What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rumoured Signings 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.

hineyrulz

Post Whore
Messages
156,709
When Burgess first arrived he was a young bloke looking to test himself in the NRL. He had done well in the ESL but thats like being the best player in reserve grade here. He was an unknown commodity.

Folau is a former QLD and Australian rep. Everyone knows how good he is.

BIG difference.

Within 12 months, Burgess had earned an upgraded contract.

But keep going on with your conspiracy theory and proving what an imbecile you are. It's good entertainment for everyone else here.
lol, He was an England rep and already one of the hottest young prospects in the game.. Folank was coming of two years of starving himself and had to be seen as a risk. And big difference ripping it up against average Yawnion backs than back playing in the premier Rugby Comp in the world. Anyway i had no problem what Souths were paying him until Shooie decided to make up rules as he went along and decided Falonk had to play for Market value.

Does that mean now every player can't say at his club for a little less because they have to play at market value or does this rule only apply to Parra????
 

murraymob

Coach
Messages
10,338
You know he was only getting paid $150k though. There would be no way they would lie to Customs about his income just to get around the salary cap. It isn't worth the risk for very harsh penalties for Sam and Souths

does not matter what you declare on customs its a a projected figure.The only amount that matters is whats declared to taxation.His deal with nine would be at least 150k
 

BranVan3000

Coach
Messages
12,297
lol, He was an England rep and already one of the hottest young prospects in the game.. Folank was coming of two years of starving himself and had to be seen as a risk. And big difference ripping it up against average Yawnion backs than back playing in the premier Rugby Comp in the world. Anyway i had no problem what Souths were paying him until Shooie decided to make up rules as he went along and decided Falonk had to play for Market value.

Does that mean now every player can't say at his club for a little less because they have to play at market value or does this rule only apply to Parra????

What was Burgess's market value? Keep in mind this was 2010, he was 20 when he signed and he was the first real player imported from the ESL in awhile. The signing could have been a total failure, he wasn't proven at all. We also had put pen to paper before he really gained attention in the 2009 Four Nations tournament
 

hineyrulz

Post Whore
Messages
156,709
What was Burgess's market value? Keep in mind this was 2010, he was 20 when he signed and he was the first real player imported from the ESL in awhile. The signing could have been a total failure, he wasn't proven at all. We also had put pen to paper before he really gained attention in the 2009 Four Nations tournament
I'll say it again my problem is not with Souths or what they payed Burgess, i still think 150k was ridiculously cheap but that what souths payed and good for them. My problem is with Shooie who is able to pick and choose what market value is and for which clubs. After the falonk precedent how can anyone now stay at their club for a little bit less below market value??? Or does that rule only apply for Parra???
 

Packy

Bench
Messages
4,243
Sorry mate, I've think we've both been had by Noa, I need more sleep. I was preoccupied with finding a way for Canberra to keep Milford, considering halfbacks are like rocking horse shit and Brisbane wouldn't waste his talent sitting out 5 of 6 plays at fullback. Brisbane wouldn't consider a young bloke who left the 20's early because he was so good in a position as worthy cultivating in that same position in the NRL. Good one Noa

Except that they have practically ruined Ben Hunt by doing something similar... at least stagnated him.
 

851

Bench
Messages
3,141
You know he was only getting paid $150k though. There would be no way they would lie to Customs about his income just to get around the salary cap. It isn't worth the risk for very harsh penalties for Sam and Souths
That was what his contract stated that was submitted,maybe they lied to the nrl about the real wage I don't know.
 
Messages
15,545
I'll say it again my problem is not with Souths or what they payed Burgess, i still think 150k was ridiculously cheap but that what souths payed and good for them. My problem is with Shooie who is able to pick and choose what market value is and for which clubs. After the falonk precedent how can anyone now stay at their club for a little bit less below market value??? Or does that rule only apply for Parra???

The exact same thing happened to Souths when we signed Inglis. We had to get rid of Beau Champion at the time because Schubert had a higher projected value for Inglis than what Souths were paying him under contract. We were essentially made to declare some of the third party deals which should not have had to count.

Parra are not the only club to ever have this problem.

