Would an NRL club ever pay a fee though? How does their salary cap work? You don't hear about the likes of Manly paying top dollar to break a player out of an existing contract.

200k plus Chris Sandow or John Sutton would do nicely.


I stand by my word that it will be a mistake unless we get first refusal upon return to SL.

Is this definite, or have the T&A just taken rumours off here again ?

If you read the article, it seems quite unequivocal. I'd say it reads as if someone has specifically told the T&A that this is a term of his contract. Outside of the club - who may of course be kite-flying to prepare the fans for what is to come - the only two who Craven might speak to who would know the terms af Sam's contract would surely be Sam himself...and of course his rather well-known agent/manager who will also likely be pretty au fait with the internal situation.

But remember, this is loose-cannon Craven we are talking about here, so you really can't assume anything.

If the club let him go for £200,000 with no first refusal, and no other quality player coming this way, they can sit in the stands on their own as I won't be spending my hard earned on another season ticket.

Surely they can see that without a decent term for a return to us in his contract, this would be a rediculous deal, he will probably become the best forward in the world wherever he plays at, he's got that much talent, £200,000 is not enough.

Agreed. I think he's worth way more than that given his age and potential.
How much did we get for Fielden's move to Wigan? I'm sure it was way more than £200k and Burgess is a million miles better than Stu.

Completely different circumstances. This is the NRL we are talking about here, with NO precedent for paying transfer fees so if we got £200k that would be huge news over there. Also, with Fielden and with Wigan we had a club in very serious straits and a then-owner happy to throw megabucks around. And it was not in the middle of an economic disaster.

Good point(s).
I still say he's worth more than £200k tho

Of course he is. To a UK club with 2 years left on his contract, provided they have a rich owner with the dosh to shell out AND the cap space. Big "Ifs" there in the current climate (except for Wire, of course cos they seem to operate in a parallel universe).

Thing is...would you rather have Sam playing for (say) Souths, or Saints? And if Sam wants to go and enjoy the sun, sea and Sheilas in Sydney for some decent dosh (and having been to Sydney and Oz IMO he'd be an absolute idiot not to want to) then its pretty academic WHAT a UK club would come in with, I'd suggest?

It's just been on radio Leeds about a bunch of nrl clubs after him!! It said burgess is contracted up, but!! He has a release clause to play in the nrl??

I refer the honourable gentleman to the extensive discussion on just those points set out above...

Dont forget though, paying a fee for a player in the NRL is a rarety, and its not as if he is going to a rival club who we will competeing against. 200k is a fair amount if we get the clause into his contract stating he has to return to Bradford if he comes back to the Super League.

What contract would that be that we would seek to get a clause into?
=white
And if any sensible Leeds supporter takes this opportunity to point out the breathtaking irony of the situation, who could blame them?

Read up guys... [url=http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=rleague/09/08/06/RUGBYL_Burgess.htmlthis[/url is the latest and apparently from the mouth of the Caisley himself.

Note the emphasis on player exchange as opposed to dosh...

Just hope we get the right players in exchange and don't get fobbed off.

So if he goes at the end of this season, it will probably be a player exchange deal.
Going after 2010 season suggests cash.

Sounds reasonable enough to me.

The registration is key. I generally thought we could only keep his registration if he was moving out of RL altogether. Pryce, Walker etc

The only other scenario (if the above is incorrect) is we could keep his registration for the length of his original contract with us?? ie 2011. I don't think that is right though.

If therefore we cannot keep his registration then we are in the scenario of first option, preferred option etc (between RL clubs) and that basically doesn't work outside of football.

Pretty academic anyway. If he goes to Oz then he will stay there for a couple of contracts at least.

So basically we're going to given 1 or 2 aussie players whose club feel they could do without, hmmm. I'm sure these said players would be over the moon to be told "sorry mate but we want Burge, your'e going to Pommyland and that's that."

How is that going to work? Each Aussie club who wants to bid for Burgess first of all has to go into the dressing room and say - Right who wants to go to GB for 3 years? Take off the names of the players they want to keep and then fax what is left to us to see who we want? And if the said mediocre Aussie player demands too much wages - then what?

Or maybe you get a club that is very strong in one position (not second row, purleeese...) where say the young third-choice sees little prospect of first-grade footie in the foreseeable? And likes the sound of a couple of years in England making a stronger name for himself on decent dosh with a load of sightseeing thrown in? And then do a Hendo?

Or maybe there's another Glenn Morrison/Danny Gartner/Brad Mackay out there who's ready for a new challenge and good for a couple of years at least?

Like you say though, hopefully not another second rower.

Yes, if every team in NRL was a 100% settled unit ,with no position under threat ,and no player having any single reason to leave. Meanwhile back in the real world, EVERY club has players looking at options to improve their lot and that has over the years inlcuded very many, even the Alfie Langers, Johns, Carrolls, Buderuses etc of this world, deciding for whatever reasons that the time has come to draw some pounds sterling.

The idea of a player or players being dragged kicking and screaming from a club onto the boat, to accommodate Burgess, is frankly silly.

The reality is we need do nothing, those players who want to be involved will be knocking on OUR door via their agents. And if there are none we fancy, then Sam goes nowhere till his contract runs out. As I reckon the young man being perfectly honourable would be 100% willing to do.

Yeah - I wasn't trying to suggest that a club could just "coherse" (I think is the correct phrase) a player into moving to Bradford without his agreement.

Obviously there is no point a player exchange with someone coming to the end of their contract - I would think we would have contacted aplayer in that position if we wanted them.

We are therefore looking at players 1-2 yrs into a 3 or 4 yr deal. The said club would have to be careful in how they approached it in case the player felt "unwanted" Langley/Ellis?

Would most players with a further 2-3yrs to go with Roosters/Souths/Manly not be settled, family,partner, house etc.

The club will already have some players they feel are indispensible.

The players we would therefore be offered I think are the older ones who are on a good wage but are not quite hitting the heights of yesteryear - Aussie club would be happy to offer them to get them off the wage bill. Again the settled player on the good wage might be loathe to move.

The other group are youngsters coming through and making their mark who are underpaid (in contrast) having signed a reasonable deal but have developed faster and are worth more now. But I would think the Aussie club would prefer to keep them and offer them a new improved deal in the off season (the player using us to bump up the price)

How are we for quota anyway?

I'd take....

Watmough from Manly, only if the rumours are true that he wants out, and Manly wont let him sign for another NRL club. One of the top 5 players in the world at the minute.

Moimoi from Parramatta, the impact forward we would need.

Chris Sandow from Souths

Braith Anasta or Mitchell Pearce from Sydney Roosters

Anyone of these would do, we wont get two players from a club.

yeah that's the one!


Disagree, no point is us losing a stellar prospect like Burgess for makeweights. And I reckon there are any number of players who would make the switch if the deal was right. By and large you may be right but there are always several exceptions to the by an dlarge rule. For example where there is a change of coach and the new man wants some of his own players in, some gotta go.

It may seem unlikely, but the fact is that even very top players are amenable to being poached, all the time, look at Mason, Sailor, Mat Rogers, Tuquiri, or in our own case people like Hape, Henry Paul, Fielden. There is no logical rule that decrees only older plodders are available, there really isn't.


Dunno. Do we have [iany [/ihome trained players nowadays?