I spose the argument could be that a player could change junior clubs a few years out from the big time if they saw a good prospect in their position a few grades up. But when would you think the change-over should be completed BY, and would the original team then be entitled to a "pro-rated" compensation deal...
NRL Rumour Mill Thread (Spoilers)
- Thread starter ooneil
- Start date
- Status
AyiosYiorgos
Card Addict
Am hearing very strong rumours Gary Ablett Jr is about to sign for the Bulldogs too.
Will he play fullback?
AyiosYiorgos
Card Addict
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...destepping-the-salary-cap-20140321-hvksf.html
Coaches fear the much touted "level" NRL playing field is tilting towards a handful of rich clubs, via a proliferation of Third Party Agreements (TPAs) which allow uncapped payments to players outside the official salary ceiling.
Cronulla's Andrew Fifita has been signed by Canterbury for $850,000, with the prevailing belief half this amount will be registered in the club's salary cap of $6.3m, with the other half legitimately recorded as a payment by non-club sponsors.
It means the Bulldogs can sign two front rows of talent, with only one effectively being counted in the cap.
The NRL has no cap on TPAs, meaning a club with a wealthy coterie of business connections can point a player manager in the direction of a friend/supporter and arrange for an individual sponsorship.
Advertisement
An NRL spokesman sought to allay this fear by telling Fairfax Media the league administration would not register a player's contract if the amount shown to be included in the salary cap did not reflect the player's market value.
That is, if the Bulldogs registered Fifita for an inside-the-cap payment of $425,000, it would be rejected.
Nevertheless, there is widespread concern clubs such as the Roosters, with top-end-of-town connections; the Bulldogs, with a rich Leagues Club connected to multiple service providers; and the Broncos - a one-town team - are perfectly positioned to capitalise on the absence of a ceiling on TPAs.
Should the financially weak clubs attempt to compete by utilising the TPA loophole, it is likely to drain sponsorship funds away from the club.
Any local business which elects to support a player via a TPA deprives a club of much needed revenue.
Cronulla is most vulnerable to the trend, with its nucleus of high profile talent and the crippling legal and punitive cost of the supplements saga.
The original purpose of TPAs was to help retain key players in the code, following the loss of champions such as St George Illawarra's Mark Gasnier to French rugby union.
But there is now a fear that rather than be used to retain NRL stars flirting with other codes and countries, TPAs have been used to recruit them.
Furthermore, a $40,000 to $50,000 TPA top-up to an official payment allows a club to secure a player's signature.
Each TPA must be approved by the club and the NRL, ostensibly to protect against ambush marketing of an existing sponsor.
This means the NRL is aware of the number and financial size of the TPAs at each club and could therefore monitor a trend which many suspect will show a concentration of these payments at a small number of clubs.
The NRL claims its registration process reveals no such disproportionate trend towards use of TPAs by rich clubs.
Coincidentally, the NRL has flagged the possibility of a cap on football department spending, imposing a ceiling on non-player payment outlays, such as the total wages of training and coaching staff and even comforts, including meals.
This raises the obvious question: why impose a limit on spending on professional services in order to create a level playing field when the main vehicle to achieve this - the salary cap - is being undermined by a growth in TPAs?
Compounding the irony of these developments are the Storm, who were stripped of two premierships and a host of players because they flouted the rules on TPAs.
The Storm's sin was to guarantee TPAs, meaning that if the club could not secure an agreed sponsorship for a player, it would pay the sum itself.
It was a recognition that, in an AFL city, individual sponsorships are hard to find.
Guaranteeing TPAs is still prohibited but within 12 months of the Storm's draconian punishment, the NRL introduced a Marquee Player Allowance where the club could arrange a payment of $500,000 outside the cap.
It also liberalised the use of cars by players, changing it from a situation where club sponsors could not provide any vehicles, to three per club and now six.
This is meritorious in that it allows additional money, which could have been diverted to other sports, to flow to the code.
