Panthers sign Kingston from Eels

[mickdo]

yes it was (or close enough give or take a bit) .... the $60K freed up by cuts + the $55K we currently have available in the cap covers the total needed to fit kinga

the NRL's issue is that they believe the spreading of talent that the cap accomplishes is determined at the point the contract is signed - so they don't want to let ppl take pay cuts later on

Yep. It's utter BS. The Doggies can all take a pay cut after rorting the cap, but when we try and do it through legitimate channels, they say no. Joke.

 

[bartman]

yes it was (or close enough give or take a bit) .... the $60K freed up by cuts + the $55K we currently have available in the cap covers the total needed to fit kinga

Just from reading the NRL response to the suggestion in the articles, I'm not so sure now that we have the $55K/spot left under the cap? Not quite sure what makes me suspect that, but maybe someone would drop back to Wenty squad if we were to keep Kinga on $110K, but I think the basic $55K spot might now be taken.

 

[84 Baby]

Just from reading the NRL response to the suggestion in the articles, I'm not so sure now that we have the $55K/spot left under the cap? Not quite sure what makes me suspect that, but maybe someone would drop back to Wenty squad if we were to keep Kinga on $110K, but I think the basic $55K spot might now be taken.

Who?

 

[bartman]

Just whoever happens to be the 25th highest paid out of our combined NRL/Wenty full-time squads... if Kinga was retained, it would push that person downwards into the Wenty cap, and may have an impact there.

This is just from my interpretation of the tone of the NRL's quotes about the Save Kinga idea, and why they might not bend on it for our circumstances when in other cases it seems fine.

 

[El Diablo]

yes it was (or close enough give or take a bit) .... the $60K freed up by cuts + the $55K we currently have available in the cap covers the total needed to fit kinga

the NRL's issue is that they believe the spreading of talent that the cap accomplishes is determined at the point the contract is signed - so they don't want to let ppl take pay cuts later on

you have it wrong

the NRL aren't stopping them from taking a pay cut.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...p-kevin-kingston/story-e6freye0-1225785318873

"The boys are determined to do everything they can to keep Kevvy, but the NRL has ruled we can't put him in the cap for under $115,000, which he earned this year because of his match payments,'' Osborne said. "Kevin was happy to stay for only $55,000 - the minimum salary - but the NRL won't allow it. We think it's wrong.''

the NRL are only stopping him from being signed for $55k

 

[El Diablo]

Yep. It's utter BS. The Doggies can all take a pay cut after rorting the cap, but when we try and do it through legitimate channels, they say no. Joke.

they didn't say no

if enough players take a cut so he is signed for $115k then it would be sweet. currently that has not happened

 

[strider]

you have it wrong

the NRL aren't stopping them from taking a pay cut.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...p-kevin-kingston/story-e6freye0-1225785318873



the NRL are only stopping him from being signed for $55k

how does that not agree with what I (and others) are saying?

i am under the impression there is a 55K spot avilable for him - but since the NRL are valuing him at 110K (or whatever) he won't fit in that 55K spot unless the spot becomes bigger (by whatever means)

 

[El Diablo]

how does that not agree with what I (and others) are saying?

i am under the impression there is a 55K spot avilable for him - but since the NRL are valuing him at 110K (or whatever) he won't fit in that 55K spot unless the spot becomes bigger (by whatever means)

you are assuming the cut the players want to take covers this

the cut the players take will only cover the $55k minimum fee which Kingston is happy to sign for. the NRL will only allow him to be signed for $115k though.

 

[strider]

you are assuming the cut the players want to take covers this

the cut the players take will only cover the $55k minimum fee which Kingston is happy to sign for. the NRL will only allow him to be signed for $115k though.

no - i think you are wrong ... i believe this is all based on there still being a minimum salary spot available ($55K) ... so currently there is $55K space under the cap ..... but kinga needs there to be $115K available (= minimum salary 55K + '09 payments which roll into '10 cap 60K) ... so we need another 60K made available in the cap to fit him - which seems to be what 6 players x -$10K equals

 

[El Diablo]

read the bit i quoted from the DT again

it states it's for the $55k, not the $115k

 

[bartman]

Even though there might be a top 25 "spot" available, I'm not sure the club as a whole (fulltime squad, NRL and Wenty) has the spare 55K cash sitting around for Kinga... our cap limits might be currently allocated to other players throughout the squad, and hence we might need to find the full 115K in cuts for the NRL to allow the deal - that might be the issue?

 

[born an eel]

Even though there might be a top 25 "spot" available, I'm not sure the club as a whole (fulltime squad, NRL and Wenty) has the spare 55K cash sitting around for Kinga... our cap limits might be currently allocated to other players throughout the squad, and hence we might need to find the full 115K in cuts for the NRL to allow the deal - that might be the issue?

if all spots were spoken for anyone not signed already would have to go elsewhere, wenty included. I don't believe that to be the case.

 

[El Diablo]

we might need to find the full 115K in cuts for the NRL to allow the deal - that might be the issue?

he must be signed for that fee despite the fact Kingston would be happy to stay for less

if more players took cuts then he could stay

 

[born an eel]

if you were correct El we're screwed anyhow, as we need a 25 squad member and players wont take a cut for just anybody. There has to be $55K available without the cuts.

 

[strider]

read the bit i quoted from the DT again

it states it's for the $55k, not the $115k

I cannot for the life of me understand why you think this doesn't agree with what I am saying :?

"The boys are determined to do everything they can to keep Kevvy, but the NRL has ruled we can't put him in the cap for under $115,000, which he earned this year because of his match payments,'' Osborne said. "Kevin was happy to stay for only $55,000 - the minimum salary - but the NRL won't allow it. We think it's wrong.''

 

[El Diablo]

i'm sure we have a 25 man squad already

 

[born an eel]

so if thats the case, a $50k player would drop back to the part time squad, frees up $50K and with salary sacrifice we find $65K.

 

[El Diablo]

I cannot for the life of me understand why you think this doesn't agree with what I am saying :?

this is what you said

what pisses me off is that they wouldn't let OUR players take pay cuts to accomodate kinga when its been done in the past .... f**kwits!

that is not true

 

[mickdo]

ElD, what you are saying is still not clear from the articles

 

[Raudonikis]

Didnt Kinga already say he didnt want the boys to do that for him?Pay cuts.