• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Rebels 2023

Adam84

Simon Poidevin (60)
No, but they made him not sign with Melbourne. Rebels might deserve the pettiness but he doesn’t. Bizarre bridge burning that’s becoming typical for the Reds.
I dunno, directly engaging an under contract player from another team without consulting that club is a pretty good way to burn bridges, frankly its pretty outlandish behavior by Rebels management
 

Wallaby Man

Darby Loudon (17)
Did he even have a contract for next year? I’m pretty sure I read Reds were in advanced talks to re-sign him but hadn’t confirmed it. So technically he was free to speak to whoever he wants. Which would indicate he’s simply chosen the Force over Reds and Rebels despite what spin any club wants to put on the situation.
 

dru

John Eales (66)
I dunno, directly engaging an under contract player from another team without consulting that club is a pretty good way to burn bridges, frankly its pretty outlandish behavior by Rebels management

The Reds do seem to have been a prime target for talent raiders and quite a bit of that has been quite painful, even where it has been above board. More than simply understanding the Red position, I suspect I'd have been irritated if there had been no action. My question is, "Don't Rugby Australia have a role here?"
 

Wallaby Man

Darby Loudon (17)
The Reds do seem to have been a prime target for talent raiders and quite a bit of that has been quite painful, even where it has been above board. More than simply understanding the Red position, I suspect I'd have been irritated if there had been no action. My question is, "Don't Rugby Australia have a role here?"
But a role in what? If he was a free agent, right decorum or not, I don’t see where any action could take place as my understanding is he wasn’t officially signed to anyone next year. So technically it was free game.

The sad thing is (as a reds member) they appear to be the common denominator in any transfer issues over the last 3/4years. That’s something that needs to be looked at and why, then again maybe it’s just bad luck.
 

Adam84

Simon Poidevin (60)
But a role in what? If he was a free agent, right decorum or not, I don’t see where any action could take place as my understanding is he wasn’t officially signed to anyone next year. So technically it was free game.
he was signed, hence why Rebels should have approached Reds management rather then player directly. As the Force did.

if he wasn’t signed then it wouldn’t have been an issue.
 

Wallaby Man

Darby Loudon (17)
he was signed, hence why Rebels should have approached Reds management rather then player directly. As the Force did.

if he wasn’t signed then it wouldn’t have been an issue.
Reds released a statement saying he executed a binding agreement recently to stay in 2023, perhaps that’s their version of the circumstances, nothing was ever released publically. But then contradicts this when they say a release was given to the Force because they have salary cap pressures. It just doesn’t add up. They either signed him under these pressures and it’s very poor salary cap management or the agreement wasn’t as binding as they believed it to be and the player was free to walk on the agreement.

They are the only club that persistently has issues with player contracts. Kerevi, Lucas, Hockings, etc. it’s a yearly cycle of player, club and agent conflicts that doesn’t happen as often at any other team.
 

GoMelbRebels

Colin Windon (37)
I don’t get it, Mafi signs with the Rebels, no problem, so I assume he didn’t have any handshake agreement with Reds to sign on for 2023? OK, I am a Rebels supporter and as such will side with them, however, I see this more as a misunderstanding of Stewart’s contract / re-signing status than the Rebels not following proper process. They have signed many players from other clubs, so you can assume they know what has to be done. I just feel the Reds got the shits (probably rightfully) with raids on their players.
 

Adam84

Simon Poidevin (60)
or the agreement wasn’t as binding as they believed it to be and the player was free to walk on the agreement.

Force approached Reds management and negotiated the release given the recent injury to Pasitoa. Rebels didn’t
 

Rebel man

Desmond Connor (43)
I dunno, directly engaging an under contract player from another team without consulting that club is a pretty good way to burn bridges, frankly its pretty outlandish behavior by Rebels management
How so? Why would you talk to the club? It’s not how business is done. You have to sound out the player, see if they are interested in a deal and if you can meet their demands. If you come to an agreement then you talk with the club about a release. Why on earth would you talk to the other club first?
 

Adam84

Simon Poidevin (60)
How so? Why would you talk to the club? It’s not how business is done. You have to sound out the player, see if they are interested in a deal and if you can meet their demands. If you come to an agreement then you talk with the club about a release. Why on earth would you talk to the other club first?
it's pretty common place for professional sporting competitions, that clubs don't approach under-contract players and encourage them to seek release from their existing contracts. Even the NRL has strong rules against it, there are formal channels for it and that's by approaching and negotiating with the management of the other club. Plenty of examples recently with the Storm, Warriors and Broncos all negotiating with other clubs for the release of players.
 

Rebel man

Desmond Connor (43)
it's pretty common place for professional sporting competitions, that clubs don't approach under-contract players and encourage them to seek release from their existing contracts. Even the NRL has strong rules against it, there are formal channels for it and that's by approaching and negotiating with the management of the other club. Plenty of examples recently with the Storm, Warriors and Broncos all negotiating with other clubs for the release of players.
You negotiate with a club when you actually know if the player wants to come to you. Simple you are naive to actually think any of those discussions started out any differently
 

Rebel man

Desmond Connor (43)
not at all, i've maintained the same stance on the issue since Mafi first leaked it, below;
That’s exactly how player movement works. Queensland are well within their rights not to release him. Good luck to him at the Force. The Reds may have seen it as disrespectful but nobody asks the club let’s be real. Why are you asking the club about a player with out talking to him or his manager and knowing if they are receptive? It just doesn’t happen.
 

Adam84

Simon Poidevin (60)
Clubs approaching players and encouraging them to break contract is not how player movement occurs, nor should it be an acceptable practice in Australian Rugby. That's all i will say on this topic.
 
Last edited:

Wilson

Mark Loane (55)
To be clear, rugby Australia has rules against approaching a player and compelling them to break contract. They've been fairly toothless in recent memory but they also haven't been pressed to enforce their rules around contracting.

It certainly looks to me like the rebels have decided to press their luck after getting away with some shenanigans in recent years and the Reds understandably slapped then down.
 
Top