Now dont you go offering sensible reasons why some things aren't the clubs fault. As well as it being the clubs fault that we appear to have suffered an unrecoverable injury to a very well paid back - money we could use to recruit a half back or other good back, I think its clearly Maccas fault the power steering pump had gone on my Focus, damn him.

On the tribunal I suspect we would all try similar actions to protect 18 months worth of good earnings. I hope when he does move on he can recover his fitness and find a place in another club and can continue his career, as he has potential as parts of his try record shows - played 9 scored 6 for us in 2007 and 15 in 25 games for the Broncos in 2006.

You're new, and maybe I over-reacted, it's just that for some months now it seemed for a while that every thread, even on say Patagonian agriculture, was gatecrashed by fools having digs at McNamara, and it grates. To say the least.


Probably about right, but more probably the need to use these funds better elsewhere is paramount.

I do find this strange. I've always believed that if a player is injured the club should honour his contract. Players put their bodies on the line every time they take to the field. If they are injured in the process they shouldnt lose their livelihood.

This may be complicated if the injury that is keeping him out was originally incurred on international duty and I can accept that there may be circumstances where it is right to tear up the contract eg if the player is not genuinely trying to get fit. But as a general principle I think the clubs should play their injured players and then re-claim the money from their insurance. Or am I missing something?

Maybe the insurance payout itsn't forthcoming on this occasion because the injury was sustained playing for NZ? It wouldn't be the first time.

It's a nice sentiment, however it's just not feasable in the modern game. The salary cap as it means clubs have to watch their spending and a player who can't play is just so much dead weight. Sorry if that that seems harsh but that's the way of the world

I did see Tupou, a couple of weeks ago at the gym at Bradford Uni, i know its not full time training but its a start!

I appreciate he may be training but I just don't understand what constitutes as "training." But then the RFL are taking a week to decide what it is.....My thoughts are though that its all well and good saying your training and then doing a few bench presses in the gym but although Yes its training, its not actually training (I know thats a confusing sentance!) For me if your training your out there with the players, doing everything the other members of the Squad are doing. I dont think Tupou is at this stage and I think realistically he needs to be sold to Wakefield to get some revenge on them for selling you Jefferies

They have done, and argue they are doing. The question is whether the contract means what the Bulls argue, or whether it means what Tupou argues. Sounds like a pish-poorly drafted contract if "training" is relevant, but is not defined. On which basis I won't be surprised if we lose the argument under benefit of the doubt.

It sounds like Tupou is undergoing some sort of training regime - like lifting weights in the gym at the Uni. That shouldn't be a surprise - people who undergo surgery and then begin rehabilitation could - in some sense - be said to be 'training' within a week or two after the surgery

But that hardly constitutes training in any real Rugby League sense i.e 'in' training with the squad, doing all the various routines and having actual contact with others.

In any case, I thought the rule was that a contract could be cancelled if a player was unavailable for 26 weeks - whereas Tupou has been unavailable for 38 weeks already (that becomes 39 as of this weekend). It's not as if the Bulls have tried to pull the plug on the exact date, he's had an extra three months to get fit enough to play. I hope that this is taken into consideration in the eventual ruling.

They probably also want to take into consideration that while the sports centre is being rebuilt the gym at the uni is the least well equipped in the western hemisphere. He'll have at least an hour of enforced recovery time between machines.

Can we expect further news today? The RFL were making to be taking a week to consider what constitutes training.

Ah, but what constitutes a week?

The RFL aren't sure so will be taking a week to discuss what a week is and at the end of the week they're going to have a vote. And some of them might abstane

Ah, but what constitutes a vote?