We Have Lost Fifita!

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Referring to it as the Ricoh doesn't alter the information presented, lot's of people still do. I just find it hard to imagine we'd offer such, especially to a NZ  player, coming from half way around the world, who could have likely secured a gig elsewhere without much fuss..as an employee, it doesn't seem that appealing, especially with a family. Your one bad injury away from nothing after a few months. Given it hasn't been reported anywhere that it was a 1+1 and that is pure conjecture, we have to go with what has been reported until confirmed otherwise.

Is it pure conjecture because it isn't in a newspaper? Or is it because I said it on a forum?

I was told by someone who should know that he did not break his contract. The implication was it was a 1+1, it could be a 3 with a 1 year break clause, it could even be that there was a financial penalty that has been covered and is under an NDA.

I don't know, and I don't really care. I just know that he was given an offer we couldn't match, and neither he nor the club have messed the other about.

I wish him all the best, he's been great for us. But he's not part of the future of this club so my focus is now on the players who are.

[andermt]

Andy Goode mentioned a 1+1 contract in his podcast this week

[will311293]

As much as it sucks that Fifita is off... I'd feel a lot worse if Stooke hadn't been such a success. Seems to have fitted in really well with the squad, does great work around the pitch and his work at the line out has really helped us in offensive/defensive situations.

[Neils]

As much as it sucks that Fifita is off... I'd feel a lot worse if Stooke hadn't been such a success. Seems to have fitted in really well with the squad, does great work around the pitch and his work at the line out has really helped us in offensive/defensive situations.

Yes fully agree with that.

[will311293]

As much as it sucks that Fifita is off... I'd feel a lot worse if Stooke hadn't been such a success. Seems to have fitted in really well with the squad, does great work around the pitch and his work at the line out has really helped us in offensive/defensive situations.

Yes fully agree with that.

Yes it's why as much as i hate to say it... Fifita/Fekitoa cash could be redistributed. If we can pick up a quality centre, Prem Standard centre, a back three player, prem standard lock and a back row player who wil be there all year then i think we are really tidy.

[InBetweenWasp]

We’d also largely as a bunch written Gaskell off as being too old and too injured.  If he can stay fit (hardly a brilliant record over the past few seasons) he showed on Sunday that he’s still got it.

Launch, Stooke and Gaskell as our prime 3 locks with Cardall, TV3 and potentially big South African lump isn’t too shabby still.

[Hymenoptera]

Referring to it as the Ricoh doesn't alter the information presented, lot's of people still do. I just find it hard to imagine we'd offer such, especially to a NZ  player, coming from half way around the world, who could have likely secured a gig elsewhere without much fuss..as an employee, it doesn't seem that appealing, especially with a family. Your one bad injury away from nothing after a few months. Given it hasn't been reported anywhere that it was a 1+1 and that is pure conjecture, we have to go with what has been reported until confirmed otherwise.

Is it pure conjecture because it isn't in a newspaper? Or is it because I said it on a forum?

I was told by someone who should know that he did not break his contract. The implication was it was a 1+1, it could be a 3 with a 1 year break clause, it could even be that there was a financial penalty that has been covered and is under an NDA.

I don't know, and I don't really care. I just know that he was given an offer we couldn't match, and neither he nor the club have messed the other about.

I wish him all the best, he's been great for us. But he's not part of the future of this club so my focus is now on the players who are.

Everything is conjecture until it's confirmed directly but decent print like the Telegraph tends to be more reliable than a mate of a mate or 'source'.
Like you, I don't care,  I just said it was an odd situation for him to decide to come from NZ on those terms and if print is correct, then there would surely be a financial component.
He goes, we move on, no biggie if everyone is happy.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Referring to it as the Ricoh doesn't alter the information presented, lot's of people still do. I just find it hard to imagine we'd offer such, especially to a NZ  player, coming from half way around the world, who could have likely secured a gig elsewhere without much fuss..as an employee, it doesn't seem that appealing, especially with a family. Your one bad injury away from nothing after a few months. Given it hasn't been reported anywhere that it was a 1+1 and that is pure conjecture, we have to go with what has been reported until confirmed otherwise.

Is it pure conjecture because it isn't in a newspaper? Or is it because I said it on a forum?

I was told by someone who should know that he did not break his contract. The implication was it was a 1+1, it could be a 3 with a 1 year break clause, it could even be that there was a financial penalty that has been covered and is under an NDA.

I don't know, and I don't really care. I just know that he was given an offer we couldn't match, and neither he nor the club have messed the other about.

I wish him all the best, he's been great for us. But he's not part of the future of this club so my focus is now on the players who are.

Everything is conjecture until it's confirmed directly but decent print like the Telegraph tends to be more reliable than a mate of a mate or 'source'.
Like you, I don't care,  I just said it was an odd situation for him to decide to come from NZ on those terms and if print is correct, then there would surely be a financial component.
He goes, we move on, no biggie if everyone is happy.

Surely that depends on who the "mate" is?