and Thabo Mamojele as well. All four are currently in your squad…

  • Comment 84, posted at 20.01.10 10:08:43 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 84) :
    Or make an offer, it’s not only about money, but about doing the right thing.
    Yes, there was a loophole in Jaques Fourie’s contract. It was there at the request of the player himself(and agent), regarding future rumuneration, based on the assumption that a players worth would increase with an increased profile(ie regular bok place).
    Once identified as a loophole, by arbitration, all players on the GLRU books, with similar contracts, were given new contracts. These contracts, according to Kevin De Klerk, are “Watertight”. Manie Reyneke has stated that should the Sharks make these players an offer, he reserves the right to make a counter offer, but that he probably won’t do so.
    So, make the offer, buy them out of their contracts, and let them get on with playing rugby. The repurcussions of playing them illegally could be serious, and could involve docked points.

  • Comment 85, posted at 20.01.10 11:57:06 by Greg Reply

    GregSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Greg (Comment 85) : ja, I agree. Look, this whole thing has been done in a very slapgat manner, by both sides. Frikkie Erasmus, yet again, emerges as the bad guy, but van Zyl and Strooli really should know better.

  • Comment 86, posted at 20.01.10 12:08:15 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • In Beeld today: Peter Jordaan reports that Brian van Zyl says that the Sharks will field Willem Alberts in the upcoming tri-series if he is available (read honymoon) only to force Saru to get involved. Christo Buchner reports that Pat Lambie might play flyhalf in the upcoming tri-series and that Plumtree is looking for a longterm flyhalf sollution and no-more stopgaps.

  • Comment 87, posted at 21.01.10 08:13:29 by Jarson's (X + V) Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition WinnerCompetition Winner
    JarsonXAssistant coach
     
  • @Jarson’s (X + V) (Comment 87) : I would like to see Lambie in action at flyhalf :cool: and it seems that Brian van Zyl is not just sitting on his ass.

  • Comment 88, posted at 21.01.10 08:17:38 by Jarson's (X + V) Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition WinnerCompetition Winner
    JarsonXAssistant coach
     
  • @Jarson’s (X + V) (Comment 88) : But shouldn`t Monty get some gametime before the actuall start? Giving Lambie a run in Cape Town is one thing but we have to get Monty ” in the mix” now. I don`t think Lambie will start against the Chiefs. If Monty is fit he must play.

  • Comment 89, posted at 21.01.10 08:44:14 by Original Pierre Reply
    Author
    Original PierreSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Original Pierre (Comment 89) : Absolutely, but it will be good to know if Lambie can play with the big boys, but Monty has to start.

  • Comment 90, posted at 21.01.10 08:49:43 by Jarson's (X + V) Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition WinnerCompetition Winner
    JarsonXAssistant coach
     
  • @Greg (Comment 85) :
    Regarding tyhe new watertight contracts that all thhe players were given after the Jacques Fourie debacle – if Alberts and Ludic were given these then Im sure that they didnt sign them. If they had signed them and they were watertight there is no way that they could have made the move.
    Are the Lions still paying them a monthly salary?

  • Comment 91, posted at 21.01.10 08:50:42 by Salmonoid Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Salmonoid (Comment 91) : apparently the Sharks are paying them

  • Comment 92, posted at 21.01.10 08:56:48 by Jarson's (X + V) Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition WinnerCompetition Winner
    JarsonXAssistant coach
     
  • @Jarson’s (X + V) (Comment 92) :
    So Ive heard, but if the Lions are still depositing their salaries into their accounts it means they still view them as bona fide Lions players, if they have stopped doing this then it could have some implication in the outcome of whatever action(arbitration etc) follows.

  • Comment 93, posted at 21.01.10 09:17:45 by Salmonoid Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Salmonoid (Comment 91) : Doesn’t make a lot of sense does it? The ‘watertight’ came from a report of in interview with Kevin De Klerk, and in it was said that they had resigned the contracts. Yep, apparently the sharks are footing the salary bill.

  • Comment 94, posted at 21.01.10 09:24:36 by Greg Reply

    GregSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Greg (Comment 94) : but de Klerk is changing his story on a regular basis, Greg. Back in November, he admitted to Jan de Koning that their contracts were exactly the same as Fourie’s…

    I would say I’m almost 100% certain that neither player would have signed a new Lions contract last year. Both made up their minds very early in 2009 that they wanted to leave Joburg.

  • Comment 95, posted at 21.01.10 10:13:30 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Greg (Comment 94) :
    Im sure the contracts being given out now are watertight, I seriously doubt that Alberts or Ludik would have signed them, considering the timing of Fouries dramas, his arbitration hearing and these 2′s move to Durban.

    If the Lions were still paying them I think it would make their case that much stronger.

  • Comment 96, posted at 21.01.10 10:17:27 by Salmonoid Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Salmonoid (Comment 96) : not even Manie Reynecke is stupid enough to throw that much good money away :)

    The Lions are angling for a transfer fee and a moral victory here. I say we give them both in the interests of moving forward.

    Or, at least, pay them a fee for Alberts and let Ludik’s case go to arbitration, since he’s still injured anyway.

  • Comment 97, posted at 21.01.10 10:30:17 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 97) :
    That would probably be the best.
    One thing is for sure and that is that SARU, SARPA the unions and all agents must sort their crap out quick quick. They are all starting too look as incompetent as they really are.

  • Comment 98, posted at 21.01.10 10:59:49 by Salmonoid Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Salmonoid (Comment 98) : funny how the truth always comes out :-)

  • Comment 99, posted at 21.01.10 11:02:15 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.