Notional value

[BranVan3000]

Im surprised people don't kick up more of a fuss about this? It seems entirely like a concept that the salary cap auditor can bring up at his own convenience.

Who decides the notional value of a player?
What attributes go into deciding what a player's notional value is?
Does it go up over time?
How do salary cap increases affect notional value?
Does it apply to only certain players over a certain pay threshold?
Why was it applied to the likes of Inglis and Folau but not classic examples of Gasnier or Lockyer?
Does it only apply to new signings? How about resignings?
Can a players notional value decrease? Who decides that it has decreased? If not, does that mean clubs have to pay Folau a minimum of 400k for the rest of his career?
Can a club make up for notional value with 3PAS on currently signed players?

How about a bit of transparency from our woefully incompetent salary cap auditor?

 

[joshreading]

If i were Parra i would sign him for the 150 thousand with the back ended contract and take it to the NRL with a clear threat if they don't approve it they will see the court room. So long as a club is actually paying the player that figure the NRL has no right to block it. The Storm just signed finch for about 100 thousand when he supposedly could get 400 thousand in super league. Schubert seems to have way too much descretion in making decisions

 

[Springs]

I don't see what's wrong with the 150,000. It's a salary cap, Schubert is acting like it's a points system.

 

[BranVan3000]

If i were Parra i would sign him for the 150 thousand with the back ended contract and take it to the NRL with a clear threat if they don't approve it they will see the court room. So long as a club is actually paying the player that figure the NRL has no right to block it. The Storm just signed finch for about 100 thousand when he supposedly could get 400 thousand in super league. Schubert seems to have way too much descretion in making decisions

I'd love to see it. I'm sure putting Schuberts processes under the spotlight of legitimate auditors and lawyers would prove a massive embarrassment for the ARL.

 

[CC_Roosters]

Ridiculous that Schubert has been able to do this, isn't it a restraint of trade of sorts? The club and player are the only ones in a position to determine a players worth

 

[Didgi]

Im surprised people don't kick up more of a fuss about this?

My opinion exactly based on the other thread. As I said, it's not only a complete farce but it opens up doors for judgement calls, the loss of players and perhaps even legal issues. People seem more preoccupied in wanting the game to shoot itself in the foot by barring Folau (and then whinging about Grant, the ARLC, Mattiske, Gallop, Hadley, the Welsh banker, and whoever comes to land in their misguided sights) than looking at the real issue, which is that a player out of the game for two years can have a value set on his services by an external party, and a ridiculously high one at that!

Who is Schubert to determine what Izzy is worth. What's to say that after cleaning up big in AFL he doesn't simply want to play the game he loves at the same club as his brother, no matter his earnings? Unfortunately the game seems to want to prevent a huge drawcard signing, and instead try to push him off to rugby or whatever.

 

[BranVan3000]

Ridiculous that Schubert has been able to do this, isn't it a restraint of trade of sorts? The club and player are the only ones in a position to determine a players worth

I can't think of many industries where a salary floor can be legally enforced on an employer, especially when the employee has agreed to less

 

[Silent Knight]

Yeah some transparency on notional value would be good. From my own clubs perspective Willie Mason, Timana Tahu and Danny Buderus would be earning far less now than they were in their prime.

A notional value of $400k for Folau seems ludicrous.

 

[eozsmiles]

This is the best reason yet to implement a points system. This situation would not exist with simple guidelines that anyone could follow. My opinion is that players who haven't been in the NRL for over 2 years probably shouldn't count towards the cap.

But people did lose their fckn minds when Mark Gasnier came back from a couple of years at another sport and signed a back ended deal. It isn't surprising to see the NRL being reluctant. They are damned either way so meh.

Just thinking though, if JT or GI signs a contract that pays $500k in the 1st year and a million a year after that.....will it upset the "notional" value system with their back ended deals?

