Rumours and Stuff

[parrathruandthru]

As already mentioned Schneider had surgery this year on a shoulder otherwise i believe would of been playing NYC right now.
Brown just returned from injury and i believe will be given game time possibly this year if not 100% next year.
With Schneider alot will depend on who Parra keep and who they move on.
But ill say this with both kids even though only 18yo
Dylan Brown - Halve - 5/8 - FullBack
Kyle Schneider - Hooker
I'm hearing both boys are doing Nrl preseason this year at seasons end. If this is the case i cant see the club not wanting these players in there future plans and see them potentially playing first grade at some stage in the future. Why else would they be doing NRL preseason at 18yo.?

This is what I believe to be true too.
Brown told me last October he was signed to Parra for the next 3 years
(that's hearsay I believe disregard it for you succession thread Pou)

 

[Bazal]

You f**king Moron. .

Bully!

 

[Obscene Assassin]

What about playmakers putting cheap shots on wingers?

 

[hineyrulz]

What about playmakers putting cheap shots on wingers?

Nice shoulder charge by the protected species Thuston missed by all a sundry.

 

[hindy111]

Mguires stomp against Storm has been charged.
I recall an identical one against Mannah. Nothing said?

 

[parrathruandthru]

Mguires stomp against Storm has been charged.
I recall an identical one against Mannah. Nothing said?

was he facing the other way when he stomped Mannah/ Might have been on his seeing side this time

 

[strider]

Not sure of the relevance in your comment re: new injury.
Retiring doesn't need to be a new injury, nor does cancellation of contract with the NRL.
The only entity concerned about new vs pre-existing injuries are insurance companies and they arent in this conversation... yet.

Surely if its coming off their cap then it will need to be the whole medically induced insurance retirement scheme .... otherwise there is no question we can do the same with beau scott

 

[strider]

Players can sign after July 1 if they don't have an existing playing contract (i.e. they are a free agent).

But obviously, this is a bit non-standard....if they are overtly stating that he might come back, then that doesn't sound too much like retirement.

Only you need a full 30 man squad by june 30 now .... you would have to medically retire another merkin to make a spot

Doesnt supreme ruler Todd have to approve the not previously contracted players ... frank winterstein says hi

 

[strider]

NRL Commission?

Peter Beattie probably still figuring out what a sin bin is

 

[emjaycee]

Surely if its coming off their cap then it will need to be the whole medically induced insurance retirement scheme .... otherwise there is no question we can do the same with beau scott

It is a grey area (at least to us Joe Public) but I can't see too many differences in the following scenarios:

1. Getting a cap exemption to cover for long-term injury which is effectively the same as "coming off the cap". The NRL Salary Cap assessment would take into account that player A was injured and therefore Player B's salary would increase the clubs allowable spend for the year (based on getting pre-approval) as in the case of Mahoney.

2. A player has their contract cancelled mid-season (Kenny Edwards says Hi) would also reduce the cap spend by a pro-rata amount which means a club could spend that amount on another player.

3. A player retires mid-season thereby reducing the cap spend and allowing a club to spend the balance on another player or get under the cap by not replacing them (Watmough says Hi)

I could be totally wrong but the above options are all reasonable examples of how this might work, but then again, the NRL could change the rules tomorrow and we wouldn't know until a club got breached.

I reckon the insurance issue is a different one - it is about the club covering its expenditure.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Surely if its coming off their cap then it will need to be the whole medically induced insurance retirement scheme .... otherwise there is no question we can do the same with beau scott

Scott might not want to retire.

 

[84 Baby]

I think it’s part of the reason they brought in football department capping. No problem with a player retiring and club not paying him anymore under cap (have to include whatever they have already paid him)

 

[Glenneel]

And you wonder why people call you a deathrider

I'm sorry I suggested that Parra pay huge amounts to and sign over the hill players to long term contracts. They've never done it before..............how dare I.

 

[Glenneel]

Either that or he'll sign a bargain and you'll still f**ken whinge.

Was Evans the bargain your talking about?

So Peter Wallace retires due to chronic injuries before 30th June, releasing approx 50% of his cap value for the rest of the year in time for Penrith to sign a mid-season transfer. And Wallace moves immediately onto the coaching staff and gets paid no less than his 2018 contract value I am sure.

Nice move Gus.

Can BA do that with Mannah, would free up about $3m.

 

[Glenneel]

Surely if its coming off their cap then it will need to be the whole medically induced insurance retirement scheme .... otherwise there is no question we can do the same with beau scott

Why would we do something sensible like that, I mean we kept IDG on the books for a whole year when it was sensible to not play him again because of his very serious injury.

 

[Gronk]

Why would we do something sensible like that, I mean we kept IDG on the books for a whole year when it was sensible to not play him again because of his very serious injury.

Do you mean the player that had suffered considerable headaches and dizzyness bc of concussion ? Do you think that we should have eased him out of the game or just booted him ?

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

I'm sorry I suggested that Parra pay huge amounts to and sign over the hill players to long term contracts. They've never done it before..............how dare I.

MAybe if you just added one or two positive comments where due, people might well agree. You only seem to want to speak to complain. Fair enough. But it can't be fun mate.

 

[emjaycee]

Do you mean the player that had suffered considerable headaches and dizzyness bc of concussion ? Do you think that we should have eased him out of the game or just booted him ?

View attachment 20822

I think he means the player that was struggling to come to grips with the fact that he could be permanently disabled from injuries caused playing professional sport for our club. Disabled to the extent that he would wake up some days with headaches that would last 2-3 days. Disabled to the extent that at times we was unable to drive, or to lift his children up... this guy should have been booted out of the club with no duty of care shown cause he was taking up a spot on our playing roster and sucking up our cap.

 

[emjaycee]

MAybe if you just added one or two positive comments where due, people might well agree. You only seem to want to speak to complain. Fair enough. But it can't be fun mate.

That's not fair mate - there has been 2 posts in the 21 made since 1st June that don't include a complaint about a player, the club or another poster. That's a cool 10% (almost). 90% completion rate is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[strider]

I think it’s part of the reason they brought in football department capping. No problem with a player retiring and club not paying him anymore under cap (have to include whatever they have already paid him)

If you pay out a retiring players salary in any way/shape/form then i reckon it should stay on that years cap .... unless via the indpendently assessed medially induced thingy