How long will the Salary Cap last?

[Lego_Man]

Correct, just like people cant make a contract saying that one party can kill the other if money is not paid back or something.

Having said that, the abolition of the salary cap would be disastrous for the game. Several of the more precariously positioned (financially) clubs would fold, or we'd have a situation leading to artificial creation of teams and Super League style amalgamations. And we all know what happened there...

 

[DJ1]

The NRL is structured in a completly different way to the old NSWRL when the Terry Hill decision occurred.

The same draft challenge would not hold up under the NRL structure today. A draft would stand.

In terms of a salary cap challenge as a restraint of trade, there is an equal case for the ACCC to step in and overule any attempt at removal of the salary cap on the grounds that it would lead to a reduction in the number of teams and therefore a reduction in competition in favour of more monopolistic scenario where a few key clubs become permanently dominant.

 

[Fibroman]

On the 12th (Quote...Johnny Mathis)

 

[humpy]

I can see why the NRL dont allow players to have deals with club sponsors, if they allowed them to do whatever they want it is just a open invitation to rort the cap imo.

In the fair dinkum department, the cap cannot be policed properly, and there are 20 ways to get around it:-

1 Uncle Nick takes Braith out for a game of golf each week with winner getting $5k.
2 Rusty Crowe puts Matt Orford in his next movie as an extra and pays him $50k for the days work.
3 Benny Elias invites Benji to a weekly poker game with winner taking all.

Explain to me how all players that work for channel 9 or Foxtel do not have their wages or appearance fees included under the salary cap, when they are the biggest sponsors in the league.

News Limited sponsor / own 3 - 4 teams, so is any payments to players for writing columns counted under the cap??

You could go through every club and find a long serving player that retires and goes straight into an admin / development role at that club, and this is not included under the cap unless it was specified in the contract, and this is the case, then that manager needs shooting.

 

[Balmain_Boy]

The thing is, if this thing went to court, it would be an open and shut case. Yet some people seem to think they know an answer it will take months for a judge to come to.

 

[Balmain_Boy]

Because the conditions of entry that they'd impose are a restraint of trade. Same as if Telstra impose certain conditions on other companies using their network - also a restraint of trade.

I think you'll find it's a little more compex than simply deeming it a restraint of trade.

 

[Danish]

All i have to say on this matter is the NRL should decide the salary cap the same way the NFL does...

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/question644.htm


60% of the League's revenue is divided amongst the clubs as a grant to pay each of their salary caps. Simple. Effective. Neat.

And whats more it will naturally increase when the competition starts bringing in more money (as it should drastically now that we are sitting on $100mill/year in TV rights), and not just with inflation.... although it doesnt even do that now.

NRL revenue is expected to hit $150Mill/yr by 2008. So some simple maths means we'd be seeing a cap of just under $6 mill per club. It will also eliminate **** clubs bitching they cant afford it because this money will be handed out as a grant by the NRL, then they can use the rest (about $50 mill) for advertising, junior footy and whatever else they deem necessary.

Seems simple enough for me. I cant for the life of me understand what else the league is doing with the money.

 

[eelandia]

you mean where players go to increase opportunities to play at higher levels, or have the challenge of mastering a different sport?

name one player who's gone to union for the money.


how many sponsors do clubs have? 8? 10? how many businesses are there that would be willing to sponsor a high-profile athlete? the restraint isn't as big as you make it out to be.

Are you telling me Lote (or Wendell), who recently proclaimed that League was where his heart lay didn't go to union for the cash. He certainly didn't go for the 'higher level of play' - arguably.

Also, in Australia there aren't that many companies that are willing to invest money into sport. The willing sponsors are most certainly outweighed by the competition for sponsorship within and between codes. You seem to know what you are on about but it appears you are comparing our miniture market to those in the US and Europe in regards to sponsorship dollars.

The cap was put in place to save clubs such as the Sharks who struggle with Leagues Club injections but has definitely held back League wages. The level competition aspect is just a bonus I really don't think was considered at the time.

****

 

[The Preacher]

Are you out there somewhere DENNIS TUTTY ???????? :-k

 

[Razor]

I cant for the life of me understand what else the league is doing with the money.

Remember the $10mil a year repayment to News Ltd to repay them for their investment in the game.

 

[m0j0]

It's funny how it seems to be mainly Rooster boosters calling for the cap to be ditched, I guess like their club, they don't care how they win the comp, just as long as they win it, even if it means buying it.

