Well done Cas.

A small victory, at least its well over £200K coming into a League club & lost to union.

Despite all the chest beating from their club, cas bottled it.

Regards

King James

I wish I could bottle it all the way to the bank.

There is some garbage being posted on here.

This has not set a legal precedent. It was settled by agreement and the claim against the Defendants is stayed. Nobody has won/lost.

Cas haven't bottled anything. They have clearly assessed the risks of being successful in a trial and did not believe they would receive a higher amount given the litigation risk.

I am not sure on the specifics, but say if Sale's legal team put forward the offer of settlement, if Cas failed to recieve a judgment as advantageous or more as the offer of settlement they would be penalised in costs as they should have accepted the offer of settlement.

Personally, I think Cas have done well to get what they have given the risks.

It was never about setting a precedent. It was about enforcing a precedent already set. The precedent that a fee has to be paid to sign a player under contract.

The £400k is easily enough to put off any other union club trying the same thing. That is a lot of money for a player unproven in your sport, especially one Sale thought they could initially get for £50k.

I was interested to read the comments on the BBC website from the RL and RU analysts. The RU one did not mention the rights and wrongs of what Sale did, which just about sums up the problem. He just focused on how Sale's owners are determined to make them a force.

Personally I'd say Sale come out of this looking like a bunch of immoral idiots, and Cas as an organisation with integrity (and a wad of cash). I don't know where the criticism of Cas is coming from.

Exactly. We need to keep highlighting what amoral scum there are in RU - the fascists code of choice.

Quote ="Erik the not red"Exactly. We need to keep highlighting what amoral scum there are in RU - the fascists code of choice.'" Listen to this - I'll guarantee it will make your blood literally boil:- https://audioboom.com/posts/6034084-the ... y-solomona

Quote ="Erik the not red"Exactly. We need to keep highlighting what amoral scum there are in RU - the fascists code of choice.'" Listen to this - I'll guarantee it will make your blood literally boil:- https://audioboom.com/posts/6034084-the ... y-solomona

Quote ="Tigerade"Listen to this - I'll guarantee it will make your blood literally boil:- https://audioboom.com/posts/6034084-the ... y-solomona'" What a pair of cretins. Did they actually offer 200k at any point before Cas took legal action then?

Quote ="Tigerade"Listen to this - I'll guarantee it will make your blood literally boil:- https://audioboom.com/posts/6034084-the ... y-solomona'" What a pair of cretins. Did they actually offer 200k at any point before Cas took legal action then?

They might have offered that as the original transfer offer but they withdrew it and said 50k take it or leave it because by that point them & Clark had already done the move without permission.

It's quite remarkable to contrast the way Cas just released a very professional statement as soon as an agreement had been reached to those two gobsh**es.

Reprehensible set of s, honestly they sound like the aggressor in an abusive relationship "we did nothing wrong."

They're right of course - no precedent has been set; and a settlement means that nobody has 'won' - so it's SOP for both sides to claim that they have.

They do however, sound like a pair of arrogant pricks.

Whilst no legal precedent has been set, they've set the tone for how they should be dealt with by anyone, and IMO only the most one-eyed Sale fans won't have slight misgivings about the way they make their club and code look.

I thought the BBC is supposed to be impartial - the is undiluted lying aided by the weakest interviewer I have ever heard. Its a pity we can't have Paxo or Andrew Neil ripping into those dishonest scum. I realise its local radio but surely Cas have a right of reply of equal length on this program.

Obviously I don't expect anything better from Sale but shame on the BBC.

This case was not about setting a precedent. This was about enforcing an existing precedent.
The precedent is that fees have to be paid for contracted players and this is still the case as Sale have paid a fee for Solomona.

The uncertainty this has created is whether a player can move clubs whilst under contract, without the permission of the club he is under contract to, before a fee is agreed rather than after the fee has been agreed. It seems that the RFU are happy to let this happen, so RU clubs can sign under-contract RL players, without the need communicate with the player's current club, and negotiate the fee afterwards.

However, even if Castleford had gone all the way to court and won, this problem would not have been resolved. This case was about Castleford receiving an acceptable fee, as is the precedent, for a player who was under contract. It's now up to the RFL and RFU to explore a reciprocal agreement that a player cannot be registered to play for another club until their previous club has agreed the transfer.

That's not strictly true though is it - by settling out of court, there is no 'guilty' party and there is no legal judgement that can be relied upon in future cases; which is why both parties are running to the media claiming victory.

I don't know if Cas were originally offered the 200 grand they've ended up with - but for Sale to suggest it's cost them the same as their original offer is face-saving at best, because if they've paid costs, that figure is probably doubled.

Moral victory for Cas - and it may give RU clubs pause for thought when they see that the mouse will sometimes roar - but in legal terms, it hasn't achieved anything.

Surely it wouldn't be difficult for RL clubs to just write clauses into players contracts saying they are forbidden from playing professional rugby union during the duration of the contract.

It seems to be coming from a Wakefield fan who is either bitter or is trolling. Either way, in my opinion, the only time Cas should ever need advice from our Wakefield friends on our legal matters is if we one day find ourselves in administration.



Moving swiftly on, a good conclusion for Cas, hopefully that's the end of it as I feel it's been an unwelcome distraction and right at the beginning I said I wanted to see a fair offer to settle the case - last thing needed was a Iestyn Harris length dispute.

Looking to the future I'd like to see the RFL refuse to allow Mr Clarke to have any involvement in the sport, if that is not under their jurisdiction, then it would be nice to see all clubs and players use their morals and refuse to deal with him. Unlikely I know. Clubs might also want to insert clauses in contracts to prevent players 'retiring' from the sport but again not sure if this breaches any kind of law.

You're far too sensitive - I'm neither of those; is it not possible to discuss the facts of the case - that was of interest to the whole sport - without being deemed a troll; unless you're cheerleading this as a landmark victory for Cas?

For what it's worth, I've admired and supported the stance that Cas have taken all along; they appear to have been absolutely in the right from day 1 - and Sale, Solomona and the agent have behaved reprehensibly. I wonder if the RFL have offered much support, or if Cas have been left to manage it themselves?

I wasn't referring to you, I'm a frequent visitor to the Wakefield forum and your comments usually come across as reasoned and sensible. I'm referring to an earlier comment from a different Wakefield fan which I've pasted below, which started a lot of the 'have Cas done the right thing' debate.

There is no legal judgement, no. But the precedent has not been broken or altered, so there doesn't need to be. Legal judgements are helpful when there is no precedent to resolve similar issues in the future.
No club has been able to sign a contracted player without paying a fee, which is what Sale were trying to do, unless this has been agreed by both clubs. This is still the case.
Perhaps another RU club will try the same in the future, and it will be up to the club concerned (and the RFL) to enforce the precedent again. But I bet they don't try to on with Castleford.

If a player walks away from his contract, why would he give any weight to any clauses within it?

The only route for that to be enforceable would be with the agreement of the RU to not accept their registration. If the RU & RFL had a reciprocal agreement to support this then it might be viable, and beneficial to both codes.