 

[boxhead]

It isn't even just Izzy though, Souths suffered the same issue too with GI. So I'll rule out any bias claims but it is still ridiculous that Schubert can do this. I hope our club challenges it but I'm afraid the current board has no back-bone.

 

[BranVan3000]

What happens if Folau plays for 400k for two years, is average at best and Eels want to resign him for 200,000? Is notional value still in effect? Why / why not?

Why should Schubert decide the market rate of particular players, and only in instances when he feels like it?

 

[eozsmiles]

I can't think of many industries where a salary floor can be legally enforced on an employer, especially when the employee has agreed to less

Most industries have an award wage I think.
But that doesn't matter, no industry has a salary ceiling, the cap is illegal, and if they piss off the players too much they'll have it tossed out.

 

[boxhead]

Agreed. It really is ridiculous. As an Eels fan, it does hit close to home, but I would imagine that for those who are concerned with the future of the game, it is an issue as well. The value of stealing the AFL's big marketing ploy in Western Sydney can't be under-stated.

 

[ethan tremblay]

i Wanna know why he doesn't look at players getting over paid?? as well would only be fair

 

[BranVan3000]

Most industries have an award wage I think.
But that doesn't matter, no industry has a salary ceiling, the cap is illegal, and if they piss off the players too much they'll have it tossed out.

An award wage is an industry or sectoral standard, the NRL has a minimum wage too. But I'm talking about a minimum floor for an individual, decided by an external party. It's ridiculous. It's like if the new NRL CEO was offered 500k per year and the Government decided to tell the NRL that they could only sign a new CEO for a million per year, minimum

 

[jargan83]

I don't really understand how Schubert can set an amount that any player is worth

I would have thought a player is worth what clubs are willing to pay them

 

[Quidgybo]

Most industries have an award wage I think.
But that doesn't matter, no industry has a salary ceiling, the cap is illegal, and if they piss off the players too much they'll have it tossed out.

What's it got to with the players? The cap is a restraint on the clubs, not the players. The players are free to sign any size contract they can get, either within the NRL, with rival Rugby League comps like Super League, or with any number of rival comps in other codes. The clubs meanwhile are restrained from spending more than a certain amount. And none of them look like challenging that restriction any time soon.

Leigh.

 

[Perth Red]

Reality is it exists to stop clubs being tempted to cheat the system by offering silly official salary whilst paper bagging the other 75% of the real salary.

Re the $400k isn't that just a media made up figure? Maybe he thinks he is worth $250k? Who knows, not us I'm sure.

 

[BranVan3000]

Reality is it exists to stop clubs being tempted to cheat the system by offering silly official salary whilst paper bagging the other 75% of the real salary.

Re the $400k isn't that just a media made up figure? Maybe he thinks he is worth $250k? Who knows, not us I'm sure.

So basically the auditor is to confident in his auditing abilities to avoid such a situation?

Either way though, it's the inconsistency and lack of transparency that is the issue

 

[DubaiSaint]

If he's being paid 150k this year and 500k next year, and Schubert has contracts for Sandow, Hayne and Will Hopoate in his draw with clear values on them, and then adds up all the fodder players and if the sum is less than or equal to the $5M (or whatever value the cap is) then it gets the green tick.

I absolutely do not condone what Parra want to do with an "advance" on their 2014 cap but I see absolutely no problem with a 150-550-250 pay structure over three seasons. Its what my own Dragons did with Gasnier and I saw no problem with it then and I see no problem with it now for Parra.

Look at the NFL... all their contracts are clearly transparant to the NFL management and they know exactly what they get and they have no issue with a "bell curve" approach to player payments.

Its all about risk and reward. A perfect world would be contracts would only exist for 12mths and players would be paid / offered a sum based on their prior year performance but the real world doesnt work that way as clubs and players want some form of medium term security.

Schubert should stop playing "God" and let the Eels manage their cap as they see fit (which I believe is poorly, so who cares!)