Gasnier/Union: Possible 780K deal

[Catatonic_Omnivore]

Lockyer isnt going anywhere and has not indicated he wants to go to union.
Gasnier is umming and arrring.

Someone offers me $780K with the prospect of not having to tackle, I would be umming and arrring too.

 

[Iafeta]

As good as Gasnier is no one compares to Joey.

Waiting for the biast calls but its definately true.

Whats your point?

The salary cap exists so all clubs have an equal opportunity in term's of the ability of their roster.

Therefore, in fairness to the cap whats good for one is good for the other - you can't make exemptions here or there.

 

[Iafeta]

Johns is one of the best players in the history of RL. His conversion to Union would have been a massive propaganda victory. The NRL were absolutely right to do whatever it takes to keep him in the game.

Gasnier is arguably the best centre in the world at the moment. He's also an arsehole. I'm sure the NRL would prefer to keep him but comparing it to the Johns situation misses the point - the fact that he's replaceable.

Wrong - the point is the salary cap is there to give all clubs an equal opportunity at the premiership through evenness of player roster.

The salary cap does NOT exist to ensure top players are retained, otherwise we'd see less players in the ESL or going to union. Thats not the point whatsoever.

Once you make exemptions for one club/player, then you have to continue through with exemptions to other clubs/players or otherwise you simply create in equity in the player roster strengths, which is not the salary caps intention.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Whats your point?

The salary cap exists so all clubs have an equal opportunity in term's of the ability of their roster.

Therefore, in fairness to the cap whats good for one is good for the other - you can't make exemptions here or there.

I didnt say I agreed with what they did.

I was making the point a comparision to Gasnier and to Joey is totally off, as one has a much bigger stature then the other.

 

[Danish]

How can Gasnier be the best centre in the league if he can't tackle?...I thought rugby league involved both attack AND defence.

Its the same reason why people believe Billy Slater is an excellent fullback.

 

[Paullyboy]

Let him go, I learnt my lesson after Sailor and Tuquiri left. At the time I really thought rugby league in QLD would struggle. Then what happens a mob called the Cowboys produce a bunch of local kids who have more talent than Sailor and Tuquiri combined.

Gasnier leaving will be bad short term, and will help the Waratahs, but we'll produce someone better - Greg Inglis will be a bigger name than Gasnier in 2 years anyway. Let alone some of the players running around in the juniors who havent even debuted yet.

See ya Gasnier, enjoy the money.

 

[Nook]

Wrong - the point is the salary cap is there to give all clubs an equal opportunity at the premiership through evenness of player roster.

The salary cap does NOT exist to ensure top players are retained, otherwise we'd see less players in the ESL or going to union. Thats not the point whatsoever.

Ofcourse its not - where have I suggested that?

Once you make exemptions for one club/player, then you have to continue through with exemptions to other clubs/players or otherwise you simply create in equity in the player roster strengths, which is not the salary caps intention.

I'm happy for them to make an exception for Johns, in the form of pushing through some dubious 3rd party stuff and generally assisting in negotiations, on the basis that his departure would have done significant damage to RL. To the extent that its inequitable if one player receives special treatment where others don't due to his value to the game, so be it.

I think its a slightly different issue to the salary cap, and indicative of the inevitable tension between salary cap/competition evenness and the need to hold onto the best talent in the game. No easy answers but I've got absolutely no problem with the NRL exercising discretion to help out in the case of some players but not in others.

 

[DJ1]

I'm sure he will re-sign with the Dragons for a couple of hundred thousand less than he can get anywhere else.

In a few years he'll resurface on the sidelines as the highest paid "Assistant Orange Peeler" in the history of the game.

Of course there will be no written and signed documentation trail of it.