It was also widely publicised at the time we signed Burgess that he could easily have earned more in ESL and his first contract with us was a test case to see how he'd go.
 
Last edited:

hineyrulz

Post Whore
Messages
156,709
The exact same thing happened to Souths when we signed Inglis. We had to get rid of Beau Champion at the time because Schubert had a higher projected value for Inglis than what Souths were paying him under contract. We were essentially made to declare some of the third party deals which should not have had to count.

Parra are not the only club to ever have this problem.
Yeah but weren't you taking him of the storms hands???? Wouldn't you have had to pay what the Storm were paying him brown paper bags boats and all????
 
Messages
33,280
Don't forget that the phone chucker even admitted to "wining and dining" burgess when filming one of his shitty films. Nothing dodgy there :lol:
 

851

Bench
Messages
3,141
Don't forget that the phone chucker even admitted to "wining and dining" burgess when filming one of his shitty films. Nothing dodgy there :lol:
True,we offered Burgess around $300k and he was keen,but he signed for $150k at souths,Burgess obviously new Sheen's was a basket case before the rest of the world worked it out.
 

BranVan3000

Coach
Messages
12,297
I'll say it again my problem is not with Souths or what they payed Burgess, i still think 150k was ridiculously cheap but that what souths payed and good for them. My problem is with Shooie who is able to pick and choose what market value is and for which clubs. After the falonk precedent how can anyone now stay at their club for a little bit less below market value??? Or does that rule only apply for Parra???

We had to deal with that nonsense with Inglis when such nonsense had never been mentioned when he was heading to Brisbane, so don't act like we are in a different boat. Schubert is awful at his job, can't believe he still has one
 

Big Tim

First Grade
Messages
6,500
Losses: Farrell, Starling, Asotasi, Peats

Gains: None

Re-signed: Turner, Burgess, Burgess, Burgess, McQueen, Sutton, Walker, Tyrrell, Goodwin

Doubt we'll sign anyone, probably re-sign a few more but realistically we'll have a small squad next year.

In size or number?

The Burgess' are huge, and I am pretty sure that you will have the same number of players on NRL contracts that every other club has.....
 

rabbitohs95

Bench
Messages
4,711
In size or number?

The Burgess' are huge, and I am pretty sure that you will have the same number of players on NRL contracts that every other club has.....

Number, but each club has a different number of players ranging from 25-40

This year we have 32 players in the first grade squad

Considering we haven't purchased any players (but around 4/5 of our 20's will be promoted) and the fact that we've lost/are losing about 8 players, we should have about 27/28 players all together
 

BranVan3000

Coach
Messages
12,297
Number, but each club has a different number of players ranging from 25-40

This year we have 32 players in the first grade squad

Considering we haven't purchased any players (but around 4/5 of our 20's will be promoted) and the fact that we've lost/are losing about 8 players, we should have about 27/28 players all together

Some players will come up from 20s and there will be signings, just not expensive ones
 

rabbitohs95

Bench
Messages
4,711
Some players will come up from 20s and there will be signings, just not expensive ones

Hopefully we get some that turn out to be, i have a feeling we'll snare 2/3 from QLD Cup or ESL or a reserve grade player like we did in 2012 with Hunt, Carr Everingham and King
 

bfoord

Juniors
Messages
433
We had to deal with that nonsense with Inglis when such nonsense had never been mentioned when he was heading to Brisbane, so don't act like we are in a different boat. Schubert is awful at his job, can't believe he still has one

Schubert also rejected the Broncos first offer to Inglis.
 

Iafeta

Referee
Messages
24,357
We had to deal with that nonsense with Inglis when such nonsense had never been mentioned when he was heading to Brisbane, so don't act like we are in a different boat. Schubert is awful at his job, can't believe he still has one

Gringlis loves his boats.
 

KiamaSaint

Coach
Messages
18,245
The salary cap is there to spread the talent. Jjust get rid of it and introduce an independent system and then no one complains.
 

RWB

Bench
Messages
2,814
Not every club has an ex player as the salary cap auditor either.

That would be quite an achievement.

Maybe we could give Arana Taumata the position when he's burnt up all his chances at every club in the NRL?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top