My point is that you can have that outside of what has been agreed to in contract's and Rob has the final say on what is allowed and what's not.
^^^^^^ Exactly, long term contracts are pointless, the whole 'it'll stop them getting sent 1000 PM's' is stoopid most loyal players re sign straight away and it's really not that big a deal. The only way this can have interesting implications is if it's agreed that board members must be signed for at least 2 seasons, which would ensure that they're most likely looking out for the club there in power for.
What about contract clauses? Like 2 season deals but that in that time the player must have played a certain amount of firsts games in the first season to activate the second season. I'm really against this whole thing itbt.
The contracts would have to be put into the open. If you had secret clauses that could cause disputes between players and clubs about what was actually in the contract.
Obviously. I doubt it'd be allowed because you'd be very tempted to play some bloke jsut to activate the clause if you got towards the end of the season and he needed one more game.
I don't really think that the rays should be included in not going after loyal players. When signed, we did not expect Tyson to leave after a season. choco was the only one. As it is, I think we've actually formed a very loyal group, particularly the fringe first graders. Next season we will still have either 8 or 9 from the current group in our side. Of the seconds players, I only know of the loss of two, one of which is tsf....and the other is frizzed who had me in his way of a spinners spot.
It's so obviously an idea that Jemmell has come up with to lock some of his blokes in who might go elsewhere. Somehow rob's run with it.
If you don't like the idea of 2 season contracts then just don't offer them or sign them. I believe it should be there as an option.