 

[Sea_Eagles_Rock]

YOu can't rewrite history. The Johns deal is done. I remember plenty on here didn't agree with it (me included) but that was then. This is now. It's time for a strong stand to be taken on player managers and player trying to force the NRL to cough up more bikkies by using the old Union trump card. Without Johns resigning, Newcastle may have been forced up the financial gurgler. Will the S-I Dragons be up the gurgler if Gaz leaves? Hell no.

Bluff or not, there is no way the NRL should even attempt to match or better a deal like that. It's absolutely way out of line with any other centre in the game.

There is talk Manly (and a few other clubs) want Jamie Lyon. Well if we pay that sort of dough to get him I think I would safely say we would have blown the salary cap. It's a team sport and the best team is more important than the best individual. But if Gas gets a deal from the NRL you can bet your last dollar Jamie Lyon will be after the same sort of deal as well.

 

[simon says]

that would be great to see in action.
They would be almost certainties to win the super14 in 2007 with that backline.

Ive been waiting to say this Chuckles.....

Saab,I agree 100 percent....:lol: :lol:

 

[Thomas]

Good one Thomas.

"It denies the young talent coming through"? Please...

Considering every union hack states that there has been no decent no. 10 at the Waratahs since Ella (ie. early 80s), the last twenty years have been pretty barren. :lol:

Take the anti-union blinkers off for a minute there, oh hostile one.

Do you or do you not agree that signing 24 year old RL players would result in junior RU players being disalluioned with the game? Your thoughts....and don't turn this into an anti-RU thread.

And you're "quote" is quite correct. Ella was a freak.....and NSW has always struggled in that department (until last year when they made the S12 final they were the worst Australian team...even worse than the Qld Reds). Australian rugby union has had some great 5/8's since Ella in Lynagh and Larkham......just none that could compare to the skills of Ella.

Qld and the ACT have for the most of the last decade had the majority of the Wallaby players. There's plenty of depth out there and lots of young players coming through that might not get a chance to play RU because an ex-RL player was offered an absurd amount of cash to play a game he doesn't love or care about. Thats what I don't like about it.

 

[sooperdooper]

Let him go, I learnt my lesson after Sailor and Tuquiri left. At the time I really thought rugby league in QLD would struggle. Then what happens a mob called the Cowboys produce a bunch of local kids who have more talent than Sailor and Tuquiri combined.

Gasnier leaving will be bad short term, and will help the Waratahs, but we'll produce someone better - Greg Inglis will be a bigger name than Gasnier in 2 years anyway. Let alone some of the players running around in the juniors who havent even debuted yet.

See ya Gasnier, enjoy the money.

greg inglis wont be bigger than the name gasnier!

sailor is past his prime, but tuquiri! i bet any club in the NRL would want his services!!!

 

[Thomas]

Attacking the likes of Giteau with the aid of the league would show those union bosses we are not gonna roll over and let them pick the eyes out of league

but with the salary cap there is no way that any NRL team could afford Giteau or Tuquiri even. These guys aren't going to take a pay cut.

 

[sooperdooper]

Losing Joey to Union would have been a massive blow for the game!!
and they did what they had to do to retain him, i dont think Mark Gasnier deserves that credit

 

[Mr_Ugly]

If you start bending the cap rules for every player who says he wants to go to union, then you may as well throw the cap out the window.

A better solution may be to contract the top 25 players or so to the national team, the same way that cricket does (and probably union too). That way the cap stays in place, but there is an extra $100K incentive (or whatever) to keep the best players in the game. Origin players might also be contracted at at some level.

If this happenned, then all of a sudden, staying in league is far more attractive for the top players, and there would be more pressure on clubs to release players for rep matches too.

A problem with this however, is that the Kiwis probably couldn't afford it, and so it would make it harder for them to stay competitive at international level.

 

[Thomas]

If you start bending the cap rules for every player who says he wants to go to union, then you may as well throw the cap out the window.

A better solution may be to contract the top 25 players or so to the national team, the same way that cricket does (and probably union too). That way the cap stays in place, but there is an extra $100K incentive (or whatever) to keep the best players in the game. Origin players might also be contracted at at some level.

