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

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,971
We can debate the merits of specific decisions all we like but Greenburg has already said he won't be consistent in his decisions.

No he didn't. He said fairness is more important than consistency.

Referring to fans either
a) taking clearly different situations and asking for consistent rulings, which doesn't even make sense. Eg. Greg Inglis drink driving vs Justin Pascoe cheating.
b) not understanding the rules and then complaining about them being applied inconsistently. Eg. This entire thread.
 

Mr Spock!

Referee
Messages
22,502
This is pretty much the whole point. You are sceptical that Foran would just forego $1M "for the good of the team" but seem to have no problem believing Inglis would.

The rest of us have a hard time believing either of them would and that leaves the grubby opportunity for cap rorting.
Because most players contracts are paid out.

The only other time players have foregone their contracts is to go to Union or super league.

And those contracts aren't on the cap.

And as pointed out on here it wouldn't be an issue if he went to another club.

As for jobs after football gi could well have just taken his money and gone into media.
 

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,971
Extra to what? He could have retired and got 1.5m.

Exactly. The argument he's not losing a cent doesn't even make sense.

By ending his contract, he is losing $1.5M.
Yes, he will possibly make $1.5M or more working for Souffs over the years, but he would have done that anyway.
If he plays out his contract or takes a payout, he gets $1.5M AND still gets a cushy job at the club for life.

So how is he not losing a cent, as some have put it.
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
Exactly. The argument he's not losing a cent doesn't even make sense.

By ending his contract, he is losing $1.5M.
Yes, he will possibly make $1.5M or more working for Souffs over the years, but he would have done that anyway.
If he plays out his contract or takes a payout, he gets $1.5M AND still gets a cushy job at the club for life.

So how is he not losing a cent, as some have put it.

They can’t even get their story straight. On one hand it’s a job doing nothing and doesn’t exist but on the other it’s worth $60k.
 

firechild

First Grade
Messages
8,064
Well the Sydney Morning Herald are reporting that there is some disquiet about the situation amongst the clubs, otherwise they wouldn't be talking to other club CEOs about it - https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/nr...-over-inglis-arrangement-20190417-p51f5g.html
From that article, the suggestion is that the cap concessions may be in place this year. I can't understand how that could even be considered. I get that if a player never takes the field in a given season, but if they have played even a single game, they are part of the playing squad for that year and their salary should be counted. I don't see how it matters what he's doing next year given that plenty of players who have season ending injuries in the first couple of rounds are counted in the salary cap.
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
From that article, the suggestion is that the cap concessions may be in place this year. I can't understand how that could even be considered. I get that if a player never takes the field in a given season, but if they have played even a single game, they are part of the playing squad for that year and their salary should be counted. I don't see how it matters what he's doing next year given that plenty of players who have season ending injuries in the first couple of rounds are counted in the salary cap.

Plenty of players get the wage for the entire season. GI isn’t getting a wage that’s the difference that people still don’t understand.
What if a player leaves for another club mid season or goes to England. They’re still in the squad by your logic.
 

Pedge1971

First Grade
Messages
5,898
It’s as if people have never read an employment contract before.

Not talking about labour laws though mate. Talking about ways to avoid salary cap.

Thurston called time on his career to align with completion of contract and gave value right up until hisnlast game.

GI was playing like a busted and then and only then did he call time and conveniently elected not to be paid out in full. Completely different circumstances but I am sure GI gave up all that cash because he is a nice bloke right?
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
Not talking about labour laws though mate. Talking about ways to avoid salary cap.

Thurston called time on his career to align with completion of contract and gave value right up until hisnlast game.

GI was playing like a busted and then and only then did he call time and conveniently elected not to be paid out in full. Completely different circumstances but I am sure GI gave up all that cash because he is a nice bloke right?

No I think he gave it up because he’s mentally ill and having himself dragged through the media on a weekly basis was making his condition worse.

Just my belief nothing to confirm that. As I said in an earlier post plenty of men his age find a rope to be the answer so it’s not beyond the realms of possibility.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,546
It is understood Inglis stands to earn about $200,000 from those proposed positions each year.

Its coming down!
 

firechild

First Grade
Messages
8,064
Stewart and Matai's contracts were both heavily back ended. This is what got Manly into the trouble that they are in. I'm sure that if they were being paid what they were actually worth while they were playing then the NRL would have let Manly out of the contracts they had when these guys could no longer play.
That's a big assumption that has no basis in fact. You and a couple of other Souffs fans have trotted it out as if the NRL gave that as a reason for their decision simply because you want different treatment to what clubs have received in the past.

I'm sure that if this wasn't GI and Souffs then the NRL would be making a different decision - see I can make completely unsubstantiated claims too.
 

69-05-41

Juniors
Messages
242
I suspect Turdy Greenberg will decide it is subjectively fair for GI's cushy $300k job to be cap exempt in his own little biased mind. Objectively consistent, maybe not. I wonder if this job would have existed had GI not retired and whether anyone else was considered or able to apply for such job. Similarly, if this job did not exist would GI have retired or continued playing? If GI is not retiring on medical grounds then he potentially breached his contract unless he already knew his club's response. Previous administrators took a very different approach to players breaching contracts. Luckily GI's club consented to his potential breach and even found him another job.
 

Surely

Post Whore
Messages
101,345
Gi gives up 1.5 mill so South's can spend it on another player but give it back through a job that's magically created in an area that won't fall under the football club cap either.

If Perth red was the cap auditor his eyes would be covered in wool
 

Latest posts

Top