Des Hasler

[Nice Beaver]

Indictment?

It's f**king football not war negotiations JFC

As for "favourable decisions" and "double standards" - exactly what rules are being bent or broken?

And assuming it's true, can you point out to me where the NRL has refused to endorse a lower-value contract for a player (presuming of course there were reasons for it, like in Hopoate's case)?

hahahahaha

Firstly, go grab yourself a dictionary and check out the definition of "indictment" before you start wetting your panties about my use of the word. Idiot.

Secondly, I can point out 2 occasions just off the top of my head where the NRL has refused to endorse a lower value contract - Glenn Stewart with Manly and Israel Falou with Parramatta. I am sure I could find more if I needed to bother looking, but the point is already proved.

And as another poster said, yep - going from $800k to $120k is justified because he missed 4 games in a year.

Are you a test dummy for this Flacker drug or what?

 

[Timmah]

hahahahaha

Firstly, go grab yourself a dictionary and check out the definition of "indictment" before you start wetting your panties about my use of the word. Idiot.

Secondly, I can point out 2 occasions just off the top of my head where the NRL has refused to endorse a lower value contract - Glenn Stewart with Manly and Israel Falou with Parramatta. I am sure I could find more if I needed to bother looking, but the point is already proved.

And as another poster said, yep - going from $800k to $120k is justified because he missed 4 games in a year.

Are you a test dummy for this Flacker drug or what?

Well aware of your use of the word, just seems over the top for something that really isn't that big of a deal.

As for Folau (no idea about this Stewart thing), Schubert turned it down because it was a back-ended deal. Hopoate's deal is not the same thing.

This entire discussion assumes both $800k and $120k are true, neither of which I believe.

 

[Fufu Andronez]

What I don't understand is that Hopoate is taking Parramatta to court over lost earnings for $1.8 Million that they reneged on.

So if that is what he is expecting his market value to be (the amount he is suing Parramatta for), and that is the contract that he accepted and signed, then why was he allowed to sign with the bulldogs for $150k?

That sounds like an almighty bending of the rules to me

 

[Spade]

He probably isn't worth anymore then 120k the way he played at Parra, lucky another club took him haha.

 

[Nice Beaver]

h

Well aware of your use of the word, just seems over the top for something that really isn't that big of a deal.

As for Folau (no idea about this Stewart thing), Schubert turned it down because it was a back-ended deal. Hopoate's deal is not the same thing.

This entire discussion assumes both $800k and $120k are true, neither of which I believe.

The word was entirely appropriate and not "over the top" when used in context. Hardly a harsh word at all.

Falou's was turned down because Parramatta wanted to register his contract for $110,000 per season which the NRL deemed to low.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...e-up-rugby-union/story-e6frep5x-1226527789062

And whether you know about it or not, Manly was told by the NRL that they would not register a contract they were going to submit for him because it was "under market value".

Let's see if Todd Carney turns up in a Bulldogs jersey next year, then have a chat about favourable conditions.......

 

[POPEYE]

and Storm players offered to take a pay cut to stay under the cap

 

[Timmah]

I'm still waiting on where it's been stated it's a rule that the NRL can't accept a "below-market-value" contract?

A couple of backstories (which seem slightly different in detail to Hopoate's situation) that are now several years old don't really clarify much IMO

 

[AJB1102]

I'm still waiting on where it's been stated it's a rule that the NRL can't accept a "below-market-value" contract?

A couple of backstories (which seem slightly different in detail to Hopoate's situation) that are now several years old don't really clarify much IMO

Its probably not a rule. Just random inconsistent 'what applies to some doesn't apply to others' bullshit the NRL is famous for.

 

[Nice Beaver]

I'm still waiting on where it's been stated it's a rule that the NRL can't accept a "below-market-value" contract?

A couple of backstories (which seem slightly different in detail to Hopoate's situation) that are now several years old don't really clarify much IMO

You are probably right - there is no hard and fast rule.

But no NRL contract is official until the NRL ratify it. All I have stated is that its interesting how some clubs have contracts rejected and others do not at the whim of those in power.

I don't think anyone ever said it was a rule, did they?

 

[Timmah]

That still doesn't make your pro-Bulldogs conspiracy theory any more likely.

 

[AJB1102]

That still doesn't make your pro-Bulldogs conspiracy theory any more likely.

I don't think there is enough coordination at NRL HQ to properly run a conspiracy.

I think it just goes to highlight the haphazard nature of the administration.

 

[Barkley]

The discrepancy in contracts is simple to explain. Hoppa misses out on double time for not suiting up on Sundays and he is getting $1m in 3rd Party Payments (tax free of course) from the church for all of the expose he has created.

I did the sums on my calculator watch, you know I'm right.

 

[McNulty]

A report a few weeks back had him on a contract worth only 120k a season. That's pretty small coin for someone who played Origin only 12-18 months before that contract was agreed to, IMO.

Well aware of your use of the word, just seems over the top for something that really isn't that big of a deal.

As for Folau (no idea about this Stewart thing), Schubert turned it down because it was a back-ended deal. Hopoate's deal is not the same thing.

This entire discussion assumes both $800k and $120k are true, neither of which I believe.

Well, this is awkward!!

 

[ed-grimley]

The discrepancy in contracts is simple to explain. Hoppa misses out on double time for not suiting up on Sundays and he is getting $1m in 3rd Party Payments (tax free of course) from the church for all of the expose he has created.

I did the sums on my calculator watch, you know I'm right.

I heard they threw in a bicycle.

 

[Barkley]

I heard they threw in a bicycle.

Of course....and a glove for his door knocking hand.

 

[Timmah]

Well, this is awkward!!

In what way? In the first post I merely quoted a report, I never qualified it as 100% true or stated whether I believed it to be.

 

[McNulty]

In what way? In the first post I merely quoted a report, I never qualified it as 100% true or stated whether I believed it to be.

You presented it as fact to suit your argument and later backtracked.

 

[Timmah]

You presented it as fact to suit your argument and later backtracked.

You must struggle with comprehension. The first two words of my sentence in that first post were "a report".

Not as fact, not whether I believe it or not - that it had been reported. That's all.

But keep distracting from the discussion (which is already ridiculously off topic as it is)

 

[Canard]

$120k

The Doggies never change. They make the Broncos salary cap look legit.

 

[McNulty]

You must struggle with comprehension. The first two words of my sentence in that first post were "a report".

Not as fact, not whether I believe it or not - that it had been reported. That's all.

But keep distracting from the discussion (which is already ridiculously off topic as it is)

You still presented it as fact and a great apparent reason why no one should be up in arms about the Hoppa signing.

There is clearly a good reason why you have all the time in the world to live your life on an internet forum, twitter, making banners, etc