Sad, that we wanted Suli gone. But agree, he's rocks or diamonds like Manu Vatuvai (although Manu did kind of put in all the time). Yeah, like I say, maybe the article saying we are happy in retaining him, and were expecting compensation was off?
I think there's a bit of both in the stories.
On one hand we have a player contracted on big coin that started the season in first grade, got injured and the lesser paid back up hasn't put a foot wrong since.
Yes, we're paying big money for a player that's not playing but he's still on contract.
The issue becomes end of next year, if he's not playing first grade then his bargaining power for a new deal is diminished.
Manager throws it out there and gets some bites at current $$ going forward.
Manly can't guarantee those $$ going forward and as is the way these days the suitors want the player now or the deal is off.
The standard rhetoric is rolled out - the player needs to look after his future and we won't stand in his way if he can get a long term deal elsewhere.
If could come back to bite us but if we can use those $$ to keep Marty and upgrade others then it's a calculated risk worth taking.