|
 |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2020 | Feb 2018 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote southern_rhino="southern_rhino"so he has 2 contracts? what if Leigh pick him, he refuses, as Leigh werent aware, then surely hes up for a fine/disciplinary/dismisal from Leigh for failing to play to his contract with them....
im with HIM here, this could open a can of worms, it would appear that Salford effectively have him on loan to Leigh'"
That would depend on Leighs agreement with Hock but yeah I expect not being available to Leigh would breach his contract with them. |
|
|
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2020 | Feb 2018 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Him="Him"It most definitely is unreasonable for Salford to release Hock (and his registration) but then put conditions on his registration by other clubs.
Salford are most likely in breach of the Operational Rules by placing such a clause in the termination agreement. This isn't like any other job like you or I would have. There are set terms and conditions by which players can be employed and also by which their employment can be terminated.
[iSection C1:Players
The purpose of these rules shall be:
...
(b) To ensure the integrity and fairness of competitions;
(c)To encourage Clubs to develop, train and educate young Players without unreasonably restraining Players from moving freely between Clubs;
(d) To ensure that Players have security of contract and that Clubs have security of squad available to them to ensure that the competitions can take place in an orderly manner.
These regulations are to be interpreted and applied by reference to and in a manner that advances their purpose as set out above and when an issue arises that is not expressly provided for in these Operational Rules the interpretation and application shall be consistent with the purpose of these Rules.
C1:1:7 Players’ agreements may be terminated by Club or Player in accordance with the procedures for termination as set out in the Standard Player’s Agreement from time to time and there shall be such rights of appeal as set out in the Standard Player’s Agreement.
C1:1:8
SUPPLEMENTAL CLAUSES
C1:1:9 Other than clauses from the Supplemental Clause Bank, no additional clauses may be inserted into a Player’s Full-time or Part-time Contract and no additional agreements may be entered into between a Club and a Player (or any Relative or other associated party of a Player or any Related Party of a Club) with the intention of amending the terms of a Full-time or Part-time Contract or the rights of a Player under a Full-time or Part-time Contract (including the salary payable) or which ultimately have the same effect on the Player. [/i
You cannot have clubs releasing a player and then deciding who he plays for. Salford can try to pursue Hock if he plays but I reckon they'd come up against anti-competition and sports laws and any financial benefit they may receive if they happen to win such a case against would be very much offset by the financial implications of breaking the Operational Rules and a fine or worse from the RFL.
Not to mention it appears as if they are about to be sued by Puletua. This kind of reputational damage won't help them get top players.'"
Salford aren't being unreasonable at all. Their alternative was to not release Hock at all and he doesn't play for anyone. Hock made a legally binding agreement to secure a benefit for himself. It is a contract. A fair one. Both parties received their consideration. That hock went on to make further agreements with other parties is irrelevant.
All the operational rules are fine but Hock wasn't transferred to Leigh. He left Salford and then joined Leigh. If Leigh didnt want to sign a player with such restrictions s they shouldn't have signed Hock. If they weren't aware of these conditions then their complaint lies with Hock for misrepresenting his ability to fulfil that contract.
Salford haven't put any such clauses in Hocks playing contract. They have within a compromise agreement. An agreement between a none player and a business.
Regardless of his agreement with Leigh. Hock needs to abide by the terms of his contract with Salford. Just like Leeds couldn't stop Harris playing for Bradford. They could sue him for breaching their contract with him. |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 4241 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Looks like Hock will play!
Today Leigh Centurions issued a short statement on the situation which reads: “Folllowing recent media speculation surrounding Gareth Hock’s availability for the Ladbrokes Challenge Cup Fifth Round tie against Salford Red Devils on Saturday 18 April 2015, Leigh Centurions and Gareth have sought legal advice and on the basis of that advice consider that Gareth will be available for selection for the match.
“The club are looking forward to what promises to be an exciting cup tie for both teams.”
www.leighreporter.co.uk/sport/le ... -1-7209494 |
|
Looks like Hock will play!
Today Leigh Centurions issued a short statement on the situation which reads: “Folllowing recent media speculation surrounding Gareth Hock’s availability for the Ladbrokes Challenge Cup Fifth Round tie against Salford Red Devils on Saturday 18 April 2015, Leigh Centurions and Gareth have sought legal advice and on the basis of that advice consider that Gareth will be available for selection for the match.
“The club are looking forward to what promises to be an exciting cup tie for both teams.”
www.leighreporter.co.uk/sport/le ... -1-7209494 | |
|
|
|
|
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2020 | Feb 2018 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| For Hocks sake lets hope it wasn't Chris Caisley they consulted  |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 18789 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Aug 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Sep 2023 | Mar 2018 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Hock won't play. This circus is just to put bums on seats. He'll withdraw at the 11 hour.
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Administrator | 21298 | St. Helens |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 1999 | 26 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Apr 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
Administrator
|
|
Cant see hock playing, would think it would have been part of severance from Salford that he can't play against them until his contract would have ended.
Either way, hope its a good game, whats parking like around there?
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 5880 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Mar 2025 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Do we know who the ref is for this game yet?
inb4 Joe Cobb
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 2524 | Batley Bulldogs |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Apr 2016 | Mar 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Nothus="Nothus"Do we know who the ref is for this game yet?
inb4 Joe Cobb'"
Phil Bentham |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 8680 | Leigh Centurions |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Apr 2025 | Aug 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Sadfish="Sadfish"Cant see hock playing, would think it would have been part of severance from Salford that he can't play against them until his contract would have ended.
Either way, hope its a good game, whats parking like around there?'"
The official car park is free, has spaces for around 900 cars, but as there is only 1 way in or out (onto Atherleigh Way) it could take a while to get off it. If I was you, I would drive into the town centre (a579) it goes across the by-pass (fire station on the left, you need to turn right here), that you can join from the east lancs road (a580). If you have travelled this route, then after about 1 mile (shortly after Pennington Park - watch out for a sneaky speed camera on the bend) then look for either, schofield, etherstone, or diamond street (all on the left hand side and within the next 200 yards) there is a large housing estate (no permits required), with roads aslo running accross from etherstone to diamond st. IT IS A 5 MINUTE WALK TO THE GROUND. If you go over a bridge, then you have gone too far, and will be in the town centre. Safe journey.....but hope you don't enjoy the game too much (sorry couldn't resist)  |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 9547 | Workington Town |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Apr 2016 | Mar 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
RE Hock:
1. Restriction on playing against Salford = fair
2. Restriction not to discuss the terms of agreement = fair
Clause 1 + Clause 2 = unfair.
Clause 1 is something a new or prospective employer is entitled to know about.
Clause 2 says he can't tell them.
The two clauses put Gareth in a position where either he does not play again or he must break either the agreement with Salford or his contract with his new club.
I've done a lot of representation of people through employment tribunals and this one should be ruled in Gareth's favour if those two clauses do exist in tandem.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 5166 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2017 | Mar 2017 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
If I were Salford I'd say play him, won't make any difference.
|
|
|
|
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2020 | Feb 2018 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Michael_Ward="Michael_Ward"RE Hock:
1. Restriction on playing against Salford = fair
2. Restriction not to discuss the terms of agreement = fair
Clause 1 + Clause 2 = unfair.
Clause 1 is something a new or prospective employer is entitled to know about.
Clause 2 says he can't tell them.
The two clauses put Gareth in a position where either he does not play again or he must break either the agreement with Salford or his contract with his new club.
I've done a lot of representation of people through employment tribunals and this one should be ruled in Gareth's favour if those two clauses do exist in tandem.'"
Hock could have always not signed the settlement agreement with Salford. |
|
|
|
|
|
