Kingston's offer to pay to play

[Hollywood Jesus]

Hey, I didn't start it.

 

[Ron Jeremy]

but you still contributed to it, grow up, we should be happy for what he's done, and we're in the midst of GF week, stop pushing agendas and enjoy the week and support everyone in our side - Hayne is an exceptional talent.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Hey, I didn't start it.

HJ, I really like you because you use your brain but the brain seems to always get neglected when Jarryd Hayne comes into the picture. Look, please don't take this wrong way because I actually agree with most of your points of view in this string its just that its time to move on from picking on Jarryd Hayne almost all-the-time. Now come on HJ, you can do this...... you walked away from Parra Jesus so you can easily let go of your cyclic vehement attacks on Jarryd Hayne as well.

What would Parramatta Jesus do if he was in your shoes?????

 

[Ron Jeremy]

HJ, I really like you because you use your brain but the brain seems to always get neglected when Jarryd Hayne comes into the picture. Look, please don't take this wrong way because I actually agree with most of your points of view in this string its just that its time to move on from picking on Jarryd Hayne almost all-the-time. Now come on HJ, you can do this...... you walked away from Parra Jesus so you can easily let go of your cyclic vehement attacks on Jarryd Hayne as well.

What would Parramatta Jesus do if he was in your shoes?????

Jesus blessed us with Hayne, i just find it amazing that we have such an amazing talent in our side and some idiots rubbish him because he lacks 'facial expressions' ffs, grow up everyone, he's here, like it or not, if you don't then f**k off and support Canterbury.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Jesus blessed us with Hayne, i just find it amazing that we have such an amazing talent in our side and some idiots rubbish him because he lacks 'facial expressions' ffs, grow up everyone, he's here, like it or not, if you don't then f**k off and support Canterbury.

Maybe he has watched The Godfather one too many times!!!!!!

 

[Raudonikis]

lol at how this has gone...hey casper r u going to the game?

 

[Stagger eel]

Maybe he has watched The Godfather one too many times!!!!!!

aaaahh! Roy Spagnolo and Mario Libertini......love em

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

What would Parramatta Jesus do if he was in your shoes?????

Give crap to everyone, I reckon. It was one of his more admirable points.

 

[oldmancraigy]

Point is, Hayne isnt the only bloke who has had a contract extended, the result of which may mean we can't keep Kingston - but he is the one some people look to single out.

But Hayne's contract for 2010 hasn't changed AT ALL. It's his 2011 contract which is different now!!

So him signing for 2011-2014 is irrelevant to Kingas 2010 situation.

On the match payments thing: Kingston's match payments don't count against the cap next year - it's just the number of games he played this year are used to calculate the value of any match payment counting against the cap he might sign for next year.
Simple story is that he needs to sign a contract that doesn't include match payments, and he's sweet.

The article should say that Kinga can't earn 110k at Parra next season, only 50k - because that's the real story here.

 

[strider]

From the danial mortimer story ...

...

The Eels' quest to keep Kingston has been made more difficult, despite the 26-year-old offering to hand back $50,000 in match payments to help the club squeeze him under next year's salary cap.
"It's a generous offer and shows the spirit in the club ... but unfortunately bonuses have to be clearly identified," NRL boss David Gallop said.
"At the point of offer one club may well have secured the player over another because of the bonuses that were promised. To simply remove them would disadvantage the club that didn't secure the services of the player."


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1225780947227

This reasoning is bullsh*t!!! ... when the Dogs rorted the cap back in, whenever, the players were subsequently allowed to take supposed pay cuts to try and all fit back under the cap the following year ... so THAT was a concession AFTER the "point of offer" - they only managed to sign and retain a bunch of players by offering them plenty, but then the NRL let them get away keeping them all for another season by letting them adjust their contracts ..... so why not now? is it only flexible for cheats?

Surely all we have to do is get a player who will NOT be around after next year to sacrifice $50K base salary and take it as an incentive instead - because they won't be around after 2010 then their incentive portion will not count to the 2011 cap ..... so Kinga stays, gets his $50K of incentive money from this year - the player who takes teh cut can have a nice easy incentive to make it - everyone's happy

 

[84 Baby]

when was Matt Keating's contract extended? Or Anthony Mitchell wrapped up? If either one was this year, clearly it's been done in preference to keeping Kingston. Circumstances have changed and hindsight can be a wonderful thing.