While TPAs also source money which could be lost, only a handful of clubs have access to this rich pool.
The NRL correctly points to the role of player managers in securing TPAs.
If these highly paid agents rely on rich clubs to point them in the direction of a sponsor who will help secure a player, they are not fulfilling their responsibility to their clients at poor clubs.
"There is nothing stopping a player manager at a so called poor club in Sydney arranging a TPA with say a Brisbane-based company," a NRL source said.
"We would be foolish to limit the amount of money coming into the code."
Read more:http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...-salary-cap-20140321-hvksf.html#ixzz2wdfrPYjH
Coaches fear the much touted "level" NRL playing field is tilting towards a handful of rich clubs, via a proliferation of Third Party Agreements (TPAs) which allow uncapped payments to players outside the official salary ceiling.
Cronulla's Andrew Fifita has been signed by Canterbury for $850,000, with the prevailing belief half this amount will be registered in the club's salary cap of $6.3m, with the other half legitimately recorded as a payment by non-club sponsors.
It means the Bulldogs can sign two front rows of talent, with only one effectively being counted in the cap.
The NRL has no cap on TPAs, meaning a club with a wealthy coterie of business connections can point a player manager in the direction of a friend/supporter and arrange for an individual sponsorship.
Advertisement
An NRL spokesman sought to allay this fear by telling Fairfax Media the league administration would not register a player's contract if the amount shown to be included in the salary cap did not reflect the player's market value.
That is, if the Bulldogs registered Fifita for an inside-the-cap payment of $425,000, it would be rejected.
Nevertheless, there is widespread concern clubs such as the Roosters, with top-end-of-town connections; the Bulldogs, with a rich Leagues Club connected to multiple service providers; and the Broncos - a one-town team - are perfectly positioned to capitalise on the absence of a ceiling on TPAs.
Should the financially weak clubs attempt to compete by utilising the TPA loophole, it is likely to drain sponsorship funds away from the club.
Any local business which elects to support a player via a TPA deprives a club of much needed revenue.
Cronulla is most vulnerable to the trend, with its nucleus of high profile talent and the crippling legal and punitive cost of the supplements saga.
The original purpose of TPAs was to help retain key players in the code, following the loss of champions such as St George Illawarra's Mark Gasnier to French rugby union.
But there is now a fear that rather than be used to retain NRL stars flirting with other codes and countries, TPAs have been used to recruit them.
Furthermore, a $40,000 to $50,000 TPA top-up to an official payment allows a club to secure a player's signature.
Each TPA must be approved by the club and the NRL, ostensibly to protect against ambush marketing of an existing sponsor.
This means the NRL is aware of the number and financial size of the TPAs at each club and could therefore monitor a trend which many suspect will show a concentration of these payments at a small number of clubs.
The NRL claims its registration process reveals no such disproportionate trend towards use of TPAs by rich clubs.
Coincidentally, the NRL has flagged the possibility of a cap on football department spending, imposing a ceiling on non-player payment outlays, such as the total wages of training and coaching staff and even comforts, including meals.
This raises the obvious question: why impose a limit on spending on professional services in order to create a level playing field when the main vehicle to achieve this - the salary cap - is being undermined by a growth in TPAs?
Compounding the irony of these developments are the Storm, who were stripped of two premierships and a host of players because they flouted the rules on TPAs.
The Storm's sin was to guarantee TPAs, meaning that if the club could not secure an agreed sponsorship for a player, it would pay the sum itself.
It was a recognition that, in an AFL city, individual sponsorships are hard to find.
Guaranteeing TPAs is still prohibited but within 12 months of the Storm's draconian punishment, the NRL introduced a Marquee Player Allowance where the club could arrange a payment of $500,000 outside the cap.
It also liberalised the use of cars by players, changing it from a situation where club sponsors could not provide any vehicles, to three per club and now six.
This is meritorious in that it allows additional money, which could have been diverted to other sports, to flow to the code.
