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!

Kick the roosters out.

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
Not relevant.
Peter Doust isnt threatening to sue the NRL.

Supporting an increase in the salary cap is one thing. Willing to have it dragged through the courts is another.
Try a different angle RC.
 

Roosterphin

Juniors
Messages
939
Willow said:
Not relevant.
Peter Doust isnt threatening to sue the NRL.

Supporting an increase in the salary cap is one thing. Willing to have it dragged through the courts is another.
Try a different angle RC.

So what you are saying is that he supports the idea and will be pleased if it succeeds but doesnt want to have to do the dirty work
 
Messages
6,003
Here are some quotes from our fearless leader on the matter:

"I spoke in favour of concessions for locally developed players and long-serving players," Doust said yesterday. "When it got to a debate there were plenty with opposing views on the basis that the game can't afford it generally. My argument is that it depends on the individual clubs' business plan and what they plan to achieve."

"I think the predominant feeling is that it's not good for clubs that can't afford it, but my argument is that they don't have to pay for it if they don't want to, either."

As for the threat of legal action, Doust said: "I'm not very keen on that. I don't think that's the appropriate way to go."


"One thing that annoys me within the salary cap is the limit of dispensation for juniors in the salary cap. I think it is a $100,000 limit you can have off the salary cap.

To me this should be unlimited. Each player that has been at the club for a period of 8years or is a local junior at the club should have some sort of exemption.

For example if we have Barrett, Thompson and Timmins ALL able to gain some sort of exemption but only $100,000 is allowed to be used that is not fair. The club should be allowed to have it for each player. So when Ryles, Bailey and Gaz etc are all in the same boat we are able to keep them all.

By only allowing one player, it puts us in the same position as the Roosters. We have TImmins who is able to receive the exemption, the Roosters have Ricketson. So that is saying althought we have potentially 3 players able to receive an exemption at the same time whereas the Roosters only have one, we have to be punished.

This would also help the likes of Parramata, Newcastle and Brisbane all of whom have been decimated by the salary cap in recent years. The next team that it will hurt is the Panthers who have plenty of local juniors in their side, compared to the Roosters two? (Byrne and Ricketson i think).

So maybe an increase in the salary cap is not what is needed, but rewarding clubs who produce junior talent it?"
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
Roosterphin said:
Willow said:
Not relevant.
Peter Doust isnt threatening to sue the NRL.

Supporting an increase in the salary cap is one thing. Willing to have it dragged through the courts is another.
Try a different angle RC.

So what you are saying is that he supports the idea and will be pleased if it succeeds but doesnt want to have to do the dirty work
I never said anything of the sort. Its extraordinary watching this attempt at deflecting blame.

It is dirty work... disgracefully dirty.
Do you support the Roosters' idea of having the game dragged through the courts because of the salary cap? And for what purpose?

For a long time now, the Dragons have supported salary cap reforms which would allow a concession for juniors... something I'm sure wouldn't sit all that well with the Roosters. These concessions and other salary cap changes would naturally have to be debated and a proper plan formulated which would suit the entire League.

Taking the NRL to court is a bloody minded approach. Here's hoping the Roosters board wake up to themselves sooner rather than later.
 

Southernsaint

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
20,228
Same old Roosters, always rorting...

Personally, I think that the salary cap needs to be reviewed. But sitting down with the NRL & opening dialogue is the way to do it, not threatening the code with legal action.

Cheers,
Ben S.
 

Benny

First Grade
Messages
9,500
In Today's Telegraph:

Doust argued for and supported concessions in the cap but was against an increase in the cap
 

Roosterphin

Juniors
Messages
939
Willow said:
Roosterphin said:
Willow said:
Not relevant.
Peter Doust isnt threatening to sue the NRL.

Supporting an increase in the salary cap is one thing. Willing to have it dragged through the courts is another.
Try a different angle RC.

So what you are saying is that he supports the idea and will be pleased if it succeeds but doesnt want to have to do the dirty work
I never said anything of the sort. Its extraordinary watching this attempt at deflecting blame.

