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!

Greg Inglis announces retirement from rugby league

Messages
15,545
Personally, I think the NRL will do something along the lines of count the $500k we've already paid GI for this year and the $300k we will pay him for next year under our cap.

Then we walk away with $500k of cap space for 2019 and $700k for 2020, the NRL will have set a fair precedent for how these situations can be managed going forward and other clubs won't be able to complain that Souths have found a loophole.
 

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,562
You can only include money's for the Top 30 in a teams Salary Cap

If a player retires or leaves the game and is payed out, then those funds should be in the salary cap.

But if a player retires and walks away from the remaining money the money should not be included in the players salary cap.

If he joins the football department then those costs can be included against the Football department cap.

But if he obtains employment outside of the Football departments - then that is a regular post football life job and not included in a players salary cap.

Any attempt to stop players from earning a living aftet football is a restraint of trade especially if the wage is consistant with other people in those job role positions
 
Messages
15,545
Expect a wave of retirements coming up. Souths have a few friends at NRLHQ so will be interesting to see what happens when a team with less sway attempts to have a go.

It’s cost us $600k under the cap for Inglis to play two games this year and it’ll probably cost us $200 - $300k for him to play no games next year. Not sure why clubs would want to deliberately sign up for this?
 
Messages
15,545
South Sydney may have more than $1 million to sign a replacement for Greg Inglis after the NRL agreed not to include any of the retired superstar's playing contract for next season in the salary cap.

NRL salary cap auditor Richard Gardham held a one-on-one meeting with Inglis to discuss his sudden retirement and future plans before deciding on a policy that would not disadvantage the Rabbitohs but did not create a loophole that clubs could exploit in the future.

The Inglis situation is unusual in that he has walked away without being paid the final 18 months of his playing contract, which is believed to be worth about $1 million per season, and will take up off-field employment with Souths.

Had he received full payment for his contract or negotiated a settlement from the Rabbitohs that amount would have been included in the salary cap.

Instead, the NRL has ruled that the money Inglis earned before his retirement on April 14 – estimated to be about $500,000 – would be included in this season's salary cap along with all off-field earnings for new coaching, ambassador and community roles with the club for 2019.

This would leave about $300,000 for the Rabbitohs to spend before June 30 and the NRL will make a final determination on next year's salary cap later in the year but Souths could have up to $900,000 available for 2020.

The amount will depend on how much Inglis is paid in 2020 over and above the expected wage for the roles he will be doing and the NRL has given Souths a preliminary indicative value of $100,000 to be included in next year's salary cap for planning purposes.

Gardham said the NRL had decided to treat the Inglis case similar to a medical retirement, whereby the full payment to the player is included in the salary cap for the season in which he is injured but not the following year.

The other options considered were:

  • The full value of Inglis's contract being included in the cap, even though he will not receive the money;
  • Any payment to Inglis by Souths for off-field employment to be included in the salary cap, and;
  • All payments to Inglis being cap exempt.
The first two options were considered to be a disincentive for clubs to employ big-name players after their retirement, while the third may prompt clubs to offer players off-field jobs as a salary cap rort.

The ruling is similar to the way the NRL treated the Peter Wallace's decision to retire last season and take up a coaching role at Penrith.

NRL chief operating officer Nick Weeks said Inglis was a player widely agreed as being important to retain in the game.

"Souths were keen on ensuring an ongoing connection between Greg and their club, and saw real value in him providing ongoing services across their community activities, their commercial activities and their football activities," Weeks said.

"We are comfortable that Greg had genuinely had enough and didn't want to play so if you accept that, and we do, then we think it is a good thing to remain involved with the club and in the game.

"We have tried to take an approach which was consistent with past assessments but also is one we can apply in the future and we think we have struck the right balance."

Souths had made contact with the NRL a week before Inglis announced his retirement to advise that he was considering his future and to discuss the salary cap impact if he was to take up off-field employment with the club.

