Digby Ioane quits after fallout at Reds

[Hansie]

Is this the same Digby that cannot leave family? He was very homesick when in the West, if that's the case - how is going to feel O/S?

[wholetruth]

They should sing the club song to him!

[SNOB]

Is this really about third party payments or is the "Dick Head" effect?

[Piston]

I hope Morohan have signed! As there is an opening at the Reds now he might wanna back out!
Posted via Mobile Device

[Alison]

I hope Morohan have signed! As there is an opening at the Reds now he might wanna back out!
Posted via Mobile Device

Wouldn't be the first time Piston!

Re Digby, my money would be on him heading overseas for the moolah.

Re Mafi - I think supporting his large family is more important to him than Wallaby honours so if the Japan thing isn't a done deal already, my guess is it will be if we (or another franchise) can't match the remuneration offer.

Re McCalman - he may not be all glitz and glamour but I'd far rather he stayed with us than went elsewhere as he's loyal, reliable and works very very hard.

Sorry if I've got all the threads mixed-up!

[.X.]

Where's Muddy when you need him?
Oh yeah, I 'm forgetting that the cone of silence was lowered all along the east coast when the princesses returned from their exile in Perth.

HEY!!!!

[sittingbison]

I just loved the bit about the ARU indicating the ARU top ups were dependent on Digby staying at the Reds. WTF that is the most blatant "match fixing" admission yet.

The ARU top ups have NOTHING to do with what franchise a player is at, it is a measure of the players worth to the Wallabies. Oh wait, sorry my bad....its a backhander to keep the Wallabies at the Reds and the Tahs.

[jono]

I just loved the bit about the ARU indicating the ARU top ups were dependent on Digby staying at the Reds. WTF that is the most blatant "match fixing" admission yet.

The ARU top ups have NOTHING to do with what franchise a player is at, it is a measure of the players worth to the Wallabies. Oh wait, sorry my bad....its a backhander to keep the Wallabies at the Reds and the Tahs.

Thought it was about third party top ups.
Which is interesting because I didn't think the club was allowed to have anything to do with negotiating a players third party top up? I'd love to know the back story here.
Also sounds like his manager has leaked this to try and get him the deal he wants. See of the gamble pays off

That was what i was going for in my post earlier.

[palitu]

from what i read, he has has signed with the Reds for this year, and his contract with the reds states that he has the option to extend with the reds, but if he doesn't, he is not allowed to play for another Australian team.

That has nothing to do with ARU or 3rd parties, purely Digby <-> Reds

[sittingbison]

Under the terms of his contract, Ioane is committed to playing for the Reds next year if he remains in Australia. There is a question mark over whether the agreement is enforceable and Ioane is waiting on the ARU to confirm whether he can negotiate with other Australian Super Rugby teams. But indications are that the ARU believes Ioane has a binding agreement with the Reds.

Yup, its a very ambiguous statement. Lets agree its his contract with the Reds and nothing to do with his ARU contract, I believe it is unenforceable. A restraint of trade. He could go on "gardening leave" if they parted this season, but thats it.

Still shows what an almighty cockup the administration of Rugby is in this country, and the ARU in particular.

On another matter, I know we have had many discussions about supporters attitudes towards players leaving the team, and what type of player we want coming into the team now. Digby left the Force in at best dubious circumstances, and now he is leaving the Reds in dubious circumstances. Although having developed into an international class player, I do not think this is the type of player we need. He has serious commitment issues.

[shasta]

HEY!!!!

Sorry X. Poor choice of words.
Posted via Mobile Device

[MI5_Dog]

from what i read, he has has signed with the Reds for this year, and his contract with the reds states that he has the option to extend with the reds, but if he doesn't, he is not allowed to play for another Australian team.

I'm not a lawyer but wouldn't this be considered a restriction of trade and therefore the contract wouldn't be enforceable?
I would also think that RUPA would have something to say about a contract that stops someone from signing with another Australian franchise.

[jono]

I'm not a lawyer but wouldn't this be considered a restriction of trade and therefore the contract wouldn't be enforceable?
I would also think that RUPA would have something to say about a contract that stops someone from signing with another Australian franchise.

Sounds more and more like a tantrum to me
Posted via Mobile Device

[chibi]

I thought he had family in Melbourne?

[SNOB]

RG practising his negotiating skills again?