T_R wrote:Honestly, for what we are apparently paying Wighton, we could potentially land a very-nearly top tier fullback.
I like the fact that we have a local junior in the team, but we're honestly paying the guy on potential that I doubt he will ever fulfill. I think we're also paying a centre on FB money, which is insane.
Wanna be a bit cold? This is a good opportunity to cut an overpriced and underperforming player.
I don't want to lose Jack. I'd rather the club use this as a bargaining tool to pay him less to keep him here and have him redeem himself. Pay him centre money. This whole thing is just disappointing.
T_R wrote:Honestly, for what we are apparently paying Wighton, we could potentially land a very-nearly top tier fullback.
I like the fact that we have a local junior in the team, but we're honestly paying the guy on potential that I doubt he will ever fulfill. I think we're also paying a centre on FB money, which is insane.
Wanna be a bit cold? This is a good opportunity to cut an overpriced and underperforming player.
I concur.
Sack him. Give him a trainers contract and a proviso to be on the dirty bulk till next season. Bring him back as a lock forward on lock forward money.
I can understand that if this is bad that the NRL can stand him down and the club can take it upon themselves to dish up further punishment on top such as a sacking.. to me that makes sense.
What I don't understand is if we see the NRL put pressure on the club to sack the player when we all know that within a year we would see him running around on an NRL field doing the exact same thing just in a different coloured jersey.
T_R wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 10:49 am
Honestly, for what we are apparently paying Wighton, we could potentially land a very-nearly top tier fullback.
I like the fact that we have a local junior in the team, but we're honestly paying the guy on potential that I doubt he will ever fulfill. I think we're also paying a centre on FB money, which is insane.
Wanna be a bit cold? This is a good opportunity to cut an overpriced and underperforming player.
Our back five is definitely overpaid, BJ, Croker and Jack are probably all on FB money. However I think it sends a bad signal to other players if we don't support Jack just because we want to re-balance our cap.
T_R wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 10:49 am
Honestly, for what we are apparently paying Wighton, we could potentially land a very-nearly top tier fullback.
I like the fact that we have a local junior in the team, but we're honestly paying the guy on potential that I doubt he will ever fulfill. I think we're also paying a centre on FB money, which is insane.
Wanna be a bit cold? This is a good opportunity to cut an overpriced and underperforming player.
I have a funny feeling this is exactly the way the Raiders view it too.
T_R wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 10:49 am
Honestly, for what we are apparently paying Wighton, we could potentially land a very-nearly top tier fullback.
I like the fact that we have a local junior in the team, but we're honestly paying the guy on potential that I doubt he will ever fulfill. I think we're also paying a centre on FB money, which is insane.
Wanna be a bit cold? This is a good opportunity to cut an overpriced and underperforming player.
I have a funny feeling this is exactly the way the Raiders view it too.
If we do follow this path though, do we go for a nearly top tier fullback? Or use the money elsewhere and just let Cotric take FB for his own.
T_R wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 10:49 am
Honestly, for what we are apparently paying Wighton, we could potentially land a very-nearly top tier fullback.
I like the fact that we have a local junior in the team, but we're honestly paying the guy on potential that I doubt he will ever fulfill. I think we're also paying a centre on FB money, which is insane.
Wanna be a bit cold? This is a good opportunity to cut an overpriced and underperforming player.
I have a funny feeling this is exactly the way the Raiders view it too.
If we do follow this path though, do we go for a nearly top tier fullback? Or use the money elsewhere and just let Cotric take FB for his own.
We give half to Tapine, just cause we can and we sign another half to play next to sezer.
We give Cotric the fb and put Nickman on the wing.
Dr Zaius wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 11:10 am
He needs to stay. Just to piss Lucy off.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Worth it
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
I feel like seizing the opportunity to oust Jack could cause some problems amongst the players. Is he well liked amongst the team? I really don't want to go down this road. I know we all want Cotric or someone to fullback but surely we don't have to lose Jack to achieve that. I mean he didn't kill anyone for Christ's sakes and if your argument is well he COULD HAVE hurt someone or killed them then why the hell did Papalii get off so lightly for drink driving. No one wanted to sack him for that.
Unless he has seriously injured the other people in the fight (or they are female, elderly, disabled, barbershop quartet, etc). I can’t see how this becomes a sackable offence.
Minor fisticuffs are a dime a dozen between young blokes in Civic. Is this only serious because of Jacks profile or did he actually do some physical damage to his opponents.
