The Lurker Again - Matai to the Warriors??

[FlyingHigh]

Just found this from the Lurker. Would be a shame to lose Stevie but if true would be very tempting for him.

http://www.sportal.com.au/league/nrl-premiership/the-lurker---nrl-rumour-file---monday/1819vzsdq6cq8173dvhfc6703v

 

[mozgrame]

Has Matai done a backflip?? I thought he was going to the Sharks.

 

[HappilyManly]

Isn't this the same story as the one priotr to the Hurrell Tapes :huh:

If Matai can get 2.4 million for 4 years, I would hope that Manly would release him on compassionate grounds.

For what he has given the Club, they should not stand in the way of him setting his family up for life

 

[mickqld]

We're not letting skivvy go early. He's still a vital cog out there and there isn't a ready made replacement in lower grades either. Hiku could be but this would be a huge culture loss.

 

[bones]

Isn't this the same story as the one priotr to the Hurrell Tapes :huh:

If Matai can get 2.4 million for 4 years, I would hope that Manly would release him on compassionate grounds.

For what he has given the Club, they should not stand in the way of him setting his family up for life

Totally disagree. He signed a contract, make him fulfill it. If the warriors want to, they can offer him 1.2mil for two years after his current deal expires.

 

[ALinda]

I'd be shattered to see him go but can understand the attraction of that motza 4 year deal and being back near his family.

Having said that though, in reality I can't imagine Stevie playing for 4 years without Donny and his magic words of encouragement or whatever it takes that keep him going!

 

[bones]

If this is true, how are the Warriors even allowed to make an offer to a contracted player?

 

[mickqld]

This is why Manly is consistently at the top of the table while nearly every other club comes and goes. We don't pay over inflated prices for 4 years or more on players unless they are of exceptional quality, pedigree and at the peak of their careers. I have loved seeing Skivvy every moment of his career but we can't & won't pay him 600k a year for the next 4 years. He'll be lucky to last half that amount of time with his injured body. It's rough, it's heartless, it's cold but this is a business and being bottom half of the table isn't acceptable.

 

[master blaster]

If this is true, how are the Warriors even allowed to make an offer to a contracted player?

totally agree Bones,thats Illegal isnt it,the NRL is becoming a joke with all the contract backflips and talking to other players when still contracted to clubs

 

[Pepi]

They would be stupid to do so. Luamape and Hurrell are two of the most exciting centres coming through.
Fusitua on the wing is a machine too

 

[HappilyManly]

There is nothing illegal in recruitment.

Pretty sure that the NRL has also removed their rule ( it was never a law), that prohibited approaches to Players comming off contract.

Its naive to expect a person to not renegotiate his current contract

If the previously reported offer is correct, Manly would never match it in amount, let alone duration.

 

[Brissie Kid]

Hurrell going to RU in 2015 by the look of this.

 

[MissKate]

If the previously reported offer is correct, Manly would never match it in amount, let alone duration.

Don't think they have to, for about 2 years anyway

 

[eagles2win]

Hurrell going to RU in 2015 by the look of this.

Linked to Souths

 

[Brissie Kid]

Manly developed Matai when his was not on the radar anywhere. But the media portray Manly are like the Rorters who buy their way to premierships. Today >

It was Canberra's last match against Sydney Roosters just 10 days ago that made Raiders officials seriously question the value of the club's $3 million per year investment in junior development.

In the Roosters starting line-up at Allianz Stadium were 12 players with Test or State of Origin experience, while the odd man out, Jake Friend, was the 19th man for Queensland in the series opener.

By comparison, Canbarra had only Josh Papalii, David Shillington and Brett White who had played at that level.

In addition, 13 of the 17 Raiders players were products of the club's development programs - the biggest junior representation in any NRL team.

Even other so called developments clubs such as Newcastle, Penrith and Parramatta have been fielding teams that are more bought than bred.

For all the time and money invested in producing players, Canberra has not won a grand final since 1994 and never seriously been considered a premiership contender in the 17 year history of the NRL.

In fact, a look at the records books shows that the NRL has been dominated in recent years by teams who focus more on recruitment than development, with Melbourne having featured in five grand finals since 2006, Manly in four of the last seven and the Roosters in two of the last four - winning last year and losing to St George Illawarra in 2010.

The only other clubs to have played on grand final day since 2007 have been Parramatta in 2009, the Warriors in 2011 and Canterbury in 2012 - all of whom lost.

Roosters' success gives Canberra Raiders no incentive to develop players
June 9, 2014 - 3:08PM
Brad Walter

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/roosters-success-gives-canberra-raiders-no-incentive-to-develop-players-20140609-zs1jn.html

 

[HappilyManly]

If the previously reported offer is correct, Manly would never match it in amount, let alone duration.

Don't think they have to, for about 2 years anyway

His and Choc's contract ends next year.

There was something in the Manly Daily last week, in response to the Choc comment in SOO Camp, that both of them have large backended deals next year, so will not be going anywhere.

 

[eagles2win]

Matai was playing Qld Cup prior to joining us.

 

[bones]

There is nothing illegal in recruitment.

Pretty sure that the NRL has also removed their rule ( it was never a law), that prohibited approaches to Players comming off contract.

Its naive to expect a person to not renegotiate his current contract

If the previously reported offer is correct, Manly would never match it in amount, let alone duration.

If we're talking about once Matai's current deal expires, then you are right. But by saying Manly are refusing to release Matai, the article suggests the Warriors want him for 2015. Matai is under contract to Manly for 2015. They should not be allowed to approach him regarding the 2015 season is all i'm saying.

 

[MadMarcus]

This story about the Raiders not being able to attract players has certainly got rid of the last big Raiders story - about how they have a rubbish coach. Has anybody made the connection between the 2?

 

[RiverEagle]

There is nothing illegal in recruitment.

Pretty sure that the NRL has also removed their rule ( it was never a law), that prohibited approaches to Players comming off contract.

Its naive to expect a person to not renegotiate his current contract

If the previously reported offer is correct, Manly would never match it in amount, let alone duration.

If we're talking about once Matai's current deal expires, then you are right. But by saying Manly are refusing to release Matai, the article suggests the Warriors want him for 2015. Matai is under contract to Manly for 2015. They should not be allowed to approach him regarding the 2015 season is all i'm saying.

And what would be the point anyway, unless Skivi has a get-out clause (which I doubt).

IF somehow they offered him twice what we have or more, you'd probably let him go home, BUT only if they paid us a transfer fee (for next year I mean).

Beyond that - if he stayed with us next season - perhaps a juicy contract to finish at home would be well deserved....2016 on.