Point is, Hayne isnt the only bloke who has had a contract extended, the result of which may mean we can't keep Kingston - but he is the one some people look to single out.

Important point that everyone has seemed to have glossed over. Anthony Mitchell is supposedly a rare talent. We already struggling to put 6 into the backline, do we have to pick 3 hookers as well? Unfortunately blondies and redheads usually get picked over the black haired

 

[strider]

Important point that everyone has seemed to have glossed over. Anthony Mitchell is supposedly a rare talent. We already struggling to put 6 into the backline, do we have to pick 3 hookers as well? Unfortunately blondies and redheads usually get picked over the black haired

injuries anyone? .... i hope anthony is bullet proof ... i guess if robbo stays then KK and Robo are potential backup at #9

personally i think Kinga is a better dummy half than Matt Keating and that alone should be a reason to keep him for a relatively small salary (but thats my opinion)

 

[Parra Steve]

I have to wonder if Kingston was a rep player and was being targeted by Union that the NRL would do more to keep him.

 

[fish eel]

Important point that everyone has seemed to have glossed over. Anthony Mitchell is supposedly a rare talent. We already struggling to put 6 into the backline, do we have to pick 3 hookers as well? Unfortunately blondies and redheads usually get picked over the black haired

Yeah, I mentioned Mitchell earlier. Tough choices but we can't have it all.

injuries anyone? .... i hope anthony is bullet proof ... i guess if robbo stays then KK and Robo are potential backup at #9

personally i think Kinga is a better dummy half than Matt Keating and that alone should be a reason to keep him for a relatively small salary (but thats my opinion)

and I guess that was why I asked when both Keating and Mitchell had their deals extended?

My recollection(which may not be right) is it was this year, because, if it was, that seems to be like a decision was made earlier in the season to have those two guys ahead of Kingston.

Hindsight can be a wonderful thing.....

 

[strider]

keating was extended before kinga even got to play a game .... i like matt, i think he's developing well too ... but tbh I think kinga is a better dummy half - he's a damn good player and only ended up here cos ricky stuart is a blind knob with no clue and decided aging talentless corey hughes was a better option :lol:

kinga is a minimum salary - the exact kind of player you want for depth - unfortunately the min salary gets blown out by the match payments from this year - but still leaves him cheaper than some of the hacks we've got at wenty

 

[oldmancraigy]

keating was extended before kinga even got to play a game .... i like matt, i think he's developing well too ... but tbh I think kinga is a better dummy half - he's a damn good player and only ended up here cos ricky stuart is a blind knob with no clue and decided aging talentless corey hughes was a better option :lol:

kinga is a minimum salary - the exact kind of player you want for depth - unfortunately the min salary gets blown out by the match payments from this year - but still leaves him cheaper than some of the hacks we've got at wenty

Personally I think Keating is a better dummy half - he's been superb so far in the finals series.

On the salaries thing....
For this season (from the sounds of it) Kingston is on $50k + $3k per game played.
That means his salary counts $68k towards our 2009 cap, while Kingston gets paid $107k. The salary cap calculation is [base salary] + [number of game played in previous year x match payments] - or, 50k + 6 x 3k = 68. (he played 6 first grade game for Cronulla in 2008).

Using match payments is a cheap way of bringing a player who was previously injured/ out of favour to your club for 1 year and not having much salary cap impact.

If we sign him on an incentives deal for 2010, (ie - $50k + $3k per game) then, for salary cap purposes, he will count as $107k - because he played 19 games for us in 2009, that is the number assumed for the 2010 cap calculation.
Clearly this doesn't work, since we only have $50k for each of the last 2 player spots.
HOWEVER, we could simply sign him to a deal where he doesn't receive 'incentives' - a flat rate $50k deal, and he'll then only count $50k against the cap.

I keep saying this.... he can simply take $50k and remain - however it will mean a $60k paycut for him (which Grothe is offering to take so that he can stay?)

 

[strider]

Personally I think Keating is a better dummy half - he's been superb so far in the finals series.

