All it takes is one company to independently make an offer that requires a player to play for a specific club and the NRL to say No and it's restricting that players earnings. The NRL can't restrict what third parties do and players wont agree to give up the gravy train out of certain clubs unless they are compensated.
Maybe someone in the know can tell us but I believe in the AFL they have a more generous cap on sponsors been able to pay players and they seem to have much greater ability to control TPAs as a result. I think this is the best approach and most likely to get agreement from the players in the CBA.
Not sure I agree. It just needs some good regulation. In that case the NRL stipulates it is not 3rd party as the company has gone around the process and breached and enforces the entire amount to go on the cap and fines the club a shit load for the breach.
The players earnings are not restricted but you can bet the clubs will think twice about circumventing the process.
Look, this would still be open to rorting but it will be more transparent if detected and there is no way players can moan their earnings are being restricted because the corporate dollars are still there and available to them but the process for engaging and accessing third party sponsorships is now independent of earnings from clubs. With a bit of thought and intent it would work.
Do I think it will happen? No. Why? Because it is clear the Roosters, Dogs and Broncos (via News) have too much infuence on the decisons taken by the independent commission in running the game.