It is dirty work... disgracefully dirty.
Do you support the Roosters' idea of having the game dragged through the courts because of the salary cap? And for what purpose?

For a long time now, the Dragons have supported salary cap reforms which would allow a concession for juniors... something I'm sure wouldn't sit all that well with the Roosters. These concessions and other salary cap changes would naturally have to be debated and a proper plan formulated which would suit the entire League.

Taking the NRL to court is a bloody minded approach. Here's hoping the Roosters board wake up to themselves sooner rather than later.

Of course I dont Willow. I am not happy with how this is being handled by the club.
 

STSAE

Juniors
Messages
2,170
Denis'saints'Freak said:
Here are some quotes from our fearless leader on the matter:

"I spoke in favour of concessions for locally developed players and long-serving players," Doust said yesterday. "When it got to a debate there were plenty with opposing views on the basis that the game can't afford it generally. My argument is that it depends on the individual clubs' business plan and what they plan to achieve."

"I think the predominant feeling is that it's not good for clubs that can't afford it, but my argument is that they don't have to pay for it if they don't want to, either."

As for the threat of legal action, Doust said: "I'm not very keen on that. I don't think that's the appropriate way to go."


"One thing that annoys me within the salary cap is the limit of dispensation for juniors in the salary cap. I think it is a $100,000 limit you can have off the salary cap.

To me this should be unlimited. Each player that has been at the club for a period of 8years or is a local junior at the club should have some sort of exemption.

For example if we have Barrett, Thompson and Timmins ALL able to gain some sort of exemption but only $100,000 is allowed to be used that is not fair. The club should be allowed to have it for each player. So when Ryles, Bailey and Gaz etc are all in the same boat we are able to keep them all.

By only allowing one player, it puts us in the same position as the Roosters. We have TImmins who is able to receive the exemption, the Roosters have Ricketson. So that is saying althought we have potentially 3 players able to receive an exemption at the same time whereas the Roosters only have one, we have to be punished.

This would also help the likes of Parramata, Newcastle and Brisbane all of whom have been decimated by the salary cap in recent years. The next team that it will hurt is the Panthers who have plenty of local juniors in their side, compared to the Roosters two? (Byrne and Ricketson i think).

So maybe an increase in the salary cap is not what is needed, but rewarding clubs who produce junior talent it?"

Ricko, Cross, Byrne, Cusack, Lomu (losing cos of cap) locals
Fittler 9th yr next year.
Minni, Crocker, Hegarty, Flannery, Ricko, Cross, Byrne, Cusack, Lomu and Morley have only played for Easts in 1st grade in the NRL.
Fitzy, Wing, Hodges, Cayless, Robinson and Fittler have all played more games for Easts than their previous clubs.
Minni, Crocker, Hegarty, Flannery, Ricko, Lomu, Fitzy, Wing, Hodges, Cayless all repped from Easts.

How much would Easts save in cap concessions under your system? Espescially in the next 2-5yrs when the majority of the squad has been around for 8 years, with Easts in 1st grade!!
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
Nothing has changed. Major difference between the two clubs:
The Dragons chief does not want to see the matter end up in the courts
Saints have supported changes to the cap for sometime. Its the Roosters management who have disgraced themselves by threatening to go legal. You're just too dim to realise it.
 

AdamH

Juniors
Messages
513
The Dragons are seeking seeking concessions not only for the benefit of their club but also of the NRL. I support the Dragons view on juniors.
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
I should imagine that a juniors concession would benefit a number of clubs. The losers would be clubs like the Roosters and the Storm. I'm all for allowing a sub-clause for the Storm but the Roosters can stick by the same rules as everyone else.
 
Messages
2,587
Willow, you have head up your arse. It makes me laugh, when it's the Roosters who want the salary cap to rise then it's greed when it's the Dragons it's because it's in the best interests of the NRL! :lol:
 

Latest posts

Top