While TPAs also source money which could be lost, only a handful of clubs have access to this rich pool.
The NRL correctly points to the role of player managers in securing TPAs.
If these highly paid agents rely on rich clubs to point them in the direction of a sponsor who will help secure a player, they are not fulfilling their responsibility to their clients at poor clubs.
"There is nothing stopping a player manager at a so called poor club in Sydney arranging a TPA with say a Brisbane-based company," a NRL source said.
"We would be foolish to limit the amount of money coming into the code."
Read more:http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...-salary-cap-20140321-hvksf.html#ixzz2wdfrPYjH
AyiosYiorgos
Card Addict
This was followed by confirmation of a $1.1 million three-year contract for exciting young Cronulla hooker Michael Lichaa from 2015 when he'll be joined by Sharks teammate Andrew Fifita - on a massive $850,000 a season.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-sport/bulldogs-template-the-key-for-cleary-20140321-357ld.html
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-sport/bulldogs-template-the-key-for-cleary-20140321-357ld.html
The Mad Hatter
OzCardTrader
Personally, I don't know why they don't raise the cap another couple of million dollars, raise the minimum wage to let the clubs have 2-3 marquees (a forward, a back and a half) and pay them whatever, and if clubs fold, so be it Jedi.
I don't see why well run, successful clubs should be held back by those that are not.
Sydney has too many clubs as it is.
It is time for a couple to relocate or die. I won't get in to the debate of who I think it should be as I spent the best part of the 2000's fighting for my club and defending them against relocation, amalgamation and oblivion. But the NRL needs to sort out a criteria (terrible word in NRL) for crowds, sponsors, merchandise etc and be strong.
We need new teams in other cities/regions. The NRL needs to be strong. It needs to look at satisfying the most amount of fans/customers/sponsors/stake holders and make the game big, bold and strong. But they have to be ever so careful as alienating fans is not something I recommend to the NRL after the 1999 mergers and deaths of Souths, Balmain/Wests, Norths, Northern Eagles, Manly, Illawarra/Saints, Gold Coast Chargers.
However that said, there will always be talk of 'weak' teams doing it tough and 30 years ago it was Newtown and Western Suburbs. In the mid-90's it was Saints & Easts to merge, it was kill Souths, it was mergers to be the future, it was Souths in the 2000's, it's been Cronulla recently and maybe now Wests Tigers. No one ever admits this is a cyclical game. Souths on top at the moment and would be guaranteed a spot. In 10 years they'll be shite again probably.
I don't see why well run, successful clubs should be held back by those that are not.
Sydney has too many clubs as it is.
It is time for a couple to relocate or die. I won't get in to the debate of who I think it should be as I spent the best part of the 2000's fighting for my club and defending them against relocation, amalgamation and oblivion. But the NRL needs to sort out a criteria (terrible word in NRL) for crowds, sponsors, merchandise etc and be strong.
We need new teams in other cities/regions. The NRL needs to be strong. It needs to look at satisfying the most amount of fans/customers/sponsors/stake holders and make the game big, bold and strong. But they have to be ever so careful as alienating fans is not something I recommend to the NRL after the 1999 mergers and deaths of Souths, Balmain/Wests, Norths, Northern Eagles, Manly, Illawarra/Saints, Gold Coast Chargers.
However that said, there will always be talk of 'weak' teams doing it tough and 30 years ago it was Newtown and Western Suburbs. In the mid-90's it was Saints & Easts to merge, it was kill Souths, it was mergers to be the future, it was Souths in the 2000's, it's been Cronulla recently and maybe now Wests Tigers. No one ever admits this is a cyclical game. Souths on top at the moment and would be guaranteed a spot. In 10 years they'll be shite again probably.
The Mad Hatter
OzCardTrader
In regards to the three mergers:
* Norths died, Manly took over the licence and struggled for half a decade to right itself, the merger collapsed and the Central Coast don't have a team. I can't begin to count the amount of North Shore / Bears fans people I know who just don't follow RL at all any more.
