Eels seeking permission to cheat salary cap...

[Spot On]

How the f**k could Parra be near the cap with the squad they have? That should be the issue here.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

I don't think they'll win the GF with Folau, I just want to prove a point that being a little over the cap doesn't make much difference. If you're spending much more and obviously have a deeper squad than most then yeah you should win, but the Storm won due to coaching, culture, attitude and Cam Smith along with Slater.

 

[betcats]

Grand final??? They got the spoon last year..they will improve under ricky though.

 

[Ulysseus]

If he agrees to play for the bare minimum and comes out with a statement along the lines of "I made a shitload of money in the AFL this allows me to sign for significantly less than an apparent value as I am financially secure therefore I'll play for who I want - on what grounds are you denying me employment, on what criteria are you establishing a 400K value and is this legal Ian?"
then I'd like to hear the answer.

 

[betcats]

Im not saying this is right but wouldnt the his last contract size have something to do with Schuueys value of him?

 

[Byron Knight]

Wasn't he on something like $500K a year at the Broncos?

The rule should be that when assholes like f**kau want to come crawling back to the NRL the club should have to pay at least 80% of the salary the player was on before they turned their back on the game.

Im not saying this is right but wouldnt the his last contract size have something to do with Schuueys value of him?

The smh have him earning less than $400k with the Broncos:

"That said, Schubert's refusal to lower his valuation of Folau has perplexed many at the Eels, and some outside the club. When Folau left the game at the end of 2010, as a Test and Origin star, he was not being paid $400,000 by the Broncos. Yet after two years out of the game, and more of an unknown than he was when he left, he has been valued alongside some of the star players in the game."

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ules-for-folau-falls-flat-20121126-2a3mu.html

Surely this isn't too hard? If he has agreed to it, leave it be. As it says, how can a guy 2 years out of the game be valued more than he was then? Ridiculous imo

 

[Hooch]

Schubert is a clown.

The whole idea of him or someone else determining and enforcing the market value of a player is ridiculous.

If they want to play for less, let them.

If there are undeclared payments, prove it.

Until then, shut up and get back to cleaning the tomato sauce stains out of your tie Schuey.

 

[Aaron_sfas]

Schubert is a clown.

The whole idea of him or someone else determining and enforcing the market value of a player is ridiculous.

If they want to play for less, let them.

If there are undeclared payments, prove it.

Until then, shut up and get back to cleaning the tomato sauce stains out of your tie Schuey.

This. He set a dangerous precedent with the Greg Inglis "notional value" fiasco.... now he looks set to enforce it a second time. Silly. Either way, bad signing for the Eels

 

[Canard]

Would fans accept it if Cronk, Smith, Slater, Inglis and Folau decided they wanted to play for the Storm in 2015 for $100K each?

 

[Firey_Dragon]

Would fans accept it if Cronk, Smith, Slater, Inglis and Folau decided they wanted to play for the Storm in 2015 for $100K each?

Yes. At the end of the day, most clubs will not get too many players other than true clubmen willing to play for their clubs at a significantly lower price than their market worth.

The salary cap is a restraint of trade, helping clubs stay afloat, if the NRL wishes to tell clubs how much each player is worth, they may as well move to a draft system.

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

Seriously. How the f**k can teh Eels be anywhere near the cap?

They don't have 13 NRL standard players.

Serves them right for letting arse clowns like Osborne near the joint. Poore, Hindmarsh & Burt are all gone from last year and they are still at the cap.

What.

The.

Fugg????????????????????????????????

 

[WayneBennett]

 

[Canard]

Yes. At the end of the day, most clubs will not get too many players other than true clubmen willing to play for their clubs at a significantly lower price than their market worth.

The salary cap is a restraint of trade, helping clubs stay afloat, if the NRL wishes to tell clubs how much each player is worth, they may as well move to a draft system.

So in the space of two days LU has gone from "How can club A sing player X they must be over the cap!!!"

To

"If a guy says he want's to play for $50 and a packet of Winnie Blues, he should be allowed to and its not naive to think there are no third party payments involved!"

