Has the Turner saga taken another twist

[bigjim]

I don't mind people having opinions, even opinions different to mine, surprisingly.
What I don't like is people sprouting those opinions based on absolutely zero fact or evidence and stating it as almost concrete certainty.

The outcome is witnessed and from that evidence alone the conclusion is arrived at. It's like arriving at the scene of a two car collision and immediately blaming the driver of the car with 'P' plates.

I also hate people who denagrate others and personally insult them purely because they disagree with your opinion. Disagreement can be healthy, but sometimes the tone of that disagreement is questionable.

The Turner affair is done and dusted. In hindsight, Melbourne management should never have offered a contract to Turner knowing the binding verbal agreement that was in place. That's an obvious fact.

However, to say MS and his management team are unprofessional because of the situatation that ensued is baseless opinion. There was a binding agreement in place, supported by both the law and the NRL, so what could MS have done differently to prevent the situation.
As far as the injured players in the swap arrangement. Quite simply, if they can't play the majority of the season then replacements will be found, I'm sure. Please give them a chance, and judge on the outcome.

No one can disagree with the effort MS and team have put in to realizing the Titan dream, the quality of players and the building of a fortress.
To say they are lacking in ability and are unprofessional is quite simply laughable.

Please keep it real!

[Lowdown]

The Turner affair is done and dusted. In hindsight, Melbourne management should never have offered a contract to Turner knowing the binding verbal agreement that was in place. That's an obvious fact.

You were making some good points..until you fell into the trap (like everyone else) of calling an event (which may or may not have happened like you 'think' it did) a FACT.

The only FACT is is that the full story of what transpired is not obvious to all.

Through the media, and media releases, we know that the Melbourne Storm have gone on record, confirming that they checked with both (a) Steve Turner and (b) the NRL as to the existence of a signed, and submitted Contract. There was, obviously, none (FACT). NRL guidelines require an NRL contract to be submitted within 10 business days (FACT). The Titans had not submitted a contract, and the Storm felt it was justifiable to re-sign Turner.

Subsequently, when this became pubic knowledge, the Titans supplied evidence to the NRL, which Gallop reviewed and determined (read: applied his own interpretation, he is not a practicing judge at this point in time) that there was sufficient evidence to suggest Turner had come to terms with the Titans (FACT). Whilst this last point did happen and is factual, its important to note that this was not a legal ruling, it is the NRL publicly declaring their support based on some emails between the Titans and Riolo.

No one is disputing that originally Turner did (a) agree to join with the Titans and (b) publicly acknowledge his excitement about joining the new franchise (both are FACTS). The FACT is, that Steve changed his mind in subsequent months, and due to the absence of a signed letter of intent, a signed contract - and a submitted one at that - that Turner and the Storm both felt that legally they were entitled to enter into a legal agreement.

So lets not allow our own prejudicies and allegiances to get in the way of a good FACTual debate. Personally, I feel the had this matter gone to court, then it would hardly have been a simple FACT that Turner had an enforecable agreement with the Titans. It may be much more difficult to enforce such a series of events in the absence of a signed contract.

All three parties have contributed to this situation in one way, shape or form:

1. Titans for not following through with the signed, sealed and delivered contract;

2. Turner for changing his mind (what a crime!); and

3. Storm for being brash and signing Turner, when they obviously knew the Titans would be upset.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and its funny to read back over the original posts when news first broke that Turner had signed with the Storm, that many posts by Titans supporters indicated dissapointment at Titans management for not securinig Turner via a contract. Once the NRL were comfortable that there had been sufficient agreement (via email) it was interesting to see how opinions changed so swiftly - as if the Storm should have expected this decision...like they had a crystal ball. Sure it was a bold move, and quite antagonistic but they felt legally they were entitled to do this.

But lets not forget the FACT that much of this could have been avoided had Turner signed, and the NRL received, a contract in writing. Hindsight is a wonderful thing indeed.