* St George took over Illawarra. The South Coast as a region lost it's team. However, they were very competitive and have gifted players, esp your burly, rugged country-boy prop types to numerous to mention. Have won 1 comp when should have won 2-3, but that's purely downing to coaching/mentoring. Perhaps a re-branding as the South Coast Saints might help. But doubt it. Coming from a family who are die-hard Saints fans, they don't really care, they feel like they still have their team. Illawarra Steelers people on the other hand… Saints brand should, and will always survive.
* Wests Tigers. Magpies fans pretty much disappeared leaving Balmain the 'senior' partner in colours, emblem and the fans who carried over. Wests retreated to the background, however, in the past few years and currently, the Balmain side of the merger has faltered and is facing oblivion. NRL have now taken over some of the Wests Tigers money, operations and decision making. Wests are looking at taking it over for themselves, or maybe not. Talk of relocation. Won one comp but seem to have been troubled by finances the whole 15 years of operation. So many talented juniors but lose too many; buy big names elsewhere who don't pull their weight; poor recruitment and retention. For past couple of years, have played out of SFS (WTF!?!?!?) and train at Burwood/Concord, ignoring a NRL heartland in Campbelltown/Livo/Narellan, etc.
* Norths died, Manly took over the licence and struggled for half a decade to right itself, the merger collapsed and the Central Coast don't have a team. I can't begin to count the amount of North Shore / Bears fans people I know who just don't follow RL at all any more.
* St George took over Illawarra. The South Coast as a region lost it's team. However, they were very competitive and have gifted players, esp your burly, rugged country-boy prop types to numerous to mention. Have won 1 comp when should have won 2-3, but that's purely downing to coaching/mentoring. Perhaps a re-branding as the South Coast Saints might help. But doubt it. Coming from a family who are die-hard Saints fans, they don't really care, they feel like they still have their team. Illawarra Steelers people on the other hand… Saints brand should, and will always survive.
* Wests Tigers. Magpies fans pretty much disappeared leaving Balmain the 'senior' partner in colours, emblem and the fans who carried over. Wests retreated to the background, however, in the past few years and currently, the Balmain side of the merger has faltered and is facing oblivion. NRL have now taken over some of the Wests Tigers money, operations and decision making. Wests are looking at taking it over for themselves, or maybe not. Talk of relocation. Won one comp but seem to have been troubled by finances the whole 15 years of operation. So many talented juniors but lose too many; buy big names elsewhere who don't pull their weight; poor recruitment and retention. For past couple of years, have played out of SFS (WTF!?!?!?) and train at Burwood/Concord, ignoring a NRL heartland in Campbelltown/Livo/Narellan, etc.
I agree on most points there except the Wests bit, i am very bias when it comes to my magpies, they should never have left Lidcombe, There should have been built a great stadium/Leagues club to encompass all sports in the immediate area, it certainly would have worked except for the fact that the wests leagues club at ashfield thought they had it all covered, how wrong they were.Hardly any fans went to Ashfield after the games because it was too far away, i was atypical of that theory.
A lot of blue collar workers from the Sydney area moved to the Central Coast in the late 80'-90's, as i did, who were rugby league fans through and through, yet no club looked into that demographic back then and tried to band aid the situation with Manly/Norths, no way on that 1.
I believe Wests should go to the Central Coast, b4 Souths do, Souths will do very well there for many years.
I hear you about the Campbelltown area, a new team would have worked there but not wests/balmain there is no logic there imo other than the word west.
Wests have always had poor management hence the merger.
Balmain at Leichhardt Oval was perfect, i loved going there as a Wests fan and most fans did as well, that was a bad move.
When it comes to juniors, not every player suits every coach, or every club, so trialling at different clubs is always the best policy, stupidly i worked that out after a few years in the wilderness, as would have many other juniors that thought loyalty was the factor in rugby league, but it is not.
Just my opinion for what it is worth.
