The only part of this that remotely interests me anymore is the apparent fact that burgess in definitely coming? Which to me seems the only bit that is unlikely to be true.

IF Clark and Westerman believed they had 'done deals' then they are as naive as you - there is no way a club would categorically confirm with the player it's a 'done deal' without having agreed terms with the selling club.

Burgess signing is interested and would be fantastic and would also fall in line with a thread I started a while ago commenting that I'd been told Leeds had made a 'world class' signing that would rock Super League, but I still can't believe it. The person I got this from is most definitely in a position to have the details and is usually good for giving bits of info and usually a name, but there was no way he was giving an inch on the detail of this one, in his words 'he'd already said too much', so if it is true, and a member of the coaching staff is leaking it, there'll be hell on internally..... Plus, if bookies are taking prices on Burgess signing, that individual could find themselves in hot water ala Mr Mathers....

IF there's any mileage at all in the Burgess rumours, I suspect the boot's probably on the other foot with members of Leeds' staff believing in a (fictional) done deal. Burgess is in a position where he can listen to all manner of offers. Why would he have rushed into signing for us when he's in a position to let a bidding war run its course?

They did agree terms with Warrington, subject to Wire finding a replacement. If you don't think the club helping with accommodation and assuring the player of the deal should be regarded as anything other than done in the players eyes, then I suggest you take fairly untrusting view of the world.

Compare and contrast to Aiton leaving here and the comments of people writing him off and calling him greedy. Funny how the views change when on the other foot.




So it is ok as long as you hear about it, then it could be true? By the way, I think the Burgess situation as arisen out of his disappointing world cup, and nothing more. Had that not happened, I think Burgess would be a union player for the rest of his career.

So Leeds, Clark and Warrington all agreed it was a "done deal" then, subject to Wire finding a replacement. Did Clark not understand what that meant? So what exactly did Leeds do wrong, it must be something since you've called them unprofessional time and again... did they pull out of the deal or did Wire not find a suitable replacement?

And why bring Aiton into it?

This thread is ridiculous

I don't believe for a minute the Leeds club have confirmed 'done deal' no - I believe they may have discussed terms and also even the mechanics/logistics of a move - but all subject to agreeing terms with the selling club, and that's where there are some issues

1 - If Wire pulled out because of not being able to find a replacement, or because they now have a chauffeur (which has only just been agreed, so how that would effect the Clark move doesn't stack up) this isn't the fault of Leeds - so it's not Leeds being unprofessional as you stated...

2 - On the Westerman front, Leeds clearly ne'er agreed terms with Hull, so again, Leeds are not going to state a 'done deal' to the player when they're not aware of or willing to meet the asking price - it's bonkers to think that.... The player may well have provisionally agreed terms (though I doubt that too) for a potential move.... But it's only potential...

Not sure what your Aiton comment means - nothing to do with Leeds telling players 'done deal' and being unprofessional - and I don't remember many people calling him greedy, most accept he's made a fair decision for his family and circumstances....



It's got nothing to do with me hearing about anything... I said I still can't believe the Burgess thing, even though it could add up as I've been told there's a 'world class' signing coming (which coincidentally I was told before the World Cup squad was even announced).... All I was saying was that 'IF' it was true (which would be amazing), there'll be hell on, as I was left under no impression that the 'world class' signing was absolutely not going to be leaked.... So, if Burgess was that signing, and it's got out, someone is being silly leaking it....

But just to reiterate - I highly doubt Burgess will be joining Leeds, and I think you've been led up the garden path on all fronts here..... I hope I'm wrong and your Burgess info is on the money...

But Clark will have known that Warrington hadn't found a replacement for him so why would he consider it a done deal when the key issue to the move going ahead hadn't happened. In fact by your story Warrington changed their minds because they suddenly found someone who could give him a lift.

How is this Leeds' fault for the deal not going through?

People aren't insecure challenging you. Your posts on this have just been full of holes and rightly questioned when you've used your "knowledge" to criticise others for praising Leeds on how they treat players.

Let's also throw in that most, if not all of any conversations Leeds have had will not have been directly with the player. It will have been with their agent, and agents are notorious across all sports for being less than entirely familiar with the truth when putting out stories for public consumption.

So if an agent says something is a "done deal", all that means is that they have agreed personal terms for their client. Doesn't mean the transfer will actually go ahead, as that's not their problem.

This is where I think Andy has hit the nail on the head.
It personal terms have been agreed and either the agent or the player announces a deal has been done then that is a fair presumption to make.
What the agent or the player failed to add is that the clubs need to agree a fee.
Maybe the player thought that had already happened.
Not sure you can say Leeds were un professional in all of this though.
Maybe the player or agent were more so bleating about it before it had been finalised.

I remember this thread. I believe it was around the time Sinfield had announced his switch to union and we were rumoured to have been changing Widdop.

You still confident we've signed (done deal) a world class player who'll light up super league? (Burgess or not)

That's right - and I quoted on that thread that I'd have been underwhelmed with Widdop based on how the 'world class' was emphasised - there was talk of it being someone who would usually be classed as 'marquee' but that Leeds had enough cap space available to do the signing without using the marquee slot... Burgess I suppose would fit the bill as 'world class'...

I'm still confident yes (though it remains to be seen as to whether his and my interpretation of 'world class' are the same), the person isn't the sort to stitch me up, and it wasn't even a conversation about future signings, it came out as part of a different conversation around how the exchange rate has impacted how much UK clubs are paying for overseas players currently, compared with a few years ago and what implications that has on the salary cap and the fact that has stayed static... Hence some previous comments I've made on some of our overseas signings earnings.

I hope you're right! To light up super league is a big call, look forward to seeing this unfold.

Me too... The flip side is that I could well have been sold a dud (though I doubt it) and I'd most definitely be raising the 'what happened to the world class signing you mentioned' question next time I'm doing business with this individual....

Ok I am not doubting your word that certain players have made comments directly to you. But this doesn't mean their version of events is correct. Terms being offered either directly to the player or to his agent could include accommodation etc. But terms on offer are not a done deal or even any sort of a deal but just the first part of a negotiation which like any job offer would have to be confirmed in writing ( ie a contract) and would need an agreement with his present club if were still under contract. Now even the thickest player should understand that until he puts his cross at the bottom of the contract nothing is certain.

Others have posted about a possible signing of Clark being subject to Warrington finding a suitable replacement which is believable. At the same time it was common knowledge that Leeds were scouring the NRL for a hooker and we have been linked with almost any reasonable 9 since Aiton's move to France was announced so Clark must have known that too.

The same goes for the Westerman - he must have known any deal was subject to the clubs agreeing terms.