[Old Diehard]

In respect to the Stadium they are looking at increasing the capacity to 27,000 in view of Melb Victory's success.Negotiations are still continuing so the new stadium is likely to be built with around a 30,000 capacity.

Don't follow soccer but isn't Telstra Dome managers now courting and offering inducements to Melbourne Victory to use their facilities... As I said I don't follow soccer but I'm sure I read this in The Age.

[Supernova]

You were making some good points..until you fell into the trap (like everyone else) of calling an event (which may or may not have happened like you 'think' it did) a FACT.

The only FACT is is that the full story of what transpired is not obvious to all.

Through the media, and media releases, we know that the Melbourne Storm have gone on record, confirming that they checked with both (a) Steve Turner and (b) the NRL as to the existence of a signed, and submitted Contract. There was, obviously, none (FACT). NRL guidelines require an NRL contract to be submitted within 10 business days (FACT). The Titans had not submitted a contract, and the Storm felt it was justifiable to re-sign Turner.

Subsequently, when this became pubic knowledge, the Titans supplied evidence to the NRL, which Gallop reviewed and determined (read: applied his own interpretation, he is not a practicing judge at this point in time) that there was sufficient evidence to suggest Turner had come to terms with the Titans (FACT). Whilst this last point did happen and is factual, its important to note that this was not a legal ruling, it is the NRL publicly declaring their support based on some emails between the Titans and Riolo.

No one is disputing that originally Turner did (a) agree to join with the Titans and (b) publicly acknowledge his excitement about joining the new franchise (both are FACTS). The FACT is, that Steve changed his mind in subsequent months, and due to the absence of a signed letter of intent, a signed contract - and a submitted one at that - that Turner and the Storm both felt that legally they were entitled to enter into a legal agreement.

So lets not allow our own prejudicies and allegiances to get in the way of a good FACTual debate. Personally, I feel the had this matter gone to court, then it would hardly have been a simple FACT that Turner had an enforecable agreement with the Titans. It may be much more difficult to enforce such a series of events in the absence of a signed contract.

All three parties have contributed to this situation in one way, shape or form:

1. Titans for not following through with the signed, sealed and delivered contract;

2. Turner for changing his mind (what a crime!); and

3. Storm for being brash and signing Turner, when they obviously knew the Titans would be upset.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and its funny to read back over the original posts when news first broke that Turner had signed with the Storm, that many posts by Titans supporters indicated dissapointment at Titans management for not securinig Turner via a contract. Once the NRL were comfortable that there had been sufficient agreement (via email) it was interesting to see how opinions changed so swiftly - as if the Storm should have expected this decision...like they had a crystal ball. Sure it was a bold move, and quite antagonistic but they felt legally they were entitled to do this.

But lets not forget the FACT that much of this could have been avoided had Turner signed, and the NRL received, a contract in writing. Hindsight is a wonderful thing indeed.

Here here very well said and presented fairly for both sides. It's very hard to argue with that no matter whether you're a Titan or Storm supporter. But in saying that i'm sure someone will try to disprove the facts you mention that are just that. Facts.

[Supernova]

Don't follow soccer but isn't Telstra Dome managers now courting and offering inducements to Melbourne Victory to use their facilities... As I said I don't follow soccer but I'm sure I read this in The Age.

Yep that's very much correct. The major sticking point to the stadium going ahead is that Victory want it to be a 35-40K capacity and nobody else really wants it that big. There's also the fact that the state government has an agreement with Telstra Dome that there would be no stadium that around that size to be built before 2010 i believe the year is.

With that being the case and the TD courting the Victory there's no way a stadium that big will be built. The new tendeer went out last week for the ammended total of 27,000 seats but the Victory have yet to commit to that. If they do the stadium will go ahead as planned but if they don't the future of it remains up in the air.

[bigjim]

[QUOTE=Lowdown]
The only FACT is is that the full story of what transpired is not obvious to all.

And probably never will be fully explained.

Both sides know there's more to the story than they are letting on.

Did seem in the end, a case of two sides holding firm on principal.
A difficult problem to resolve when both parties feel their in right. :fence: