Return of gaz

[Talons]

I think your problem with Gasnier is going to stem from the Storm rorts, Gallop has stated something along the lines that the Storm players cannot take pay cuts and choose there own wages next year in order to keep the team together, this may be putting more pressure on Gallop to set a precedent.

 

[j0nesy]

I think your problem with Gasnier is going to stem from the Storm rorts, Gallop has stated something along the lines that the Storm players cannot take pay cuts and choose there own wages next year in order to keep the team together, this may be putting more pressure on Gallop to set a precedent.

The precedent has already been set with Tuquiri.

As for the Storm rort I thought Gallop stated that they could not take pay cuts this season to get under the cap and stay in the competition? If so this is a completely different situation. The Storm had already breached the salary cap and when caught and penalised for it the players offered to take a pay cut to avoid the penalty.

 

[saints_fireup]

I think your problem with Gasnier is going to stem from the Storm rorts, Gallop has stated something along the lines that the Storm players cannot take pay cuts and choose there own wages next year in order to keep the team together, this may be putting more pressure on Gallop to set a precedent.

There is no precedent there whatsover.

The players at the Storm have pre-existing contractual arrangements which stipulate a particular salary. The NRL does not believe that the nucleus at the Storm should remain together as it was formed on illegitimate grounds, and rightly so.

Gasnier is not in that situation. He is negotiating a new contract, and should be able to agree to whatever terms he believes are sufficient for his purposes. If it involves a back-ended deal, so be it.

Those wishing him not to return to the Dragons are using the argument he should be paid 'market value'; taking a salary reduction from a pre-existing contract and requiring a player to be paid market value are two very different circumstances.

 

[Saint Jack]

There is no precedent there whatsover.

The players at the Storm have pre-existing contractual arrangements which stipulate a particular salary. The NRL does not believe that the nucleus at the Storm should remain together as it was formed on illegitimate grounds, and rightly so.

Gasnier is not in that situation. He is negotiating a new contract, and should be able to agree to whatever terms he believes are sufficient for his purposes. If it involves a back-ended deal, so be it.

Those wishing him not to return to the Dragons are using the argument he should be paid 'market value'; taking a salary reduction from a pre-existing contract and requiring a player to be paid market value are two very different circumstances.

Right on SF. If Gaz accepts $50k this half season and a different amount next - its a financial decision that he can make. Its nothing to do with the NRL Salary team - unless its a rort - ie the Club is going over the Cap.

Same as a business giving a worker a performance payment that rises every year - he gets an initial payment to join, then has a contract whereby it increases. If he is willing to accept a smaller first up payment - that's his decision.

We have loans whereby you may re-pay in different ways - depending on your circumstances. This isn't illegal - it just fits the needs of the borrower at various stages of his/her life.

So - a footie player might see the advantages in taking his contract money in a variety of ways - if it meets his needs and goals and he receives the amount he is seeking.

I've often wondered what might happen if some muli-millionnaire had two sons who turned out to be the greatest pair of halves in the game. As they have too much money anyway they agree to play for their favourite team for the base $50k plus match payments. Another team might have to offer them $500k each to get them. But they only want the base from "their" team.

Is this illegal ?

 

[Firey_Dragon]

I think your problem with Gasnier is going to stem from the Storm rorts, Gallop has stated something along the lines that the Storm players cannot take pay cuts and choose there own wages next year in order to keep the team together, this may be putting more pressure on Gallop to set a precedent.

How is that a precedent? One is a situation where players are changing their agreed salary in a contract. The other is having a contract with it's value declared from the start. They are nothing alike. Since when has the NRL ever had the power to state how much a player can or can't earn?

If the player in question agrees to whatever payment terms there is, the NRL is powerless to stop it. Gasnier will still earn around $120,000 depending on how many games he plays, for half a season which equates to well over the $250,000 mark for a season if you include pre-season in those calculations. Still pretty damn good coin for a mid-season signing.

 

[Willow]

I think your problem with Gasnier is going to stem from the Storm rorts, Gallop has stated something along the lines that the Storm players cannot take pay cuts and choose there own wages next year in order to keep the team together, this may be putting more pressure on Gallop to set a precedent.

The Storm are trying to get a busted bung back into the hole, the Dragons are clean and up front.

The Dragons have met with the NRL to discuss this well before any thought of putting pen to paper.

When it comes to clubs and salary cap issues, the NRL looks at it on a case-by-case basis. Melbourne cheating is not the fault of any other club. I suspect the NRL will see it that way as well.

Any comparison with the Storm, no matter how remote, is totally irrelevant to Gasnier.

 

[STG-Dragon]

BRISBANE captain Darren Lockyer has branded Mark Gasnier's impending return to the Dragons as unfair, declaring that the centre should only be signed by a club that can afford to register him on a "market value" contract.

What a hypocritical wanker! I'm pretty sure Falou has a hugely back ended contract plus the other examples put on here! f**k anyone from that club has no right to comment on situations like this!

