Heads up boys, we could have a player boycott on our hands

[some11]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/league/...gh-as-58-million/story-e6frf3ou-1226535862717

The 2013 salary cap is set to rise to as much as $5.8 million, saving the NRL from threats of a player boycott and several clubs from having to release their biggest stars.

On a landmark day of meetings at League Central, collective bargaining agreement (CBA) talks made progress as NRL officials delivered a formula to meet the players' pay demands.

While Wayne Bennett and Darren Lockyer were in the building to recommend rule changes for 2013, most attention focused on Robbie Farah, Paul Gallen and Clint Newton - the player representatives fighting for better conditions on behalf of their peers.

It took just five hours for many of the barriers to crumble, with the push now on to complete the five-year CBA before Christmas.

More negotiations have been scheduled for today, indicating a sudden rush of goodwill.

The Daily Telegraph understands the circuit breaker was a willingness from the NRL to lift next year's cap to between $5.5 million and $5.8 million, primarily through raising each club's marquee player allowance.

An increase of such magnitude would help Penrith and Manly, struggling to accommodate their squads under next year's cap.

The Panthers have unsuccessfully asked top players to strike out cap increase clauses, while Manly still cannot register Brett Stewart's new four-year contract extension.

Clubs had initially been told to work on a $5 million cap for 2013 - well beneath the $6.5 million limit the players had sought.

At the first major meeting on November 30, the NRL offered to increase the provisional cap to $5.2 million.

That provoked scorn from the players, who dug their heels in deeper and demanded a presentation from ARLC chairman John Grant about how the game's $225 million future fund was costed.

Grant fronted them last Friday, but there was no further progress.

Then tensions were inflamed further on Monday, when Grant revealed the ARLC would independently set the salary cap if a CBA was not achieved by February.

But from impending disaster came a breakthrough, with sources close to the negotiations saying a $5.8 million cap next year was nearly enough to placate the players.

The reliance on marquee payments also relieves Grant from having to erode the future fund to compensate clubs for direct payments.

How much the cap would incrementally rise over the remaining four years of the CBA remains to be seen, but the NRL is resisting a jump of more than $300,000 per annum.

The Daily Telegraph also understands that players have been successful in their bid to secure more cap-exempt cars, but their resolute drive for an $80,000 minimum wage was unfulfilled.

Negotiations have stalled around the $70,000 mark, leaving work to do over the coming week if a pre-Christmas agreement is to be reached.

"Things are looking positive," Gallen said. "They've (the NRL) moved a long way from where they started.

"The NRL came up with a pretty good offer today.

"We're not there yet, but we're not too far away."

Rugby League Players Association boss David Garnsey confirmed talks would continue today.

"It was a lengthy meeting, but it was lengthy because there was some progress made," he said.

"I'm not saying we are close to a deal yet.

"But we've made suitable progress and that's why we are coming back (today).

While the players and administration were thrashing out their differences, the NRL Rules committee - including Lockyer and Bennett - were drawing up a definition for the shoulder charge, which has been outlawed.

It is also suspected that changes will be made to golden point, with their recommendations to be reviewed at the ARLC's end-of-year meeting next Tuesday.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Seems like a reasonable compromise. More or less half what they wanted. The minimum wage rise is good too. It's a shame the only time the players make an effort to stand up to the admin is when it helps line their pockets though. They should strike over the shoulder charge and the lack of action on expansion if they really cared about the sport. But it's to be expected. The next thing the ARLC needs to do is ensure that non-accredited managers are cut out and if that means star players are not registered, tough luck.

 

[Frailty]

Minimum wage of $80,000?

f**king spoilt bastards.

 

[Danish]

Minimum wage of $80K should have been the first thing the ARLC accepted, then haggle over the marquee payments.

If they ARLC had offered them the minimum wage of $80K straight up, with a lower marquee allowance, the agreement would already be done. The majority of NRL players aren't on big bucks, and the top guys if they continued to push for more money would then be seen to just be chasing their own dollars and not trying to help the player group as a whole.

Most of my tradie mates (sparkies mostly) earn between $70-90k per year working about 10 hours per week less than me and with all sorts of ridiculous benefits. Footy players deserve to be earning at least that for what they do.

 

[Cumberland Throw]

Why don't the clubs just make it a policy that no player will earn under 80 k

Not what the cap is designed for

 

[hardbaby]

So the marquee players get most of the extra money and the minimum wage stays pretty low. That's disappointing. Kind of makes you sick when you see Smith in there negotiating. How much extra money did he make under the table?

 

[_Johnsy]

So the marquee players get most of the extra money and the minimum wage stays pretty low. That's disappointing. Kind of makes you sick when you see Smith in there negotiating. How much extra money did he make under the table?

He's nothing but a lying, money hungry cheating merkin. It was only ever about him squeezing a few more $ into his pockets.

 

[POPEYE]

He's nothing but a lying, money hungry cheating merkin. It was only ever about him squeezing a few more $ into his pockets.

I think Hardbaby will realise you're taking the piss. You'll have to lower your sights if you want him to think you're dumb enough to believe what you posted

 

[BunniesMan]

Only regret is they didn't get the minimum wage.

But besides that I'm very glad the players bent the ARLC/NRL over and absolutely smashed them at the negotiating table.

The original offer was just not good enough given the increase in revenue THE PLAYERS earned! Very glad with the outcome.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Personally, paying stars the majority of income increases is a short sighted policy that will hamper the code with growing and prospering into the future

Look at the differences between Rugby Union and AFL over the past 20 years.

The ARU had massive pay days after a World Cup win and years of success and what did they do with their money? They invested it in the salaries of a few players who took their money and ran. Mostly back to Rugby League, where they'd been taken from in the first place.

The AFL spend a massive chunk of their money on grass roots development. Like it or not, and most of us here don't like it, the AFL spend their income rather wisely. The clubs are backed by strong memberships - something the NRL has taken note of and has sensibly invested time and money into promoting. Well supported clubs with active members are stronger for it.

However, a lot of the money from the television rights also goes into expanding their game. They know that if they get kids involved in playing the game they not only get players, they also cement support.

The NRL really needs to invest wisely in ensuring that junior clubs and schools are involved in all sorts of Rugby League related programs. That playing fields are maintained and that kids everywhere have a chance to play Rugby League, Oz Tag or any other version of Rugby League that is available.

Giving money to a the few at the expense of the majority is never a policy for success.

If TV rights have doubled, then the players should expect no more than 15% in salary increases - but all the junior clubs should expect their playing fields to be maintained and all the kids to have jumpers, balls and goal posts to use.

While I agree with what your saying, let's not forget that;

1) The AFL have had a bigger budget for a longer time than we have.
They support grass roots but I think you'll find they have several marque players on big dosh too.

2) Star players attract interest in the game including sponsors and TV ratings.

3) Star players may have an influence on kids deciding what sport they want to play.

4) The NRL shamelessly promote the game through the use of star players.

5) Rival codes have shamelessly promoted their game through the use of ex NRL stars.

So there is an argument to give them more money. A balance does need to be sort of course.

 

[100%green]

As long as the development /strategic fund isn't sacrificed to line the players pockets and that the minimum wage goes up before the big names then I'm ok with it. Otherwise the players need to stay out of the headlines for the wrong reasons and start being more available for fans and media before they start whining for more money!!!

 

[kmav23]

Seems like a reasonable compromise. More or less half what they wanted. The minimum wage rise is good too. It's a shame the only time the players make an effort to stand up to the admin is when it helps line their pockets though. They should strike over the shoulder charge and the lack of action on expansion if they really cared about the sport. But it's to be expected. The next thing the ARLC needs to do is ensure that non-accredited managers are cut out and if that means star players are not registered, tough luck.

Lol about this crazy obsession about shoulder charges some fans have. Soon there will be fetish Internet shoulder charge websites.

Grown men shoulder charging underground pay $50 per month

Unlimited shoulder charges

 

[some11]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...ociation-and-nrl/story-e6frep5x-1226536478518

A SIGNIFICANT shift in the NRL's initial position has broken the deadlock in the Players Association's negotiations with the league, with a new salary cap now expected before Christmas.

Minimum-wage players look set to earn $80,000 a year, while the marquee player allowance will be changed to no longer cover just the highest-earning players at each club.

"It's a win for the little guy," player delegate Clint Newton said.

The breakthrough in negotiations ends any speculation of player strikes, beginning with next year's All Stars game.

The change gives middle-income players the chance to significantly boost their earnings.

Another marathon meeting at NRL headquarters ended yesterday evening with Players Association chief executive David Garnsey walking out with a deal he was prepared to take to his members and acting NRL chief executive Shane Mattiske praising the players.

It is understood the players are prepared to accept a cap rise to $5.8 million after initially seeking a $6.5 million cap.

A cautious Garnsey said after the meeting "a lot of ground was made".

"We're now in a position to take something to our members to approve," he said.

Alongside Garnsey in the meeting were Newton, Robbie Farah, Anthony Quinn, Michael Crocker and Jason King.

"We clearly got to a position by the end that we were seeking to get to, or at least happy to get to," Garnsey said.

"It has been hard fought without being nasty and aggressive.

"The fact we have got to a position where you say 'this is a position you should consider', I think you can safely assure that we're happy."

Newton praised the NRL for its understanding.

"I'm extremely pleased with where we have ended up with minimum wage and, I don't want to make this sound like a war, but it was a win for us," he said.

While the Players Association was pleased enough to go back to the players before they break for Christmas next week, the NRL was also satisfied with the outcome.

"We were really pleased with the position we arrived at," Mattiske said.

"Particularly with the fact that, through the compromises that were made through the course of negotiations today, we arrived at a position that the Players Association was comfortable to take back to its members.

"There was a strong representation from the players’ group again and their influence was a key factor in delivering a position that we believe is both a fair deal to the players, which is what we want to achieve, and something that will stand the game in good stead to achieve its strategic plan."

Garnsey will now prepare a document to distribute among the clubs and he foresees few problems.

Of the 16 clubs, only Gold Coast and New Zealand were not represented in the meetings.

The clubs will meet and form a consensus which they will then inform the Players Association of.

Garnsey is confident the players will endorse the new salary cap.

 

[some11]

Great news!

 

[Perth Red]

While I agree with what your saying, let's not forget that;

1) The AFL have had a bigger budget for a longer time than we have.
They support grass roots but I think you'll find they have several marque players on big dosh too.

2) Star players attract interest in the game including sponsors and TV ratings.

3) Star players may have an influence on kids deciding what sport they want to play.

4) The NRL shamelessly promote the game through the use of star players.

5) Rival codes have shamelessly promoted their game through the use of ex NRL stars.

So there is an argument to give them more money. A balance does need to be sort of course.

Tbf though they are already earning significantly more than their peers. A star player can be earning $700k whilst a rookie earns $55k. That is a fair gap for doing the same job! Yes their image is being used to grow the customer base but let's not kid ourselves they aren't being compensated. I'll be interested to hear from the clubs where the extra money on the salary cap is going to come from given the rise in the NRL grant will barely cover their annual losses for most clubs.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Tbf though they are already earning significantly more than their peers. A star player can be earning $700k whilst a rookie earns $55k. That is a fair gap for doing the same job! Yes their image is being used to grow the customer base but let's not kid ourselves they aren't being compensated. I'll be interested to hear from the clubs where the extra money on the salary cap is going to come from given the rise in the NRL grant will barely cover their annual losses for most clubs.

Agree with all that PR. As I said a balance needs to be sort and, yes, the minimum salary should be a priority.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The issue is now whether the clubs will put their hand out for more money in lieu of the salary cap increase.

 

[applesauce]

Players in $7m cap heaven as deal done
Todd Balym; The Courier-Mail; February 08, 2013

ARL Commission chairman John Grant. Picture: Craig Greenhill Source: The Daily Telegraph

The NRL salary cap will reach $7 million by 2017 after the players last night agreed to a new five-year Collective Bargaining Agreement.

After months of tense negotiations, the RLPA confirmed a vote of 83 per cent from the entire playing group had finally ended the pay stand-off between players and the ARL Commission.

The ARLC has yet to announce details, but The Courier-Mail can reveal the salary cap has now been set for the next five years, bringing clarity to clubs as they secure playing talent for the future.

2013 Salary Cap: $5.85 million
2014 Salary Cap: $6.3 million
2015 Salary Cap: $6.55 million
2016 Salary Cap: $6.8 million
2017 Salary Cap: $7 million

Under the new heads of agreement the players will be able to renegotiate the CBA for 2016 if the game's revenue continues to increase at a rapid rate.

In a statement RLPA boss David Garnsey said the new CBA went a "long way" towards achieving the RLPA's objective of establishing the best employment framework for elite professional athletes in Australia and New Zealand.

Garnsey praised the NRL stars that led discussions at the negotiating table including Test skipper Cameron Smith, Petero Civoniceva, Robbie Farah and Paul Gallen.

ARLC chairman John Grant

said the deal was beneficial for players, both now and in their post-playing careers.

"It's a very good deal and it recognises the value of the players to the code," Grant said.

"But it also recognises the fact that players' futures need to be provided for after playing and it also recognises the short-term nature of some of the careers in rugby league."

Des McGovern, one of Australia's finest rugby league wingers of the 1950s, has died at the age of 84.

McGovern made his Test debut against New Zealand in 1952 and played a further six Tests in the next four years, as well as embarking on the 1952-53 and 1956-57 Kangaroo tours of Britain and France.

He played 18 matches for Queensland between 1949 and 1956 and then turned his hand to coaching with the Toowoomba Clydesdales.