Gardham then met with Inglis at the Rabbitohs offices in Redfern.

"After the club put their application in we went back with just three areas for clarification and also said we want to meet with Greg," Gardham said.

"We sat down for 30 minutes at Souths offices and just had a discussion really to gain an understanding of what his motivations were for walking away when he walked away, why he wants to work in the areas he is working in and getting some understanding of how the agreements came about.

"I thought he was very honest and quite open in terms of the responses he gave."

The NRL wants to ensure Inglis gains the skills required to fulfil the off-field jobs, including coaching qualifications, before making a final ruling on next season's salary cap.

If it is felt he is being paid more than the job is worth, the difference will be included in the salary cap.

"If Greg Inglis was fit and wanting to play Souths are probably a stronger team with him, so any decision we make here we have got to make sure it is not over-penalising anyone from a competitive evenness point of view," Gardham said.

"If we are comfortable with the amount they are paying him and the activity he has done in the past six months the position could be that it is all excluded or an amount could be included in the salary cap."

Rival clubs were advised of the NRL's decision at last week's CEO's conference and Weeks said they appeared comfortable with the ruling.

The Rabbitohs believe they mounted a strong case that none of Inglis' post-career salary should be included in the 2019 or 2020 salary caps but accepted the NRL's decision.

"The club is supportive of the transparent and exhaustive process the NRL undertook in coming to their decision and looks forward to a consistent approach being taken in the future," a Souths statement said.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/05/16/inglis-salary-cap-ruling-gives-rabbitohs-$1-million-war-chest/
 

jack coburn

Juniors
Messages
467
Surely no one is surprised by this decision. The NRL golden children are always getting special treatment . With a billionaire owner and Hollywood superstar in greenturds ear as if the outcome was going to be any different. Will be interesting to see all clubs follow suit now.
 

BranVan3000

Coach
Messages
12,215
Surely no one is surprised by this decision. The NRL golden children are always getting special treatment . With a billionaire owner and Hollywood superstar in greenturds ear as if the outcome was going to be any different. Will be interesting to see all clubs follow suit now.
Souths are now down a legend of the game and still have to pay a portion of his salary. So we effectively go into this and next season with a smaller cap than the rest of the competition

What a win
 
Messages
13,942
Don’t see the issue here.

If Inglis is happy to go from $1mn a year to $100k a year then go for it.

Neither do I really, as firstly Souths will be without Inglis on the field. It is not like they are gaining an on field advantage.

Secondly, to those reporters like Adrian Proszenko at The Sydney Morning Herald, who crap on about how it means Souths can now make a play for Latrell Mitchell for next season, they keep ignoring the fact that Mitchell is not off contract till the end of the 2020 season, So yes from 1 November 2019 they can talk to Latrell about signing him, but he won't be available till the 2021 season. I doubt that: (a) If Mitchell signed with Souths that the Roosters would release him from the last year of his contract; and (b) That Souths will go a whole 12 months carrying that big a hole in its salary cap for the 2020 season.
 
Messages
15,545
Don’t see the issue here.

If Inglis is happy to go from $1mn a year to $100k a year then go for it.

Most of the people complaining about it are upset because of the likes of Matai and Stewart holding out for the final years contract value. If they would've foregone this then it would've been treated the same way as Inglis' deal. Both these guys had back ended contracts so they're effectively now still being paid for the games they played over the last two or three years before they retired.

The NRL have now heavily limited back ended payments because of the mess that Manly and to a lesser extent Canterbury got themselves into. So really, other teams have lost the ability to do these deals because Manly and Canterbury stuffed it up for everyone else.

Then they complain that Inglis is still getting paid by the club... Yeah, $100 - $200k a year is vastly different to $1mill and whatever that amount ends up being, if it's over what others doing a similar job for other clubs earn, it'll count on the cap.