Firstly, I support the cap. I like how close the comp is these days, even if it's only a side-effect of the cap. I also agree with the RLPA that it should be increased. However, it should be within the financial means of all clubs. I'd hate to see clubs like the Bunnies go under and be replaced by a franchise in Southern China (OK, maybe I'm exaggerating, but you get my point).
Secondly, the whole topic of this thread is how the RLPA is willing to challenge the cap in court. Now, the way I understand the article, Simon Woolford is the RLPA president and Matthew Rodwell is the RLPA chief executive, hardly the two biggest "Rooster Boosters" going around.
Funny how whenever this topic comes up, it's Rooster Bashing central. Now perhaps we can put your blind hatred aside and discuss this rationally?

 

[Danish]

Remember the $10mil a year repayment to News Ltd to repay them for their investment in the game.

True. theres also the $2.5mill in grants to each club.... so thats about half the cash accounted for. Must have been a damned expensive advertising campaign this year!

 

[DJ1]

There is an $8M dividend to both the ARL and News Ltd as co-owners and investors of the NRL. News also receives an additional $2M due to them for declining to take previous $8M dividends until the game was able to afford it. It is believed that News has only opted to take 3 or 4 of it's available 8 dividends that it was eligible for. The ARL took all of theirs.
That's a total of $18M to the NRL owners.

The 15 clubs get a $2.5M grant totalling $37.5M
Junior development is listed as $10M per year.
That makes a total of $65.5M for those 3 budget components.

I'm not sure if Packer has recouped all of his money ($93M possibly) from the war yet (one of the conditions of Packer helping the ARL was that he would be able to recoup all costs back from future TV rights deals)

 

[DJ1]

There is an $8M dividend to both the ARL and News Ltd as co-owners and investors of the NRL. News also receives an additional $2M due to them for declining to take previous $8M dividends until the game was able to afford it. It is believed that News has only opted to take 3 or 4 of it's available 8 dividends that it was eligible for. The ARL took all of theirs.
That's a total of $18M to the NRL owners.

The 15 clubs get a $2.5M grant totalling $37.5M
Junior development is listed as $10M per year.
That makes a total of $65.5M for those 3 budget components.

I'm not sure if Packer has recouped all of his money ($93M possibly) from the war yet (one of the conditions of Packer helping the ARL was that he would be able to recoup all costs back from future TV rights deals)

There's also an additional $3.5M listed as ARL development plus an additional $6.5M listed as "extra payments to assist grassroots projects".

That brings the total to $75.5M (excluding any Packer reimbursment taken out of TV revenue)

Haven't been able to get a hold of any "NRL" operational cost components. i.e. who pays Gallop and Schubert etc so add maybe $5-8M for NRL operations.

$80-83M

That would leave marketing and advertising to go.

NRL forecast total expenditure for 2006 is $107M ($24-27M for mktg and advert. is understandable.)

 

[The Observer]

Perhaps the RLPA should focus on reducing the number of NRL fixtures the elite players have to play (from 24 to 22 and below), not increasing the cap? This would mean the players would effectively get earn more per game.

 

[BrisVegas]

One of the arguments I've never quite understood is that the salary cap is preventing clubs from sending themselves bankrupt!?! As if they're little kids uncapable of looking after their weekly pocket money! If clubs of this level aren't capable of balancing the books surely those in charge shouldn't be there. What sort of club would send themselves into debt just to buy a player or two? If someone can't be trusted to not stupidly overspend, what are they doing being entrusted to run the club in the first place?

 

[Misty Bee]

RLPA takes up where young Terry Hill left off in 1989. Ever since we have been lamenting the demise of the draft -the salary cap has been the one thing keeping lubs afloat, and eventually the comp credible. No one wants to go back to the days where a few clubs ran the code and hoarded all the talent.

The RLPA are bloody foolish. Very greedy. A salary cap increase may be on the cards, but why go to $5 mil within 2 seasons? What's he CPI doing in the meantime?

With clubs over a barrell (coaches can be sacked if their players don't like them), with player managers who cut deals that see clubs pay heavily for breaches, but players scott free, and with an already hefty pay packet, why do they need more?

Market forces. Union pays more - whon have they got? A few wingers lured over for a guaranteed Wallabies jumper in te world cup PLUS a huge pot of gold? A few reserves with 'potential'? Matt Giteau? Berrick Barnes? FFS!!!

Greed. I hoped it would have died with Super League.