And rightly so. Its a good school with a very high standard of teaching

No prizes for guessing what you do for a living (and where!!).

You'l be very suprised!!!

Not a clue. It'll come out in time no doubt.

If so then surely the contracts will be ripped up.

You can't just rip up a contract, unless both parties agree.
If Cas can't play him and don't want him he could take them to court over the contract he signed in good faith
Obviously depending if there are any clauses for this. I suppose they could have been more clever than we thought and said, blah blah blah... "if you are eligible to play" but I doubt it.
Otherwise your employer could simply say don't come in tomorrow I've decided I don't like you and will not pay you any more.

actually the point is they are eligible to play!
just not at the same time as others at the team
sooooooooooo they have in fact no grounds to rip up the contracts as the employees are fit for purpose as contracted!

only option could be to not retain others on the quota? any on cas's quota out of contract at the end of the season?

whilst i see your point, i also get frustrated at those who take forums too seriously, it is what it is, and it isnt the sunday times.
Some topics you can, and must, take seriously and others decend in to farce, like the brough rumours one, because you just get bored of hearing them so in some ways its best to ridicule them, preferably without causing offence.

Fact is if everyone stuck to the confirmed facts and did not speculate or have opinions, disagreements, thats not the forum, Thats called the official club site.

Actually,isnt it about how many you can have in the squad at the start of season -- 2010 you can only have 6 over seas trained players in your squad.

no your missing my point...in theory
martin signes a contract to play rugby league for a club, say something along the lines of, i mr martin wil play and cas say fine heres some money

Mr martin can still play rugby league, only now cas dont want him to allegedly.

so cas would have top break the contract, not mr martin. and pay appropriate penalty clauses, presumably.

alternative is mr martin plays for cas and another player does not, ie another quota player at the end of his contract, no panalty clause to mr martin, but cas have to release someone else!

There's also the possibility that a contract never actually existed in a legal sense - mistake, frustration or misrepresention (though not malicious) may come into play, despite both parties acting in good faith. There's also a chance that a clause will have been worked into the contract to account for such an eventuality. It might even be an implied term. I don't know why some posters are so desperate for Cas to have messed-up. It's not like our own club has been consistently scrupulous in matters such as this. At the end of the day, no-one on here has claimed to know the details so probably best to simply hope it gets sorted soon for the sake of both the players involved and the club

I dont know either mate, i certainly wouldnt want trinity to suffer in the same circumstances.

its not a case of wanting cas to of messed up, more of where has it left Tony Martin, Brad Drew I'm sure someone will play them if we don't but try and think of your self out of a job with limited spaces available to go else where

actually havnt seen much if any gloating.

but there are some weird ideas about clauses on here!

what possible clause could be in the contract to get any team out of this situation the "unless we find someone better" clause?

Just been informed that we have signed James Evans today, and that the only Wakey player that has been signed by Cas is Martin although there is a problem with the signing, and that has come from someone on the Cas BOD.

So you'd be entirely happy if we tried to sign 3 of your better players by outbidding you, and then it went pear shaped because we'd made a schoolboy error over the quota (I'm not saying things are exactly like this by the way, just as we hear it)?

If so, hats off to you over your magnanimity.

For what it's worth as far as concerned for the players go, if any player has tried to go elsewhere for more money then it fell through, then they can go elsewhere. I appreciate the arguments that they have short careers, etc, but equally I'm not about to feel sympathy for mercenaries.

Evans i feel is a step back.

depends on money and what kears thoughts are and what role he has in mind for evans. he might not se him as first choice but just as a cheapish way of strengthening the three quarters.

you forgot about agent hanley , employed to conduct a survey off the club and point out what was needed.

"to win more games"

When he was here before he certainly did not let us down....i like players like him. No frills, but goes about his business with benefit to the team.

He's a proper centre, he'll do for me.

Who's to say it hasn't affected our club in some way already (assuming the story is true, of course)?

I think I'm right in saying we offered Drew a 1 year deal, but Cas upped the ante considerably, so Drew signed for Cas.

If you can't deliver on the contract, then you're messing with a player who is currently contracted to us. Likewise Martin. It's bound to affect the players in some way, and therefore affects our club.

he was only here for one season, went to the dulls chasing rainbows, realized that he made the mistake then bailed out before this season down turn

No i wouldnt be entirely happy about loseing a player (ala brough, sculthorpe etc) but thats the nature of the sport that players come and go i wouldnt want your club to suffer financially because of a simple misunderstanding. I dont hate wakey, i dont like them but i respect them. I'm not marsdengiant you know!

You just proved that by posting on here