Don't you be letting Phil Clarke off the hook on this one. He is a director and shareholder of the company. I have no idea whether he has any involvement in the day-to-day running of it, but I bet he won't balk at banking his dividends and director salary. His silence on this issue has been remarkable and his is a face I don't want to see on Sky this season.

If he does one of those Twitter things, make every question about Solomona.

Some more interesting comments from Diamond yesterday:

"They openly said we'd made them an offer which was substantially more than what Warrington Wolves had offered them and they rejected that," added Diamond.

It seems he is arguing that because Sale's offer was substantially more than Warrington's, Castleford were compelled to accept it.

"We feel vindicated by what we have done as we signed a player after he resigned and they'd sacked him.

This plays into Castleford's hands. It's an admission that Solomona resigned and wasn't dismissed (though I'm not quite sure how Solomona resigned and was also sacked!). His resignation was a breach of his fixed-term contract, which is exactly what Castleford are claiming.

Sale may have signed Solomona after he left Castleford, but the accusation is that he was induced to breach his contract by Sale and Clarke. It's not about when he [isigned[/i for Sale, but whether he knew he would be employed there before he did so and this was the primary reason for breaching his contract at Castleford. The evidence of him at Sale's training complex and the Sale vehicle on his drive prior to his resignation suggests he did.

"Castleford's claim is 10 times what he was earning. Maybe they should have thought of that and paid him what he is worth one would suggest."

Diamond clearly doesn't understand that a player's transfer value is not the remaining value of his contract.

Solomona was happy to sign a new contract just before the 2016 season, so he clearly did think he was being paid what he was worth. I doubt he was coerced into signing a new deal. In fact he said:
"I'm so happy to have extended my deal to stay here at Cas Tigers for the coming three seasons. I'm surrounded by players and coaches who are helping me to constantly improve my game, and I know I can continue to grow as a player in this environment."
This certainly doesn't sound like a player who doesn't think he is earning what he is worth, one would suggest.

I'm shocked Sale's legal team haven't told Diamond to keep his mouth shut.

However, I'm also wondering if there is some tactical manoeuvring going on here. Diamond says:
"...we signed a player after he resigned and they'd sacked him".
What he doesn't defend is Castleford's claim against Solomona. Are Sale now simply 'looking after number one' and trying to make sure they don't get stung as a club? Are they trying to let Solomona take the bullet? I think they may well be...

Let's not stop at Phil Clarke. Let's get a witch hunt going for the companies secretary, PA, cleaner and the guy that delivers their milk. After all, they've had just as much involvement in this as Phil Clarke has

Regards

King James

And you know that how?

Also, the PA, the company secretary, the cleaner and the milkman are not bosses. As a director and shareholder, Clarke is. It's also called corporate responsibility, and hypocrisy given his status within the media side of the game. He has a direct financial stake in the success of the Solomona deal, which is different to that of an employee.

It worries me that it seems so obviously in Cas's favour.
Sale obviously feel they have a case and I wander whether our eagerness to see Rugby League win the day is clouding the issue.

We don't know what notice periods or clauses are in the contract. We don't know whether the judge in the tribunal will say that Solomona can simply buy his contract out at his wage value.

It hinges on whether the decision is that Sale encouraged him to break his contract. That will be tough to prove. Sale will have a top legal team. I hope Cas do.

Speaking as someone who was sacked after tendering his resignation, all I can say in my situation is, my employer was so incensed on receiving my resignation letter, he actually sent me a dismissal letter.

His reasoning behind this was, he no longer had to pay me the holiday pay I had accrued.

The small claims court thought otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Cas have taken greater guidance than my former employer, & I wasn't on a long term contract, but it can happen.

Phil Clarke needs lose his position on Sky Sports due to conflict of interest.

I dont. But neither do you and the rest of rlfans who are thirsty for his blood and that hasnt stopped you has it?

Regards

King James

Please can you explain the "conflicts of interest" that arise from being a TV commentator and a Director/Shareholder in a limited company

Regards

King James

That's the one thing I agree with you on. Commentating on a game has nothing to do with being a players agent.

His company represents certain players who play in Super League, he can have a material effect on their perceived value by actively highlighting (on the games biggest platform no less) their strengths and influence on the game and underplaying any errors whilst simultaneously doing vice versa to players not represented who his players could replace.

It's really not a big leap.

On the Steve Diamond situation, am I right in my understanding that Denny Solomona is now retired from Rugby League having resigned and been sacked? Why not go the whole hog and kill off the character Denny and have him replaced by his identical twin brother Benny

Indeed. Thats exactly how clubs measure a certain players market value/wage, by Phil Clarkes commentary.

Regards

King James

Indeed. No worse than coaches being on Sky talking about players

I just can't wait for Sky's first game at Cas - should be a tasty atmosphere.

Radio Humberside seemed to think so with regards to Craig Murdoch

Exactly.

Regards

King James

But then did commentary for BBC Five live and Radio Yorkshire. Maybe radio humberside just wanted to get rid which is a strange one as he always came across well on the radio

Regards

King James

Except that coaches don't stand to benefit financially if a player moves to a new club.

On par with measuring two clubs value by comparing their websites.

You can't really gauge the atmosphere by watching it at home though. Get yourself down't lane Tigers Vs Centurions Friday night 10th Feb.

A certain amount of market value does come from how the players perform in front of the cameras and how the players are perceived by the television audience - do you think Sale's £200k offer for Denny Solomona had nothing to do with his performances on Sky, his spectacular leaps in front of camera and the amount of airtime he was given?

If in analysis Clarke chooses to downplay his players errors and sell up the good things they have done (which is perfectly plausible) then he could quite easily be using his position to paint the players he represents in a better light - however glib you choose to be about it it does represent a conflict of interest.

I'm agreeing with you. Sale based their offer to Cas based on Phil Clarkes commentary. I also know for a fact that when St Helens players contracts are up for renewal, Cunningham watches re runs of Phil Clarkes commentary to decide wether or not to renew.

Regards

King James

No I'm agreeing with you. A complete refusal to accept reasonable arguments in order to maintain some ridiculous facade of a persona is definitely a valid debating technique.

If you genuinely don't believe that what amounts to free advertising on the games biggest platform can represent a conflict then you're as stupid as you seem.

I'm being called stupid by someone who believes Phil Clarkes commentary has a bearing on market values of players

Regards

King james

No you're absolutely right, exposure and prominence never has any impact on value. You've won me over with your cogent arguments.