Kingston and Hindy on Channel 9 Footy Show

[The Bassman]

did anyone else catch this on Thursday?


Kingston said he wanted to play for Parramatta, he even wanted to just get paid "minimum wage", but parra couldn't ante up the cash ....


Kingston made the cheeky comment about Hindy taking a pay cut ...

I am guessing Hindy wanted to comment further.


Does anyone remember after the $torm cheated us out of last years grand final ... errr I mean, after they beat us in last year's grand final, that there was a group of players, 4 of them, who were prepared to take a pay cut and renegotiate their contracts so Kingston could remain an Eel?

Hindmarsh, Cayless, Grothe, Burt.

All prepared to take a pay cut to keep Kingston at the club.


Then the NRL in their INFINITE wisdom stepped in and said "no you can't do that".

Bye, bye Kevin.

Bye bye spark in the dummy half (funny, we sparked as a team after Kingston started playing regularly in first grade ... his first game was the Sharks match we lost, but he was retained after that ... then our winning streak began not long after that .... but I digress).


The NRL allowed the Bulldogs players to take pay cuts back in 2004 (I think it was 2004, sorry if I got my year wrong) after their salary cap problems.

The NRL has seemingly remained silent on the $torm players saying they would take pay cuts to remain togethger.


But they, the NRL, were rather insistant last year when 4 players were going to take a minor pay cut, to allow another player to remain for the minimum wage he was prepared to play for ....


oh well ..... it's history now .....

 

[Twizzle]

Then the NRL in their INFINITE wisdom stepped in and said "no you can't do that".

as long as they are consistent and say the same to the Storm I dont have a problem

 

[The Bassman]

I do agree there.

consistency NEEDS to be the main issue here.

I will be temped to give up following this great game all together if they allow the $torm players to remain in their current line up for just "pay cuts".

I seem to recall Gallop stating that players will need to be shed that pay cuts will not be tolerated with the $torm .... after all this is an organisation that has deliberately and sytematically cheated a system that was designed to "create a sustainable and level playing field" ...

but again ... time will tell!!

 

[Forty20]

as long as they are consistent and say the same to the Storm I dont have a problem

Well, if you are talking about consistency then surely the Storm should be allowed to renegotiate all of its contracts with its players and allow them to take pay cuts in order to keep the entire squad together.

I mean there is a precedent for it after all.







I love the smell of sarcasm in the mor-...evening

 

[Eels Dude]

Seemed a bit tongue in cheek his comments. Parramatta could not pay Kinga just minimum wage next year. He was automatically valued at 115k due to match payments, so that's double the minimum wage.

 

[The Bassman]

hehehehe!

wouldn't it be nice if the REAL minimumn wage was $60k and not the pasltry amount that it is considered .....

but maybe it's different for sportspeople as compared to the rest of us plebs!!!



nuff said really!

 

[bradeel]

I might be carrying on like an irrational Eels fan but this issue drives me insane. I understand that there are rules and we need to play by them but we seem to be the only ones suffering at the hands of a salary cap.

Just for those that need history spelt out one more time, we lose a grand final in 2009 to a team that unarguably cheated, only to then actually hand over that same cheating, but victorious side a hard working backrower (Lowrie) as well as losing 2 other bargain basement players (Galuvao and Kingston), all of whom seemed prepared to stay on very low salaries alongside teammates who were prepared to take pay cuts to keep them... The cheating team possibly gets to keep all of their star players under renegotiated deals to accommodate teammates taking paycuts, but our fledgling, struggling side that has actually done nothing more than play well for half a season in 2009, suddenly has the sort of soaring player payments usually associated with a side that has actually achieved success.

I just cannot get past the fact that there is no justice for the Parramatta Eels in this salary cap environment. You achieve for 10 rounds, your players get some recognition, their salary demands go through the roof, but you actually win nothing and have to lose players before the side can even start to build something together.

 

[lucablight]

I don't understand why the NRL didn't allow the Eels players to take a paycut for 2010 if they wanted to. It's not like the season had even started yet. Why would they not want to allow it?

