2017-18 World Sevens Series
-
So NZ have to play Fiji again, for fifth place. With Fiji looking much better, also narrowly having beaten the AB7s yesterday, it's going to be a tough game for our team. K/o 9.39pm.
@stargazer said in 2017-18 World Sevens Series:
So NZ have to play Fiji again, for fifth place. With Fiji looking much better, also narrowly having beaten the AB7s yesterday, it's going to be a tough game for our team. K/o 9.39pm.
Don't be so negative.
-
@kiwimurph Haha, I'm totally of the opposite opinion about Clarke and Nanai-Seturo!
@stargazer I'm of the same opinion as @KiwiMurph! Both looked comfortable but Nanai had a fair bit more action and aggression about him.
-
Blitzbokke are giving USA a rugby lesson. 35-7
-
Great last game from the AB7s, beating Fiji 31 - 7. The handbrakes finally came off. It was a great sight seeing Mikkelson outrunning Jerry Tuwai, one of Fiji's speedsters. Hope Knewstubb is okay after his head knock; he's been one of the better players this weekend - awesome on defence, making a lot of turnovers - and definitely needed for Hamilton.
Fifth place in Sydney, after 2nd place in Dubai and Cup winners in Cape Town. This season is already much better than last year's.
-
Yeah Aussie Men and Women were pretty awesome this weekend, we’ll done! First time Aussie men have won a home tournament since 2012 (last time Wallabies also won the Bledisloe).
My Aussie wife already saying the Fox Sports commentators will be spinning this as a prelude to how the Wallabies will go against NZ this year...
-
Oddly quiet in here?
Australia dish out a lesson in the final, SA crumble. Pretty good to do the double.
-
@bones Missed the final games. A relative living in Europe suddenly decided that it was a good time to Skype and he's always full of good stories. Funny guy, just bad timing.
-
@stargazer hah that was more aimed at a certain fan who only seems to come on to try and revel in NZ not doing well. Think he/she even lives there? True springbok fan that one.
-
-
Mixed bag from NZ overall, but some promising signs for Hamilton by the end. I thought Masirewa was a find, as they really missed the huge work-rate of Collier. Luke's aerial work and offloads were great. But, Tim Mikkelsen constantly had to do the gruntwork of 2 all the time, so little opportunity for him on attack, and I think that really impacted on NZ. Scott Curry seems to have slowed down a bit, although he gets around the park well.
Knewstubb and Ware are getting better and creating opportunities, but a fit Joe Webber would be welcomed back. Molia, Baker and Stanaway are still prone to errors from over-enthusiasm, as is Koroi. I thought Clarke and Nanai looked lost initially, but Clarke seemed to really click against Fiji, and looks a real force for the future. Ravouvou is always a threat, but maybe needs better work-rate.
Happy with the pool we have for Hamilton, but just hope we have Collier and Webber to choose from, and can boost our energy and presence around the tackled ball.
-
@stargazer said in 2017-18 World Sevens Series:
@booboo said in 2017-18 World Sevens Series:
"By naming him in the All Blacks Sevens team it appears that NZR doesn't think his contract with the Warriors holds any value. Contracts signed by a minor (under 18) are not deemed binding in New Zealand.
However Nanai-Seturo is understood to have signed his agreement in conjunction with his parents and an agent so age should be irrelevant."
League media suggesting laws shouldn't count ...
Is that true though? The law doesn't say that contracts signed by a minor are not deemed binding in New Zealand. A contract signed by a minor is not enforceable against a minor, which is something else. Also, if he is 18, he is not a minor anymore. This could be a continuing legal battle.
Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017
Contractual capacity of minors
86 Contracts unenforceable against minors but otherwise have effect
(1) Every contract entered into by a minor is unenforceable against the minor but otherwise has effect as if the minor were of full age.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a contract to which section 92(1) applies.
(3) This section is subject to sections 87 to 91.Any contract lawyers on the Fern?
Contracts against minors are enforceable only to the extent that they are fair, reasonable and in the interests of the minor. See in particular
section 88 (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0005/21.0/DLM6844198.html). The presumption is that they are unenforceable but this is rebuttable by the side wanting to enforce it if they can show the contract is fair and reasonable (or at least the part they want to enforce is fair and reasonable).I would not like to speculate too much, but my instinct is that the length of time and the age in which he signed make this probably unenforceable against the player. A football player at 15 is not really in a position to lock himself into a club for 5 years where other options may present themselves.
On the other hand, the Warriors might point to the facts (AIUI):
-
that the parents and an agent were involved in the preparation of the agreement
-
the contract has already been partly performed (ie he has trained with the Warriors and been a part of their systems), meaning that Nanai-Seturo has probably already benefited a great deal from the contract already.
I suspect that the NZR and the Warriors will come to an arrangement that will sort it out fairly quickly. It's murky, neither side is guaranteed to win and if the Warriors won they would have a reluctant player anyway, so I would imagine NZR will write a small cheque and it will be smiles all round.
@damo said in 2017-18 World Sevens Series:
@stargazer said in 2017-18 World Sevens Series:
@booboo said in 2017-18 World Sevens Series:
"By naming him in the All Blacks Sevens team it appears that NZR doesn't think his contract with the Warriors holds any value. Contracts signed by a minor (under 18) are not deemed binding in New Zealand.
However Nanai-Seturo is understood to have signed his agreement in conjunction with his parents and an agent so age should be irrelevant."
League media suggesting laws shouldn't count ...
Is that true though? The law doesn't say that contracts signed by a minor are not deemed binding in New Zealand. A contract signed by a minor is not enforceable against a minor, which is something else. Also, if he is 18, he is not a minor anymore. This could be a continuing legal battle.
Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017
Contractual capacity of minors
86 Contracts unenforceable against minors but otherwise have effect
(1) Every contract entered into by a minor is unenforceable against the minor but otherwise has effect as if the minor were of full age.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a contract to which section 92(1) applies.
(3) This section is subject to sections 87 to 91.Any contract lawyers on the Fern?
Contracts against minors are enforceable only to the extent that they are fair, reasonable and in the interests of the minor. See in particular
section 88 (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0005/21.0/DLM6844198.html). The presumption is that they are unenforceable but this is rebuttable by the side wanting to enforce it if they can show the contract is fair and reasonable (or at least the part they want to enforce is fair and reasonable).I would not like to speculate too much, but my instinct is that the length of time and the age in which he signed make this probably unenforceable against the player. A football player at 15 is not really in a position to lock himself into a club for 5 years where other options may present themselves.
On the other hand, the Warriors might point to the facts (AIUI):
-
that the parents and an agent were involved in the preparation of the agreement
-
the contract has already been partly performed (ie he has trained with the Warriors and been a part of their systems), meaning that Nanai-Seturo has probably already benefited a great deal from the contract already.
I suspect that the NZR and the Warriors will come to an arrangement that will sort it out fairly quickly. It's murky, neither side is guaranteed to win and if the Warriors won they would have a reluctant player anyway, so I would imagine NZR will write a small cheque and it will be smiles all round.
I'm with the Warriors on this one. You sign someone up at that age for that long, and all the value you get from it is at the last couple of years of the contract. What you are paying for at 15 is locking them in for the full contract term, so you can realise that value.
-
