Burgess's transfer fee is a salary cap rort

[Craig Johnston]

can someone please explain to me how paying a massive transfer free to obtain marquee signings and not counting it in the salary is not an unfair advantage for richer clubs?

 

[Dave Q]

can someone please explain to me how paying a massive transfer free to obtain marquee signings and not counting it in the salary is not an unfair advantage for richer clubs?

When you are the best club in world like Souths is, seems to me that you are entitled to a few perks.

 

[hunters]

I am happy to stand corrected but last time I checked, the money was paid to Bradford, Bradford are not playing for Souths and therefore it's not part of Souths salary cap.

 

[Craig Johnston]

I am happy to stand corrected but last time I checked, the money was paid to Bradford, Bradford are not playing for Souths and therefore it's not part of Souths salary cap.

doesn't matter, player values in a salary cap don't necessarily represent what they earn.....eg kingston.

having a transfer fee not counted in a cap advantages richer clubs. what is the point of having a cap if this rort is allowed?

 

[S.S.T.I.D]

doesn't matter, player values in a salary cap don't necessarily represent what they earn.....eg kingston.

having a transfer fee not counted in a cap advantages richer clubs. what is the point of having a cap if this rort is allowed?

I'll ask you a question. How is it a rort if it is legal?

 

[Dave Q]

Its not a rort, its a right.

 

[mohses]

can someone please explain to me how paying a massive transfer free to obtain marquee signings and not counting it in the salary is not an unfair advantage for richer clubs?

Brett finch was paid by the eels to play for the storm for the remainder of his contract at the eels same deal goes with Burgess if u ask me

 

[Craig Johnston]

I'll ask you a question. How is it a rort if it is legal?

it's a rort because it destroys the principles of having a salary cap system at all

 

[Craig Johnston]

Brett finch was paid by the eels to play for the storm for the remainder of his contract at the eels same deal goes with Burgess if u ask me

what the?

finch's 300k counted against the eels cap for 2009. did burgess's bunnies salary and transfer fee count against 2009 did it?

please try and make sense.

 

[morgan123]

Transfer fees are not common in Australia I take it?

They are payments to the clubs to enable the play to be released from his contract. The other club isn't forced to accept so it's not like its an abuse of power from the 'rich' club.

Burgess' salary goes on the cap, not the compensation paid to Bradford.

If you think that deal is a 'rort' what about the one Wigan paid to Bradford for Stuart Fielden? At the time he was arguably one of the best front rowers in the world. Wigan were facing certain relegation from SL and were up to the cap limit. They paid Bradford half a million pounds to sign Fielden, paid him a huge salary way in excess of the salary cap and managed to win a few and stay up. They were caught and admitted cheating the cap to stay up.

The RFL let them stay up and gave them a tiny fine instead.:lol: All the other clubs protested, Cas who went down sued them and then Fielden turned terrible and has held them back ever since.

 

[Fein]

please try and make sense.

Only if you can keep up with the programme.

It's a SALARY cap.

 

[Johns Magic]

They are payments to the clubs to enable the play to be released from his contract. The other club isn't forced to accept so it's not like its an abuse of power from the 'rich' club.

Except that the poor clubs can't afford to do it. Which is exactly who the salary cap is in place to protect.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

When you are the best club in world like Souths is, seems to me that you are entitled to a few perks.

Credit where credits due atleast you dont deny its a rort, just wish my club could afford it and could attract a player of his status.

 

[themacemaceman]

Except that the poor clubs can't afford to do it. Which is exactly who the salary cap is in place to protect.

I wouldnt be complaining if I was you johns magic. If I recall correctly the NRL approved a large payment from the Nine Network to Andrew Johns to top up his Knights contract to keep him in Rugby league as he had all but gone to rugby. Now thats is a RORT. How many other clubs have been allowed a similar favour. The knights couldnt win without joey back then and they still cant.

 

[Craig Johnston]

Only if you can keep up with the programme.

It's a SALARY cap.

:lol: you had to edit out the bit about finch coz you know your fellow fan was talking absolute bollocks.

 

[Craig Johnston]

Except that the poor clubs can't afford to do it. Which is exactly who the salary cap is in place to protect.

bingo

 

[Craig Johnston]

I wouldnt be complaining if I was you johns magic. If I recall correctly the NRL approved a large payment from the Nine Network to Andrew Johns to top up his Knights contract to keep him in Rugby league as he had all but gone to rugby. Now thats is a RORT. How many other clubs have been allowed a similar favour. The knights couldnt win without joey back then and they still cant.

the nrl referred johns to nine, it was then up to fordham to negotiate a 3rd party sponsorship deal. the deal had to be independent of john's negotiations with the knights.

gasnier did the same. all above table. every player has an opportunity to approach nine, without being directly referred by the club or guaranteed income.

looks like you don't understand the difference, and just want to have a go at the knights/johns.

 

[Foxy]

It would be a salary cap rort if Burgess were to have had his contract with Bradford front-loaded, walked away with the money from his contract at Bradford, which Souths reimbursed to Bradford and/or Souths then paid him a small salary to play for us.

But that isn't the case.

Burgess is on a healthy contract at Souths, fully included in the salary cap. He hasn't walked away from Bradford with more than he earnt by playing there and therefore we have made no additional payment in cash or kind to lure Sam Burgess into signing or staying. The Fuifui Moimoi case at the moment is because the Eels paid for a gratuity that could be seen as a reason for Fuifui to want to extend his association with the club - hence it is under the cap. Souths have not done anything along those lines for Sam Burgess they have simply compensated the Bradford club for allowing him to break his contract. It happens all the time in the NRL but NRL clubs do not ask for such compensation.

The only truth to what you say is that if 5 clubs were in the running for Burgess and only Souths had the money to pay the transfer fee they would have the advantage but that is an advantage afforded by sound management and aligning ourselves with passionate supporters/owners who are willing to contribute to the sucess of the club... not an advantage that can be questioned under fairness as all clubs have the same playing ground on which to succeed

 

[Fein]

:lol: you had to edit out the bit about finch coz you know your fellow fan was talking absolute bollocks.

Wrong.

 

[Different kind of Rabbit]

Why would a transfer fee be counted under the salary cap? It is not paid to the player. It is not part of anyones salary. It is an amount given to another club as compensation for them allowing a player to be released before his contract has expired. Burgess would have signed for Souths a year later anyway.

If Souths have the ability to pay a transfer fee and other clubs negotiating for the contract do not then why should Souths be penalised? Souths have operated within the laws of the game and other clubs had exactly the same opportunity.