You think we need to change our routine? It's been working well for a few years, why the wanderlust? Don't go all Andrew Ridgley on me now. We all know I am the George Michael. Actually, not sure if I want to admit that.

Not the first time I've said this to you Bloodbath but you have nailed me.

Always a pleasure, never a chore.

Well apart from the time we re-inacted 'The' Pulp Fiction scene. I was Butch (of course) you were Wallace.

My jaw has never been the same since.

It is to be hoped the enchantingly memorable, delightful and sensationally exotic Scotty hasn't set a very dangerous precedent for future antipodean chancers looking to wriggle out of lucrative Super League contracts prematurely.

3/10.

Although significantly better than your usual fare.

He does

It should read: score 90 trys in 143 games win 3 GF's, 1 WWC & 1 LLS then please feel free to retire, regards Gary x x x

No we just need some new material.

I'm getting older by the day and I really shouldn't be wasting any more of my remaining days re-hashing the old schtick when we did it so much better at the time.



Yes but that isn't the issue unless a player, any player, wins them single handedly which would be extremely rare in a team sport such as rugby league. I have therefore, as I think we all do, to measure the players as individuals within the team.

I doubt I had anything less than fulsome praise for Donald until he signed a deal for the 2010 season putting Leeds above the 80:20 home grown, overseas trained target Mr Hetherington had stated was the correct ratio for SL clubs including his own. Making use of an unintended loop hole in the system was something for other clubs to do, perhaps those with inferior Academy structures or prone to short-sighted decision making.

I found that situation dissappointing and the criticism is more one of the club management than with any of the players involved.

Tsk Tsk Swiftcorn, G1 has already pronounced on that topic, when he highlighted that very point regarding Eastwood!



Probably just after he opined that Donald had been abysmal in the first half of 2009



And please don't mention lucrative contracts either.....not worth the paper they're written on , according to the Feckwit Massive.....it's the number of tries you've scored whilst hoovering up all that dosh from the aforesaid contracts that is the benchmark! Score lots, and orft you depart, before Contract's end, with rose petals being strewn up the Quantos boarding steps.

Apparently

Now these I do know about and I do know your source has let you down.

I thought you were going to get some new material?

Billy I'm still unable to understand what your problem with all this is?, when someone who has given the service that Donald has to the club then he retires what should we do?

A) Have a thread saying thanks for everything, good luck for the future & goodbye (like most are trying to do on here).

B) Completely ignore it and don't have a thread at all.

C) Have a thread slagging him of because despite what he has achieved at Leeds lets face it he's no Martin Offiah.

The Donald and Eastwood situations are a million miles apart so that's a non starter.

Various press, I'm sure your (real) numbers wont be far off.

I was trying to clarify my own position for the benefit of Soprano's interest but I'll just ignore him in future.



They're not far off in Donald's case, less than 1% but Eastwood's are 13% understated on the first and 50% adrift on the second measure.

OK Let's keep it simple.

Eastwood signs a lucrative contract, which he does not want to fulfill, and cites homesickness as his reason.

Donald signs a luctrative contract, which he does not want to fulfill, and cites family issues as his reason.

A million miles apart?

How much trouble has Donald caused the club and how much trouble has Eastwood caused the club?

Which one had 18 months after signing his contract to consider whether or not he actually wanted to fulfill it, while his future employers expended time and legal costs to try to get him over here?

Relevance?

The impression I had with Eastwood was that he was contracturally obligated to come to Leeds despite having changed his mind on the move after his stint with Canterbury.

I recall a comment he made saying something along the lines of 'I suppose I'll have to go' and while that may well have been tailored to an Australian audience it didn't sound all that promising.

A good representation for the club who has won 3 Super League rings, hub cap and World Club Challenge and scored many tries, who has been offered a chance to change his life down under and help settle down with his family back home

or

A lad who didnt tell the club about a conviction he had, told the aussie press he was coming for the money and then 7 months in cry's his dummy out as hes missing home

Again, relevance to your obligation to fufill a Legal Contract?

What proof do you have Donald had a contract which didnt have a get out clause or the option to withdraw after a certain period of time after signing?

Bluey'll have you. Can't talk about his mate like that.

oh well

Contracts are negotiable.

Had Eastwood manned up and approached Leeds during 2009 while he was still at the Bulldogs, I'm pretty sure the parties could have come to a settlement that would have avoided all the unnecessary whining in the media he's indulged in since.

Much different from the way Donald has handled his position, wouldn't you say?