Its about consistency and a level playing field, every club should be given this exemption from now on, not just make up the rules as we go along to suit Parra.

 

[firechild]

So in the space of two days LU has gone from "How can club A sing player X they must be over the cap!!!"

To

"If a guy says he want's to play for $50 and a packet of Winnie Blues, he should be allowed to and its not naive to think there are no third party payments involved!"

Its about consistency and a level playing field, every club should be given this exemption from now on, not just make up the rules as we go along to suit Parra.

You're basing the thoughts of all LU posters on 1 reply?

 

[Canard]

You're basing the thoughts of all LU posters on 1 reply?

Of course how else would you decide things other than gross generalisations?

But honestly I reckon 70 to 80% of the posters in this thread seem to think the NRL are wrong in trying to enforce some sort of consistency.

 

[firechild]

No, I think a lot of people feel that $400k is overvalued, especially since he was being paid less before he went to fumbleball and lost all muscle mass. If they said $250k then there would probably be far fewer complaints. Parra would still be unable to squeeze him in. I think it is good to have some restrictions because as you say, an origin and international player would almost certainly not be signing a contract for SFA knowing their potential value and the chances are high that the club could be offering something undisclosed (boats, bags of cash, whatever) as extra incentive to sign for a small contract.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

It's not ridiculous to believe Folau would be valued at $400k a season in 2013 after he was being paid maybe $300-350k two or three years ago. Wages are going up by 20 or 30%, especially for top players.

But having said that, the market value - if you consider that to be a simple case of demand and supply - of a player is determined by a whole range of things. His ability, age, the position he plays, the amount of clubs after such a player, the amount of money those clubs have to spend etc etc. It's the end of November. Most clubs don't have the cash to spend. Therefore, according to demand and supply, he is not worth that much. Now, the reason there is only a low demand for a player like Folau at this time of year is because of a mechanism that is imposed somewhat unnaturally by the NRL, the salary cap. If the NRL wants to play this game of capping salaries evenly across clubs and imposing somewhat arbitrary values on players they need to consider all of these other factors, including the fact that their policy is contributing to the situation.

And having said all that I hope the merkin ends up playing Romanian second division union for a year. It'd serve him right.

 

[boxhead]

So in the space of two days LU has gone from "How can club A sing player X they must be over the cap!!!"

To

"If a guy says he want's to play for $50 and a packet of Winnie Blues, he should be allowed to and its not naive to think there are no third party payments involved!"

Its about consistency and a level playing field, every club should be given this exemption from now on, not just make up the rules as we go along to suit Parra.

The problem is that they have let things like this through in the past, and that cannot be denied by anyone. According to several articles, Darren Lockyer, Justin Hodges, Sam Thaiday, Mark Gasnier and a host of others were paid much less than their 'market value' - with the latter being signed to a heavily back-ended deal. The NRL let Gasnier through. We complained, but the fact is that they set the precedent there and to then turn around and block us is unfair. Not only that, weren't the Dragons pinged for being over the salary cap in 2010?

The fact remains that Folau himself agreed to the deal. Why is it up to the NRL, and in particular an ex player, to determine a player's minimum value? That is just ridiculous and you cannot deny that. In spite of all the benefits simply letting Folau sign for that amount would bring to both the Eels and the NRL, nope, they go with the stupid option that is inconsistent with past decisions.

Mind you, if we really are close to the salary cap limit, our club has screwed up big-time.

Just another thought - there have been lots of articles in recent times about how players that sign for the Bulldogs play for less than their believed market value so they can work under Des, no?
And yet Schubert enforces a severely over-priced value of Folau?
This last point is conjecture - that is a grey area that I do not know. But, food for thought, it is still a valid point that we hear about players going to certain clubs for what is considered "unders".

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Ex-Canterbury player? If you're going to infer some kind of bias at least get it right.

 

[boxhead]

The point wasn't what club he played for. It was a minor reference to why I think ex-players should not be placed in high positions.