Then they complain that Inglis has really not foregone anything and will still get his $1mill over 5 - 10 years with his new job. This is the most ridiculous argument of them all. Inglis was always going to walk into a job with Souths. If he held out for his $1mill next year then in 2021 he would still have been given a job with Souths for as long as he wants one so no matter which way you slice it, he's walked away from that $1mill. Honestly, I'd have liked nothing better than for him to get himself fit and firing and play out the last two years of his deal but it's obvious that the fire in his belly is gone.

I honestly fail to see how the NRL could've handled this any better.
 

jack coburn

Juniors
Messages
467
Souths are now down a legend of the game and still have to pay a portion of his salary. So we effectively go into this and next season with a smaller cap than the rest of the competition

What a win
Might down a legend but playing like a Reggie. It certainly was a win for Souths. Now they don’t have to pay a crook for 2 more years and can get Mitchell from the roosters . Ahh what perfect timing . Thanks Greg thanks Todd.
 
Messages
13,942
Might down a legend but playing like a Reggie. It certainly was a win for Souths. Now they don’t have to pay a crook for 2 more years and can get Mitchell from the roosters . Ahh what perfect timing . Thanks Greg thanks Todd.

Really? So Latrell is available for Souths to sign for 2020 is he?:rolleyes:
 
Messages
15,545
I doubt we'll sign Latrell tbh. We need a centre but won't want to be paying $1mill+ for one.

It's too risky to pay big money to bring him over as a fullback.

When is Tedesco off contract... That's who I'd be willing to throw $1mill plus at if I were Souths.

Cook + Tedesco would be an unstoppable combination at NRL level.
 
Messages
13,942
I doubt we'll sign Latrell tbh. We need a centre but won't want to be paying $1mill+ for one.

It's too risky to pay big money to bring him over as a fullback.

When is Tedesco off contract... That's who I'd be willing to throw $1mill plus at if I were Souths.

Cook + Tedesco would be an unstoppable combination at NRL level.

Tedesco is not off contract until the end of the 2021 season. At the same time Souths will have Braidon Burns, Dane Gagai, Cameron Murry and Adam Reynolds (amongst others) coming off contract.

Edit: In fact NRL.com have just posted an article which lists when every player in the NRL comes off contract - https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/01/23/2019-nrl-signings-player-transfers-and-contracts/
 
Last edited:

slamminsam246

Juniors
Messages
525
Most of the people complaining about it are upset because of the likes of Matai and Stewart holding out for the final years contract value. If they would've foregone this then it would've been treated the same way as Inglis' deal. Both these guys had back ended contracts so they're effectively now still being paid for the games they played over the last two or three years before they retired.

The NRL have now heavily limited back ended payments because of the mess that Manly and to a lesser extent Canterbury got themselves into. So really, other teams have lost the ability to do these deals because Manly and Canterbury stuffed it up for everyone else.

Then they complain that Inglis is still getting paid by the club... Yeah, $100 - $200k a year is vastly different to $1mill and whatever that amount ends up being, if it's over what others doing a similar job for other clubs earn, it'll count on the cap.

Then they complain that Inglis has really not foregone anything and will still get his $1mill over 5 - 10 years with his new job. This is the most ridiculous argument of them all. Inglis was always going to walk into a job with Souths. If he held out for his $1mill next year then in 2021 he would still have been given a job with Souths for as long as he wants one so no matter which way you slice it, he's walked away from that $1mill. Honestly, I'd have liked nothing better than for him to get himself fit and firing and play out the last two years of his deal but it's obvious that the fire in his belly is gone.

I honestly fail to see how the NRL could've handled this any better.

What an absolute load of shite! How do you know he would "still have been given a job with Souths for as long as he wants one"? And on 200k a year!? Utter crap! I'm sure if Manly were allowed this RORT of a loophole, they would have Matai and Stewart at the odd training session now getting their GI pension and Manly would have a much better roster than they do now.
It's just another case of blatant favouritism and inconsistency.
 
Top