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!

NRL derail Ingliss deal

Honkiest_Honky

Juniors
Messages
619
From ABC online unable to provide link due to forum rules <20 posts

NRL derails Inglis deal

(AAP: Dean Lewins)

Greg Inglis' future in the NRL remains up in the air after the NRL blocked his proposed move to South Sydney on Saturday.
The NRL advised the Rabbitohs that it must include the full value of a number of third party agreements relating to the Queensland Origin star's $400,000 a year deal.
Souths will now need to prove to the NRL how it intends to fit the payments under its $4.1 million cap before Inglis' contract can be registered.
Inglis, who reneged on a deal to sign with the Brisbane Broncos when third party deals failed to materialise, will now continue to in rugby league limbo as he is without a club for 2011.
In a statement released on Saturday, the NRL explained that the rules are in place to "ensure that any third party agreement is not in truth a vehicle to remunerate the player for playing rugby league at his club".
South Sydney released a short statement saying it was disappointed and disagree with the NRL's decision.
"The Rabbitohs will assess their salary cap position as determined by the NRL's salary cap auditor today and make a decision on a path forward over the next seven days," the statement said.
"The Rabbitohs will do everything they can to keep Greg Inglis in rugby league."
Inglis left the Storm at the end of last season after the Melbourne club was found to have rorted the salary cap system over five years.
The superstar centre made a move to Brisbane but that deal fell through when the Broncos withdrew their offer when Inglis refused to sign by the club's deadline.
The Rabbitohs swooped, tabling a three-year $1.8 million deal with $200,000 worth of third-party payments.
The NRL said the third-party agreements involving Inglis do not comply with the salary cap rules as they are not independent of the club.
The statement said the third-party agreements involving Inglis were drafted by South Sydney and were in some cases revised with the sponsor by the club with no involvement from Inglis' manager.
The NRL also says the terms of one agreement "were concluded and confirmed between the manager and the club before the player's manager had any communication with the actual sponsor".
"Given the circumstances under which Greg became available to South Sydney, nobody can have been under any doubt about the importance of ensuring his contract complied with the cap," NRL chief executive David Gallop said in the statement.
"The NRL had already required the Broncos to include third party agreements within their calculation of the contract value and was insisting legal fees also be included when those negotiations ceased.
"South Sydney had been advised to have all proposed offers reviewed by the NRL before making any commitments.
"They chose not to do so and it has taken some time to access all details of the agreements.
"It is unfortunate for Greg that he is in the middle of a difficult situation and I assured him this week that these issues do not reflect on him but that they are matters for clubs in assessing the offers that they make.
"He is one of the game's most highly valued players and we have assured him of that in no uncertain terms.
"That said the cap has to apply fairly to all clubs and one club cannot be allowed to do what others were prevented from doing.
"The rules on third party deals are clear.
"We have worked with clubs and players by substantially increasing the amount that sponsors can pay players through the $300,000 Marquee Player Allowance in 2011 but without rules on third party agreements there would be no point in having a salary cap system."
 

BranVan3000

Coach
Messages
12,289
"That said the cap has to apply fairly to all clubs and one club cannot be allowed to do what others were prevented from doing."

Isn't that was St. Merge did already this year?
 

Dave Q

Coach
Messages
11,065
The NRL have no idea.

The way forward is that we will have to release one or two players.

Simpson and Crocker I'd say.
 

Wobbygong

First Grade
Messages
6,145
Offload some depth and you'll accommodate the fat lazy slob, it's a pretty simple choice.

Then again Richardson will be shown up as the clueless pharkwit he is, if they have to offload some quality players to accomodate Owen Craigie MkII especially given he said Souths won't need offloaed anyone for the deal to proceed guaranteed. Souths keeping the status quo four decades of abject failure.
 
Messages
14,937
Rabbitohs disappointed and disagree with NRL’s decision on Greg Inglis’ contract

18 Dec 2010

2009RabbitohsLogoDetail-c1c6fa2d-bc19-410f-a1db-e011264b9573.jpg
[FONT=&quot]The South Sydney Rabbitohs are disappointed and disagree with the decision of the NRL to include some of Greg Inglis’ third-party agreements in the Club’s salary cap for the 2011 season.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Rabbitohs will assess their salary cap position as determined by the NRL’s Salary Cap Auditor today and make a decision on a path forward over the next seven days.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Rabbitohs will do everything they can to keep Greg Inglis in Rugby League.[/FONT]
 

Galeforce

Bench
Messages
2,602
forget legal action, Souths must now just work it , in quick fashion.
My preferred players to be worked in order

Crocker, Wesser , Corrigan, Simpson .
 