 

[strider]

I don't understand why the NRL didn't allow the Eels players to take a paycut for 2010 if they wanted to. It's not like the season had even started yet. Why would they not want to allow it?

there reasoning is, and I roughly quote - that the players are originally lured to the club by the initial salary which gave the club the edge over other clubs in getting the player

so in this case, its just like the melbourne storm players being lured by: the original salary - and the boat - and the new kitchen - and the furniture - and the fish tank - and the brown paper bags

 

[bartman]

I hope the NRL comes down on the Storm hard, and forces them to clear all their contracts (while the organisation still has to guarantee the payments they originally guaranteed the players), and negotiate and register only those that fit under the salary cap, releasing any remaining contracted players to other clubs (with their salaries fully guaranteed and paid by the Storm organisation for the first year).

It's the only way that it will be fair, and the only way the bastards (and any club wanting to emulate them) will learn.

 

[MrT]

there reasoning is, and I roughly quote - that the players are originally lured to the club by the initial salary which gave the club the edge over other clubs in getting the player

so in this case, its just like the melbourne storm players being lured by: the original salary - and the boat - and the new kitchen - and the furniture - and the fish tank - and the brown paper bags

That is the worst excuse I have ever heard. Nathan Hindmarsh came to parra as a teenager. All the years of Parra looking after him is what keeps him there. He was at parra about 14 years ago before Kingston even came to the club so how can they say that reducing Hindy's contract by $10k....YES $10K gives Parra an advantage. I have not heard 1 player change clubs for $10k...THATS A JOKE.


It's not $200k that Anasta was getting at the Dogs and it's not $175k that Inglis, Slare and Smith were getting outside the cap.

This all proves one thing and I hate cheats, IF YOU CAN'T BEAT THEM, JOIN THEM.

If we resigned Kingston for $115k and were over for that, BIG DEAL, would have got a slap on the wrist but we still would have had a good hooker and would have been higher on the ladder. have a good look who has won premierships in the last 5 years..

Melb and we know how
Brisbane - there were rumours of a large mining magnate paying Broncos players, not sure how true it was
Manly - funny how they don't have the same issues we do when it comes to upgrading big players contracts

Melb will get to re-negotiate the players contracts or they'll say the second and third contracts get thrown out and you stay on the $400k you signed for.

It's easy for the Big 4 to stay as they were getting paid this extra cash for years. It's easy to be loyal to the Storm because they were paid top dollar and played in a competitive team. I can see them all taking paycuts if allowed to do so.

 

[strider]

it would have been interesting if our management had of gone - f**k it, lets sign him and hope we can sort out some way to lessen the cap later (ie as actually ended up happening with weller leaving)

problem is, despite then regretting it now, I don't think our management REALLY were that keen to keep kingston - I think they thought, yeah handy, but not necessary and not worth the $$$s the NRL valued him at - so they never really pursued it hard and were prepared to deal with whatever it took to free up that $120K needed .... unfortunately it came back to bite us massively as we have no decent dummy half now

 

[Eels Dude]

It's not $200k that Anasta was getting at the Dogs and it's not $175k that Inglis, Slare and Smith were getting outside the cap.

This all proves one thing and I hate cheats, IF YOU CAN'T BEAT THEM, JOIN THEM.

If we resigned Kingston for $115k and were over for that, BIG DEAL, would have got a slap on the wrist but we still would have had a good hooker and would have been higher on the ladder. have a good look who has won premierships in the last 5 years..

That's a terrible idea. I'd hate to see any club just think, screw the salary cap. we'll pay overs and if we get caught we get caught. It's that kind of rorting attitude that everyone despises the Storm now and why they've had two premierships stripped.

 

[oldmancraigy]

as long as they are consistent and say the same to the Storm I dont have a problem

I will totally agree with you and more - but I'd say there's already a flawed 'solution' by the NRL since the Storm can just drop some contracts and be free of any obligation.

Problem for the Storm is that Slater, Smith and Inglis MUST be on between $500-800k each. Cronk must be close to that too?
Methink the Storm will be allowed to just wash their hands of a few players and thus no longer be obligated to pay them at all....

The solution (going forward) to salary cap cheating (or even mistakes) from $1 to $1billion worth of rorting must be uniform.
1) you may not alter the amount of players contracts and MUST pay them what you signed them for
2) a team over the cap must 'remove' (but still pay for) some contracts instantly to get under the cap AND add back enough minimum contract guys to make a 25 man squad (remaining under the cap)
3) if another club signs a player to al ower amount, you are only obliged to keep paying that player the 'difference'