You are correct in that the ARU has a central contract system whereby certain players have their contracts bumped up by the ARU. I'm fairly certain that the unions (ACTRU. NSWRU. QRU and WARU) can only give players $100,000 and that they have to ask the ARU for funding help.

However...who decides who these top players are?

 

[Iafeta]

Ofcourse its not - where have I suggested that?



I'm happy for them to make an exception for Johns, in the form of pushing through some dubious 3rd party stuff and generally assisting in negotiations, on the basis that his departure would have done significant damage to RL. To the extent that its inequitable if one player receives special treatment where others don't due to his value to the game, so be it.

I think its a slightly different issue to the salary cap, and indicative of the inevitable tension between salary cap/competition evenness and the need to hold onto the best talent in the game. No easy answers but I've got absolutely no problem with the NRL exercising discretion to help out in the case of some players but not in others.

You suggest it in this very post.

On the one hand, you agree that the salary cap is designed to bring equaliy to the game by allowing even payments from all clubs to their respective players.

But have no problem for the NRL granting exemptions for one player, but not another - or for one club, and not the other. It gives one club a foot up, which therefore makes it an unlevel playing field. Which is the purpose of the Salary Cap.

 

[Mr_Ugly]

You are correct in that the ARU has a central contract system whereby certain players have their contracts bumped up by the ARU. I'm fairly certain that the unions (ACTRU. NSWRU. QRU and WARU) can only give players $100,000 and that they have to ask the ARU for funding help.

However...who decides who these top players are?

Probably a selection panel of some sort. The ACB manage to contract the best players to the Australian Cricket team (even if they rarely make the 11), and as you say, union do too.

I think working out who gets a contract might always be a bit controversial, but it would be easily achievable.

 

[Iafeta]

YOu can't rewrite history. The Johns deal is done. I remember plenty on here didn't agree with it (me included) but that was then. This is now. It's time for a strong stand to be taken on player managers and player trying to force the NRL to cough up more bikkies by using the old Union trump card. Without Johns resigning, Newcastle may have been forced up the financial gurgler. Will the S-I Dragons be up the gurgler if Gaz leaves? Hell no.

Bluff or not, there is no way the NRL should even attempt to match or better a deal like that. It's absolutely way out of line with any other centre in the game.

There is talk Manly (and a few other clubs) want Jamie Lyon. Well if we pay that sort of dough to get him I think I would safely say we would have blown the salary cap. It's a team sport and the best team is more important than the best individual. But if Gas gets a deal from the NRL you can bet your last dollar Jamie Lyon will be after the same sort of deal as well.

Johns is two years or so years from retirement. What happens to the Knights then?

Or have they realised one marquee player doesn't make a club and sourced further funding?

No player has that power, and if they did, then the management of said club should have their minds read for allowing it to happen. And if it was out of management's control, then perhaps the club has a troubled future past said player's retirement. He won't keep going until he's 80 to ensure the club sticks around, will he?

 

[Iafeta]

Losing Joey to Union would have been a massive blow for the game!!
and they did what they had to do to retain him, i dont think Mark Gasnier deserves that credit

So now Joey would have been a massive loss to the game?

Thats too simplistic a view. The NRL's assets don't table Andrew Johns as their prime asset. If they do, they're up sh!t creek when he retires, aren't they?

And I think that view is somewhat unfair to many of our games greats of this era - Lockyer, Minichiello, Hindmarsh, Gasnier, Buderus, Bowen, Thurston, Marshall, Williams, Prince, Price, Webcke, Mason, Barrett, Campbell etc., there are players left right and centre who are key to bringing people through the turnstyle and key to putting bums on TV seats. Not just Andrew Johns.

I can assure you rugby league will survive beyond Andrew Johns' retirement, the same predicament it would have been in had he been snared by rah-rah.