On the salaries thing....
For this season (from the sounds of it) Kingston is on $50k + $3k per game played.
That means his salary counts $68k towards our 2009 cap, while Kingston gets paid $107k. The salary cap calculation is [base salary] + [number of game played in previous year x match payments] - or, 50k + 6 x 3k = 68. (he played 6 first grade game for Cronulla in 2008).

Using match payments is a cheap way of bringing a player who was previously injured/ out of favour to your club for 1 year and not having much salary cap impact.

If we sign him on an incentives deal for 2010, (ie - $50k + $3k per game) then, for salary cap purposes, he will count as $107k - because he played 19 games for us in 2009, that is the number assumed for the 2010 cap calculation.
Clearly this doesn't work, since we only have $50k for each of the last 2 player spots.
HOWEVER, we could simply sign him to a deal where he doesn't receive 'incentives' - a flat rate $50k deal, and he'll then only count $50k against the cap.

I keep saying this.... he can simply take $50k and remain - however it will mean a $60k paycut for him (which Grothe is offering to take so that he can stay?)

you see, I really don't think this is correct :-s ... I don't think it matters if he is on incentives next year or not in 2010 - his incentives from this year will count regardless

if it was only an issue if he got an incentive deal next year then I can't see tehre would be any problem at all - he said he's willing to not get incentive payments this year to stay, why wouldn't he just not get them next year and have a base $50K and it all be sweet???

I think if he is on the books next year, incentives or not, his incentives from this year will count to our 2010 cap

 

[born an eel]

Personally I think Keating is a better dummy half - he's been superb so far in the finals series.

On the salaries thing....
For this season (from the sounds of it) Kingston is on $50k + $3k per game played.
That means his salary counts $68k towards our 2009 cap, while Kingston gets paid $107k. The salary cap calculation is [base salary] + [number of game played in previous year x match payments] - or, 50k + 6 x 3k = 68. (he played 6 first grade game for Cronulla in 2008).

Using match payments is a cheap way of bringing a player who was previously injured/ out of favour to your club for 1 year and not having much salary cap impact.

If we sign him on an incentives deal for 2010, (ie - $50k + $3k per game) then, for salary cap purposes, he will count as $107k - because he played 19 games for us in 2009, that is the number assumed for the 2010 cap calculation.
Clearly this doesn't work, since we only have $50k for each of the last 2 player spots.
HOWEVER, we could simply sign him to a deal where he doesn't receive 'incentives' - a flat rate $50k deal, and he'll then only count $50k against the cap.

I keep saying this.... he can simply take $50k and remain - however it will mean a $60k paycut for him (which Grothe is offering to take so that he can stay?)

he can not stay for anything under $107k (using your numbers), $50K salary (2010) no incentives plus this year (2009) bonus $57k

 

[Craig Johnston]

The best thing for Kingston is another club picking him up for a worthy package. Penrith or even back to cronulla isn’t a bad alternative, once the hysteria dies down reality could sink in and that maybe the most likely outcome. I really hope the bloke benefits financially. From an eels point of view though, i agree with the sentiments that we have more than adequate depth at hooker coming through, and when sacrifices need to be made for the future direction of the club this one regrettably makes sense,

Bit out of left field.....but I’m sure though if punters bag 100k for an eels win like the papers report, it would be grossly unfair if Shubert was to deny Kingston from receiving a donation. Who would say the punter is an eels fan?

 

[yy_cheng]

From the danial mortimer story ...



This reasoning is bullsh*t!!! ... when the Dogs rorted the cap back in, whenever, the players were subsequently allowed to take supposed pay cuts to try and all fit back under the cap the following year ... so THAT was a concession AFTER the "point of offer" - they only managed to sign and retain a bunch of players by offering them plenty, but then the NRL let them get away keeping them all for another season by letting them adjust their contracts ..... so why not now? is it only flexible for cheats?

Surely all we have to do is get a player who will NOT be around after next year to sacrifice $50K base salary and take it as an incentive instead - because they won't be around after 2010 then their incentive portion will not count to the 2011 cap ..... so Kinga stays, gets his $50K of incentive money from this year - the player who takes teh cut can have a nice easy incentive to make it - everyone's happy

BUt then wouldn't that player's incentives count towards the salary cap of his new team?
That would also make other teams look the other way.