A lot of blue collar workers from the Sydney area moved to the Central Coast in the late 80'-90's, as i did, who were rugby league fans through and through, yet no club looked into that demographic back then and tried to band aid the situation with Manly/Norths, no way on that 1.
I believe Wests should go to the Central Coast, b4 Souths do, Souths will do very well there for many years.
I hear you about the Campbelltown area, a new team would have worked there but not wests/balmain there is no logic there imo other than the word west.
Wests have always had poor management hence the merger.
Balmain at Leichhardt Oval was perfect, i loved going there as a Wests fan and most fans did as well, that was a bad move.
When it comes to juniors, not every player suits every coach, or every club, so trialling at different clubs is always the best policy, stupidly i worked that out after a few years in the wilderness, as would have many other juniors that thought loyalty was the factor in rugby league, but it is not.
Just my opinion for what it is worth.
The Mad Hatter
OzCardTrader
Funny thing is, back in 1982, they brought in Illawarra. They needed a 2nd team to make it a 14 team comp. Central Coast knocked em back. Newcastle knocked em back. They finally settled on Queanbeyean (ACT/Canberra eventually).
Campbelltown was being groomed by Newtown but ultimately failed to continue there and Wests eventually took up the slack. How Campbelltown doesn't get 12 games a year is a crime in my books.
However the population explosions in NW & SW Sydney, South Coast AND the Central Coast weren't catered for. In reality, and this is no disrespect to Manly, the NRL should have taken the Northern Eagles licence and offered it to anyone willing to put a team on the CC. However, it was a shambles and Manly did the best they could and took it back. They basically service the peninsular, North Shore and CC and have an antiquated stadium (seriously, fix it up peeps and Manly would have a home/fortress to be bloody envious of).
Now, you have regions like Perth, Central Qld, Brisbane 2/Western Brisbane and even PNG and a 2nd NZ team vying for spots. I fear CC will not get a team.
Campbelltown was being groomed by Newtown but ultimately failed to continue there and Wests eventually took up the slack. How Campbelltown doesn't get 12 games a year is a crime in my books.
However the population explosions in NW & SW Sydney, South Coast AND the Central Coast weren't catered for. In reality, and this is no disrespect to Manly, the NRL should have taken the Northern Eagles licence and offered it to anyone willing to put a team on the CC. However, it was a shambles and Manly did the best they could and took it back. They basically service the peninsular, North Shore and CC and have an antiquated stadium (seriously, fix it up peeps and Manly would have a home/fortress to be bloody envious of).
Now, you have regions like Perth, Central Qld, Brisbane 2/Western Brisbane and even PNG and a 2nd NZ team vying for spots. I fear CC will not get a team.
I must add in regards to St George/Illawarra, that was another bad move as St George was always going to be the dominant factor, as they should be, but the Illawarra region was a country boys haven from whatever part of the country you were from, so they should have stood alone and now that touch has been lost.
AyiosYiorgos
Card Addict
If Illawarra didn't join with the Dragons, they would have been dead within 2 years....
AyiosYiorgos
Card Addict
The St George Illawarra Dragons advise that after consultation with the NRL Integrity Unit, Craig Garvey has been conditionally reinstated to the Club having been disciplined and fined for breaching the Dragons Code of Conduct at the end of last month.
Garvey will play for the Illawarra Cutters in Saturday’s NSW Cup clash against Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks
Garvey will play for the Illawarra Cutters in Saturday’s NSW Cup clash against Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks
Mate most clubs would have been dead in 2 years that is why Super League was a lifeline and still is.
How are Canberra still viable and Cronulla, i believe in Cronulla but once again poor management. Brisbane are hanging on via a life line so no 2nd team here would cope. Most clubs are financially under pressure due to lack of iniative and poor management. What i believe is that the top 8 clubs, the regular top 8, are well managed, whatever it takes to show they are viable.
The Mad Hatter
OzCardTrader
Sad but true.
- Status