BJ wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 12:14 pm
Unless he has seriously injured the other people in the fight (or they are female, elderly, disabled, barbershop quartet, etc). I can’t see how this becomes a sackable offence.
Minor fisticuffs are a dime a dozen between young blokes in Civic. Is this only serious because of Jacks profile or did he actually do some physical damage to his opponents.
I certainly don't wish ill on Wighton, but a headline of "NRL Star in Barbershop Quartet Melee" would make my day.
If the Raiders cut Wighton for this, it's because they want him off the books.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
dreaming09 wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 10:24 am
This might be the issue RS and management are at loggerheads. RS wants to keep Jack and management want him gone.
If this is true, management need to pull their heads in. They have to let the police and if charged the courts do their job.
BJ wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 12:14 pm
Unless he has seriously injured the other people in the fight (or they are female, elderly, disabled, barbershop quartet, etc). I can’t see how this becomes a sackable offence.
Minor fisticuffs are a dime a dozen between young blokes in Civic. Is this only serious because of Jacks profile or did he actually do some physical damage to his opponents.
I certainly don't wish ill on Wighton, but a headline of "NRL Star in Barbershop Quartet Melee" would make my day.
Joel Monaghan's dog encounter and Todd Carney's watersports adventures haven't been enough for you?
The only way I see Wighton being sacked would be if he coward punched someone in that brawl. Otherwise it might be a good chance to re-evaluate his contract and move him into a lock or centre role.
SeeBee101 wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 12:59 pm
The only way I see Wighton being sacked would be if he coward punched someone in that brawl. Otherwise it might be a good chance to re-evaluate his contract and move him into a lock or centre role.
EDIT
Last edited by greeneyed on April 6, 2018, 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:Sorry, but that is speculation about a matter subject to possible legal proceedings.
SeeBee101 wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 12:59 pm
The only way I see Wighton being sacked would be if he coward punched someone in that brawl. Otherwise it might be a good chance to re-evaluate his contract and move him into a lock or centre role.
EDIT
You want Jack shot out of a cannon now too?
(disclaimer: A fake clown cannon, like the ones used in a circus. And no injuries sustained. And completely consensual, so as to not break apparent forum guidelines.)
SeeBee101 wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 12:59 pm
The only way I see Wighton being sacked would be if he coward punched someone in that brawl. Otherwise it might be a good chance to re-evaluate his contract and move him into a lock or centre role.
EDIT
You want Jack shot out of a cannon now too?
(disclaimer: A fake clown cannon, like the ones used in a circus. And no injuries sustained. And completely consensual, so as to not break apparent forum guidelines.)
I believe its now referred to as being "Sideshow Luke Perry'd"
BJ wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 12:14 pm
Unless he has seriously injured the other people in the fight (or they are female, elderly, disabled, barbershop quartet, etc). I can’t see how this becomes a sackable offence.
Minor fisticuffs are a dime a dozen between young blokes in Civic. Is this only serious because of Jacks profile or did he actually do some physical damage to his opponents.
I certainly don't wish ill on Wighton, but a headline of "NRL Star in Barbershop Quartet Melee" would make my day.
Joel Monaghan's dog encounter and Todd Carney's watersports adventures haven't been enough for you?
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
BJ wrote: ↑April 6, 2018, 12:14 pm
Unless he has seriously injured the other people in the fight (or they are female, elderly, disabled, barbershop quartet, etc). I can’t see how this becomes a sackable offence.
Minor fisticuffs are a dime a dozen between young blokes in Civic. Is this only serious because of Jacks profile or did he actually do some physical damage to his opponents.
I certainly don't wish ill on Wighton, but a headline of "NRL Star in Barbershop Quartet Melee" would make my day.
Joel Monaghan's dog encounter and Todd Carney's watersports adventures haven't been enough for you?
Jack Wighton's Canberra Raiders future hinging on investigation
Canberra Raiders fullback Jack Wighton's immediate playing future hinges on the outcome of the ACT Policing investigation into a Civic brawl, which is likely to be finalised next week.
Further details have emerged of the alleged involvement of the Raiders star in three assaults outside Canberra nightclub Academy five weeks before the start of the NRL season. Melbourne Storm fullback Scott Drinkwater has been linked as potential cover for Wighton.
By the way, I've had to delete further posts just now from this thread... posts need to stick to what is publicly reported. We don't want posts reporting "stories" people have heard. Please stick to the facts of what is reported in the mainstream media in cases like these, thanks. We can't have allegations made about what happened... which are unsubstantiated... when this is the subject of a police investigation and a possible legal proceeding.