Digby Ioane quits after fallout at Reds

[GIGS20]

I can really only go on Big Kev's public comments. He was pretty strong in saying that the report was crap in relation to him. That's good enough for me.

If Nathan Sharpe had denied a similar rumour, I'm sure you'd also be saying that was good enough for you. Would that make you an apologist for all things Western Australian?

I never claimed to have a balanced viewpoint, however you regularly talk about providing balance to this website.

I take it that you are relinquishing the moral high ground now?

And, re the Nathan Sharpe comment, nobody would have questioned sharpies commitment to the Force, so even though I would act exactly as you say, it's a moot point.

I contend that, where Queensland contracting protocols are concerned, there's a lot of shady back room bullshit that goes on!

[sittingbison]

My understanding was that clubs were allowed to negotiate the third party within the salary cap.

This is what will stuff the Reds and his restricting contract will be torn up. If the REDS negotiated the third party contract that is the crux of the problem, they are responsible for implementing it. If it is not being paid, Digby has every right to walk on the Reds.

Wheres if the third party contract was independent of the Reds, negotiated by his manager, the Reds would have every right to say "wasn't me nobody saw me do it" and tell Diggers to sort out his own mess.

[TOCC]

This is what will stuff the Reds and his restricting contract will be torn up. If the REDS negotiated the third party contract that is the crux of the problem, they are responsible for implementing it. If it is not being paid, Digby has every right to walk on the Reds.

Wheres if the third party contract was independent of the Reds, negotiated by his manager, the Reds would have every right to say "wasn't me nobody saw me do it" and tell Diggers to sort out his own mess.

Jim Carmichael has said they aren't responsible and have had lawyers examine the contract to confirm this.
Posted via Mobile Device

[TOCC]

and thus lies the problem. How the frak can the ARU allow a situation that its star international player is forced to become ineligible for the Wallabies (by being forced to go overseas) because of a dispute with his club.

Farcical

It's the ARU contract which he won't be extending :/
Posted via Mobile Device

[AndyS]

But only because of a dispute with the club - not an ideal situation for the ARU.

Still can't help wondering whether, if JO'C is seriously looking to move on as well, there isn't a deal to be done with the Rebels that would give everyone a good outcome.

[tic]

Jim Carmichael has said they aren't responsible and have had lawyers examine the contract to confirm this.
Posted via Mobile Device

This is my understanding also, from an inside source. I was told that Digby had problems with a 3rd party sponsor who his agent negotiated with directly. However Digby insists that the Reds should fix it up for him -ie- pay him the shortfall. That is why the Reds are shitty. I understand that Horwill also has issues with this sponsor, but he has manned up and is using his lawyers to sort that situation out through the appropriate chanels.

So let me pose this question - if the Reds release him to another franchise, he will obviously go the highest bidder: if that was the Force, would you be satisfied that he was passionate enough and was going for the right reasons?

I love Digby, but I agree with Carmichael. Some of these blokes, who command huge money, have a sense of entitlement at all cost. Sometimes the hubris needs to be called for what it is.

[tic]

But only because of a dispute with the club - not an ideal situation for the ARU.

Still can't help wondering whether, if JO'C is seriously looking to move on as well, there isn't a deal to be done with the Rebels that would give everyone a good outcome.

Interesting point.

[James]

So let me pose this question - if the Reds release him to another franchise, he will obviously go the highest bidder: if that was the Force, would you be satisfied that he was passionate enough and was going for the right reasons?

I don't think him moving back to the Force is a good idea. Melbourne isn't a good idea either as they have enough problems with players who have hissy fits and write crap on twitter. It looks like the quick easy resolution train has sailed. Maybe it is best for everyone if Digby goes overseas.

The best situation for the Force out of all of this is if Digby goes overseas and it convinces Mafi to stay. Digby hasn't had the form of 2011 IMHO and I think Mafi is quickly catching up on him.

[shasta]

Taking Jim Carmichael's assertion at face value, the 3rd party deals were done according to the correct protocols. That being the case Digby seems to have three choices. Cop it on the chin, walk or do a SBW and try to re-negotiate/pay out his conyracts.
I can't recall any Oz player actually walking out on a contract. Wonder if the IRB has any regulation to cover that scenario.

[The InnFORCEr]

Is this not similar to Gits leaving us even though the "rules" were different back then?
Posted via Mobile Device

[jono]

Or drew
Posted via Mobile Device

[sittingbison]

It's the ARU contract which he won't be extending :/

But only because of a dispute with the club - not an ideal situation for the ARU...

having a Reds contract that says he cannot play for another club if he doesn't accept a separate contract from a completely different entity (ARU) is unenforceable and boloney. What happens if the ARU in its infinite wisdom offered Digby a top up contract of $500 instead of $500 000?

More to the point which is what I raised, the OTHER entity being the ARU are not going to be pleased that QRU will prevent their star player from playing for the Wallabies by forcing him overseas over a dispute with the QRU. Complete and utter BS

[GIGS20]

actually bison, he is contracted to the Ted's next year, and therefore can't play for another club until released. I think Carmichael is saying they won't release him unless he gives up the wallabies contract.

essentially the same situation as signing with a foreign club.

if Rigby was confident enough of his skills it'd be a No brainer giving up the top up doesn't mean you can't play for the wallabies, in fact wallaby availability is a condition of t e c in contract.

call their bluff diggers, go play for Melbourne with all your douche mates.
Posted via Mobile Device

[tic]

^^^ In which case Digby and the Rebels could expect to be on the wrong end of an injunction.

Despite how desperate the Rebels are, the last thing they would want is expensive litigation.

[shasta]

Is this not similar to Gits leaving us even though the "rules" were different back then?
Posted via Mobile Device

IIRC they both actually fulfilled their Force contracts (though the way my old fart memory is going I could be completely wrong) . Giteau pulled lots of media princess stunts to try to get out of it but in the end stayed. Mitchell pretty much copped it sweet, went to the Tahs, got a man's haircut and played some of great Rugby. No problems with that. Too bad he had such rotten luck with injuries.