It's a bit football-esque but by holding out and selling a player for a large sum as opposed to receiving so called compensation. It could go either two ways, it would put off union clubs or league clubs would make shed loads of money, which I hope would raise the value of our game and thus an increase in the salary cap alongside other benefits.

It is probably wishful thinking by myself but it's a thought nonetheless.

Which Tuilagi? There are 7 brothers in all and apparently all play Rugby.

if you reveal who tells you then they tell you naff all in the future but from the same source Sam has no intention of leaving for the time being at least

This thread raises some interesting points that I hadn't thought about before re players contracts. To me, Wigan have a contract with tomkins, if he decides not to see out that contract then Wigan would have a case against him, and not against any future employer. An ru club may decide to pay compensation to ease the process, but I don't see any other obligation on them. For instance, Mundine walked away from rugby to be a boxer, I don't think st georges could have made a claim for compensation from his boxing manager? Similarly, if a player walks out and becomes a builder, the club couldn't claim compensation from the new employer, but could sue the player for breach of contract, probably unsuccessfully. RU may be a similar sport to ours, but legally would probably be treated no differently to bob the builder.

Rumour going round that Nathan Hindmarsh is coming in to replace the Hoff.
Would have to pay him megabucks if its true

Well theoretically Wigan could try for an injunction to stop him playing another sport because that would mean he was not making himself available to fulfil his contract with Wigan. That is why the RU club would pay compensation. To stop Wigan doing that as he would not be much use to them if he could not play. While some would argue that in practical terms Wigan would not do this if he just walked out and started playing RU Wigan would be mad not to. However while an RU side might not have an obligation to pay compensation they know it is equally impractical to just start playing him.

That'd be awesome. Won't happy IMO though...

And this is where we start getting into a very grey area. If a player walks out on a club and becomes a bin man, would a court grant an injunction to stop him working? And in the eyes of a court, is a bin man any different to a rugby union player. I think you are right in that an ru club are likely to pay a fee to grease the wheels of the process, but of a bloody minded player or club challenged this, I think we could easily end up with another bosman situation, in which case contracts really would be worthless

A player wanting to leave a club to be a bin man would be in effect retiring from the game and from sport. A player wanting to leave a club to go an play RU would not be retiring from sport and the courts are not completely stupid. They would easily see the difference and rule accordingly in each case.

As to a new Bosman ruling no RU club would be daft enough to force the issue to get Joel to such and extent that we end up with more changes to the law governing players contracts that [iwould[/i allow him to walk away for free. If they did that any new change on the law would apply equally to their players as well. So any of their players who fancied going to play in France or for another English club could just walk out of the door in exactly the same way.

So at the end of the day despite the conventional wisdom that contracts are not enforceable I think they actually are because if RU forced the issue in such as way as making Joel's contract with Wigan worthless then that would make all their players contracts worthless as well and they won't want that.

It then boils down to Wigan deciding if they want to let Joel leave or not with all the usual discussions about keeping a player who wants away etc.

Given the situation it's quite feasible for Wigan to sue both Tomkins and the RU club. Tomkins for breach of contract and the RU club for being complicit in breaking that contract. It won't happen of course because some kind of compensation will be agreed between the clubs and there's no way Saracens would take a player still under contract at another club without that club's agreement.

www.wigantoday.net/sport/wigan-w ... _1_3882105

www.wigantoday.net/sport/wigan-w ... _1_3882105

If we didnt bother signing lauaki we could easily give joel alot better contract and we have lost Hoffman, coley etc wages if joel is leaving for money obviously wigan dont think hes worth anymore money than hes on. The £400,000 a year contract is Boll*cks its more like £150,000. Surley wigan could give him £120,000 and if he wont say for that then hes crazy after watching the Rugby union world cup players like joel what like to run with ball and score tries is not what there all about. Even All Blacks and Wallabies was about kicking and scruming. Also i think give Ashton another 12 month and he wont be in England Squad from what i have heard. At least in RL he knows he can play and enjoy the game and he will get a decent wage till hes about 33 in union if he gets a 3 year deal and it goes wrong when he wants to come back RL he will get less than what hes on now and if they have ruined him he will be retired for 30

I have a great deal of respect for IL and feel enormous gratitude for what he's done for the club.... but when he speaks as a club owner it's often very hard to agree with him.

He's wrong on the salary cap and frankly this quote from that article is laughable "They [RU clubs] are in a mess financially and we are stronger than that.” Did he really say that?

RU clubs have much higher incomes than RL clubs. Even if every RU premiership club went into admin because their investors pulled out most would come out of admin in better shape than any SL club due to the higher TV money, higher sponsorship revenue and higher matchday revenue (even the small clubs make a mint as they charge far more for tickets than RL clubs). IL needs to face up to the reality of the situation I'm afraid.

Lenegan is obviously basing his comments on both the revenue and cost base, you statement above completely ignores the costs in RU and is based solely on revenue. I think I'll go with the successful self-made multi-millionaire on this one.