Greg Inglis announces retirement from rugby league

[Perth Red]

And how do we prevent that from happening?

You pretty much cant unless it leaks out or the player contract registered with NRL appears greatly under market value. I expect it goes on all the time, the number of ex players at clubs they retired from would suggest it is not an uncommon enticement, even if it just a way of securing a signing rather than rorting the cap. I'd be very surprised if Cronk doesn't have some post playing role at the Roosters.

But that isn't relevant here, what we have here is a well paid player who has had enough, decided to hang up the boots and will no longer be paid to play. It shouldn't count on the cap from the day they stop paying him as a player.

 

[Pommy]

Consistency is over-rated.

I’m not saying it’s right but should Souths be at a disadvantage because of bad management elsewhere?

 

[Perth Red]

I don’t care what the description is half the ceos would be lucky to be on that type of coin.

It’s a rort , a way to pay out his contract.

You don't know what he's being paid, or what he is expected to do to earn that money?
But yeh keeping shouting angrily at that cloud lol

 

[unforgiven]

But that isn't relevant here, what we have here is a well paid player who has had enough, decided to hang up the boots and will no longer be paid to play. It shouldn't count on the cap from the day they stop paying him as a player.

But we don't know that's the situation here, what if the Rabbitohs wanted him to retire to get out of his contract and offered the role as an inducement to retire?

 

[Pommy]

But we don't know that's the situation here, what if the Rabbitohs wanted him to retire to get out of his contract and offered the role as an inducement to retire?

With the incentive of losing about $1.1m over the next 18 months? I bet he ripped their hands off

 

[Surely]

You don't know what he's being paid, or what he is expected to do to earn that money?
But yeh keeping shouting angrily at that cloud lol

Why not a job in the football department

Oh that’s right from 2020 the football department will be under a salary cap

Dodgy as f**k and anyone who’s not a Souths supporter can see it

 

[Surely]

With the incentive of losing about $1.1m over the next 18 months? I bet he ripped their hands off

With his Souths care gift I mean job he’s not losing a cent.

 

[Pommy]

Why not a job in the football department

Oh that’s right from 2020 the football department will be under a salary cap

Dodgy as f**k and anyone who’s not a Souths supporter can see it

Well the guy you’re quoting supports Melbourne so obviously not.

 

[Pommy]

With his Souths care gift I mean job he’s not losing a cent.

you got a link to this?

 

[Perth Red]

But we don't know that's the situation here, what if the Rabbitohs wanted him to retire to get out of his contract and offered the role as an inducement to retire?

What if they did? So what? He is not being paid as a player, he is not performing as a player, he should not be in the salary cap once he stops that role. If he is happy to retire, club are happy for him to retire, if he can earn some coin after retirement, what's the problem? Personally if a club and player come to an agreement and get their full contract paid out for leaving then I also think they should come off the salary cap. End of day salary cap is there to keep the comp artificially even. This scenario does nothing to jeopardise that.

 

[unforgiven]

What if they did? So what? He is not being paid as a player, he is not performing as a player, he should not be in the salary cap once he stops that role. If he is happy to retire, club are happy for him to retire, if he can earn some coin after retirement, what's the problem? Personally if a club and player come to an agreement and get their full contract paid out for leaving then I also think they should come off the salary cap. End of day salary cap is there to keep the comp artificially even. This scenario does nothing to jeopardise that.

Because it creates a loophole to use to make the competition uneven!

 

[Pommy]

Because it creates a loophole to use to make the competition uneven!

So the competition is even now?

 

[unforgiven]

So the competition is even now?

So we should add more ways to make it uneven?

 

[Perth Red]

Because it creates a loophole to use to make the competition uneven!

How does it? He wont be on the field. How can it influence the competition? I don't get why people feel it has given Souths some kind of unfair advantage?

 

[Pommy]

So we should add more ways to make it uneven?

Well this actually isn’t making it uneven but I wouldn’t be against getting rid of the cap altogether.

 

[Bazal]

But we don't know that's the situation here, what if the Rabbitohs wanted him to retire to get out of his contract and offered the role as an inducement to retire?

They could easily just medically retire him.

Why go to all the effort?

 

[Surely]

you got a link to this?

Daily Telegraph rugby league writer Phil Rothfield said Inglis had been able to retire because he’d been offered work by South Sydney and the NRL.

He was only able to retire because Souths offered him a job, a good job, said to be $300,000 a season,“He was only able to retire because Souths offered him a job, a good job, said to be $300,000 a season,” he said on Fox League’s NRL 360.

The NRL are talking about topping that up and why wouldn’t they? He’s a great ambassador. I don’t care that he’s getting that money.

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/allowed-fury-greg-inglis-retirement-loophole-235910035.html

 

[unforgiven]

How does it? He wont be on the field. How can it influence the competition? I don't get why people feel it has given Souths some kind of unfair advantage?

I'm not so much talking about this case but the precedence it sets, what is now to stop a club signing a player on a 5 year deal with the promise of retiring him after 3 and paying the remainder after he finishes in the same fashion that Inglis will be paid? They pay the 5 year value of him but he earns that money in 3 years.

 

[Surely]

How does it? He wont be on the field. How can it influence the competition? I don't get why people feel it has given Souths some kind of unfair advantage?

You’ve got a dud player on big bucks so instead of settling for 14 games a year out of him you retire him and sign someone better.

They used to have to hope another club would take them and foot half the salary for the remainder of the contract.

 

[Perth Red]

I'm not so much talking about this case but the precedence it sets, what is now to stop a club signing a player on a 5 year deal with the promise of retiring him after 3 and paying the remainder after he finishes in the same fashion that Inglis will be paid? They pay the 5 year value of him but he earns that money in 3 years.

That's a very long stretch, for one as a player you would want that in writing. Then the club runs a significant risk of the NRL finding out as there would be evidence, then the club is punished heavily for being outside the spirit of the game (it wouldn't be cap cheating as this sort of deal wouldn't make any difference to the cap as long as the first 3 years were at market value). No to mention the club would be paying massively overs for what would be an end of career player.
Could it happen? Sure.
would it happen? highly unlikely
would you be punished for it happening if found to be pre meditated? absolutely