 

[dragonlady53]

There have been plenty of players over the years who have signed to play for less to stay with their current club rather than follow the big money elsewhere. As for Brisbane, that's been their cry for yonks, with various players saying they're willing to get less money so they can stay where friends, family, whatever are. I'm sure Darren Lockyer's contract would be less than others', yet he is our Australian captain - what a hypocrite!

 

[TheRev]

I think your problem with Gasnier is going to stem from the Storm rorts, Gallop has stated something along the lines that the Storm players cannot take pay cuts and choose there own wages next year in order to keep the team together, this may be putting more pressure on Gallop to set a precedent.

Unlike the others here, I agree with you Talons.. yes the Dragons situation is quite different to the Storms, but they are related, and right now the salary cap is under the microsope from the media, public etc.. and the Storm issues may be what costs us a shot at Gasnier (even though its similar to many of those other players who have done it in recent years).

Particularly if they asked a few players to take a pay-cut at the Dragons.

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

Unlike the others here, I agree with you Talons.. yes the Dragons situation is quite different to the Storms, but they are related, and right now the salary cap is under the microsope from the media, public etc.. and the Storm issues may be what costs us a shot at Gasnier (even though its similar to many of those other players who have done it in recent years).

Particularly if they asked a few players to take a pay-cut at the Dragons.

The NRL ratified Finchs transfer last year under the exact same circumstances ie - second tier cap plus match payments. There is no grounds for them to do any different in this instance so long as we are not breaking the cap.

Forget the emotional clap trap flying around - in the real world, where FACTS, not hysteria, rule, this will be ratified so long as no rules are broken.

 

[BIKER_DRAGON]

Is Gasniers finished playing for the frog yawnion club and is he back in Australia yet, and most importantly. What has he Gasnier, had to say about all this speculation about himself and his future football plans.

 

[snogard6]

The longer this lingers on the worse it will be for our teams concentration. Someone needs to come out and let us all know where we are with this dilema, and then make the deal accordingly.

 

[boxa777]

There is no precedent there whatsover.

The players at the Storm have pre-existing contractual arrangements which stipulate a particular salary. The NRL does not believe that the nucleus at the Storm should remain together as it was formed on illegitimate grounds, and rightly so.

Gasnier is not in that situation. He is negotiating a new contract, and should be able to agree to whatever terms he believes are sufficient for his purposes. If it involves a back-ended deal, so be it.

Those wishing him not to return to the Dragons are using the argument he should be paid 'market value'; taking a salary reduction from a pre-existing contract and requiring a player to be paid market value are two very different circumstances.

Completely agree..

The Storm and Gaz situations are completely different. When you start venturing into ascertaining between 'market' value and 'real' value, you are going to open up an area that is and forever will be shrouded in grey.

The bottom line is if Gasnier signs he is accepting of the terms stipulated whereas the Storm put together their team based on figures which breached the salary cap. Whether the Storm players would accept less now is irrelevant. Team was formed using illegal means.

Everyone complaining from Weidler to Lockyer have no grounds whatsoever.

 

[borat]

The precedent has already been set with Tuquiri.

As for the Storm rort I thought Gallop stated that they could not take pay cuts this season to get under the cap and stay in the competition? If so this is a completely different situation. The Storm had already breached the salary cap and when caught and penalised for it the players offered to take a pay cut to avoid the penalty.

F*ck precendent. if players aren't able to decide what contract they will sign then this will end up in the court as a restraint of trade.

Both Gaz, if he does sign, and Tiquiri have chosen to play for alot lower contracts than what they could earn elsewhere. Thats their choice and they are being compensated for it by receiving larger payments in later years.

Both players do this becuase they want to play NRL and want to sign for their respective clubs.

As long as its all within salary cap rules, if anyone else doesn't like it can go and get stuffed.

 

[Bring back choc]

How soon can Gaz actually play for us?? It's staring to annoy me reading the rorters are now after him. Cmon Gaz, let's get this thing done.

 

[borat]

Gaz's manager is just doing the right thing by his client and lining up other options should the NRL knock back our deal.

The difference between the other deals and the dragons offer is Gaz wants to play for us. If it was about money Gaz would be still in France or playing for the Rebels

 

[Willow]

How soon can Gaz actually play for us?? It's staring to annoy me reading the rorters are now after him. Cmon Gaz, let's get this thing done.

If it happens, it happens. If doesn't happen, we'll move on.

I read a post earlier today where someone suggested the negotiations will having an effect the team. I think he/she meant it is having an effect on some supporters.

They have until June 30th to lock it down. So the we'll know more tommorrow, or in six weeks time. So relax. No point going nuts in the meantime.

 

[Daniel Dragons]

Willow, stop being so logical. This is an internet forum - there's no place for sensibility here!!!

 

[Willow]

lol. You're right.

Go nuts everyone!

http://www.turkyurdu.com/hollywood/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/jen_elison_nuts_mag_small.jpg

(Warning: link above contains picture of Nuts)

 

[TheRev]

Yeah but June 30 is a long time away, if hes going to play, the sooner the better he get into the squad and we start working plays with him... we should only be paying him half a season this year I feel, since he missed all the pre-season, and hes going to have to shake off those union cobwebs.