DC_fan

Coach
Messages
11,980
I hope we take legal action!

That would be the worst thing the club can do. The game and the club does not need such action.

For me, it will be unloading players to fit Inglis under salary cap.

Regardless of how this turns out, people within the club look really stupid. They said that Inglis will be with the club and we will not have to let any player go because of this.
 

NGR

Juniors
Messages
1,499
That would be the worst thing the club can do. The game and the club does not need such action.

For me, it will be unloading players to fit Inglis under salary cap.

Regardless of how this turns out, people within the club look really stupid. They said that Inglis will be with the club and we will not have to let any player go because of this.

Yep, we need a game that is administered as fairly as FIFA administer soccer..

Maybe its not the people saying the deal should go through that are the problems, maybe we are getting f&cked over again like 99?
 

Dragons01

First Grade
Messages
9,066
"That said the cap has to apply fairly to all clubs and one club cannot be allowed to do what others were prevented from doing."

Isn't that was St. Merge did already this year?

Impossible to compare Saints deal with Gasnier to Souths with Inglis. Gasnier only played 10 games for Saints this year including the semis and the GF not the whole season. Gasnier's contract also took about 2 months to sort out and in that time Gasnier was not once spotted wearing Saints gear or being anywhere near the players until the NRL officially approved the deal.

Saints also let J. Smith, N. Costigan and J. Saffy go to accomodate Gasnier under the cap.
 

Midnight Rabbit

Juniors
Messages
226
We wont take it to court but if we feel that strongly we should even if we are worried about the shock waves it could cause, seriously stuff it. If Schubert did blab to his Rooster mates that he was going to stop the deal he also has to be sacked because that's unprofessional and should not be tolerated. Something seriously stinks about this and I feel from the beginning that they were always going to try and find any loophole to stop the deal.

Since we will take it I have no problem releasing Wesser, Corrigan and McQueen, Mundine, Webster or Simpson to a lesser extent but who will take them?
 

Midnight Rabbit

Juniors
Messages
226
Sick of this defending of Gasnier's deal too 10 games for $50K you do know at that rate it still comes to less than Inglis's $190K for a year you clowns, Simple bloody Mathematics.
 

Midnight Rabbit

Juniors
Messages
226
His base contract was $50k from everything I saw , If you think he was on a $140K base that late in the year then you are delusional.
 

Dragons01

First Grade
Messages
9,066
The only ones looking like clowns at the moment are Richardson, Crowe and co at Souths who stupidly paraded Inglis around for everyone to see when his deal was not even approved.

Simple bloody maths is that Saints let 3 quality players go to accomodate Gasnier who have Souths let go?
 

Honkiest_Honky

Juniors
Messages
619
Impossible to compare Saints deal with Gasnier to Souths with Inglis. Gasnier only played 10 games for Saints this year including the semis and the GF not the whole season. Gasnier's contract also took about 2 months to sort out and in that time Gasnier was not once spotted wearing Saints gear or being anywhere near the players until the NRL officially approved the deal.

Saints also let J. Smith, N. Costigan and J. Saffy go to accomodate Gasnier under the cap.

2010 Bunnies Vs 2010 Steelers
Wesser <<< Boyd
Merritt << Nightingale
Champion <<< Gasnier
Best << Cooper
Talanoa <<< Morris
Sutton = Soward
Sandow <<< Hornby
B Lowe < D Young
Taylor = Creagh
Burgess >> Scott
Asotasi >> Hunt
Luke = Fien with Pridis
Stuart << Weymouth

No way Illawarra are cheating the cap, just good coaching.
 

Dragons01

First Grade
Messages
9,066
2010 Bunnies Vs 2010 Steelers
Wesser <<< Boyd
Merritt << Nightingale
Champion <<< Gasnier
Best << Cooper
Talanoa <<< Morris
Sutton = Soward
Sandow <<< Hornby
B Lowe < D Young
Taylor = Creagh
Burgess >> Scott
Asotasi >> Hunt
Luke = Fien with Pridis
Stuart << Weymouth

No way Illawarra are cheating the cap, just good coaching.

2010 Steelers - Oh that hurts - nearly as much as it must have hurt Souths missing out on making the semis yet again - NOT.

Of the 13 listed - 8 are Dragons local juniors. And yes it is good coaching. Most other team supporters laughed when Saints bought Weyman, same with Priddis and for what they paid for both those players would not even begin to cover Burgess's price.
 

Latest posts

Top