Rumours and Stuff

[Chipmunk]

Spot on. Granted this is from 2012, but this explicitly outlines some conditions within the standard contract:

“The NRL Playing Contract incorporates restraint of trade terms typical of those found in many Australian professional sports leagues. The relationship between the NRL and premier rugby league players is that of employer and employee.

The major restraint of trade on NRL players is the salary cap, set at $4.4 million per club in 2012 ‘for the 25 highest paid players at each club’ plus up to an additional ‘$350,000 on those players outside the top 25 who play in the NRL competition’.

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (‘CBA’) states that:

The NRL Clubs and Players recognise the importance of a Salary Cap and acknowledge that the Salary Cap limits, in a reasonable way, the remuneration that may be paid by, or on behalf of, any one NRL Club to its Players.

Should the salary cap be averaged amongst the top 25 players, each would receive $176 000 per annum. Of course, better players are paid far more leaving less money available for other players. The impact of the salary cap on NRL players is revealed in the difference between what each would command in a free market and that paid under the salary cap.

There are a number of additional trade restraints. First, under section 3.1(s) the player must:

not play the Game with any person, team of organisation save for the Club or in matches in any representative Competitions ... except with the prior written consent of the Club.

Second, under section 3.1(t) the player must:

not without the prior written consent of the Club, which the Player acknowledges will only be given with the consent of the NRL, participate in any football match of any code.

Third, under section 3.1(u) the player must:

not participate in any sporting or leisure activities other than matches approved by the Club and the NRL ... except where:
(i) the chances of injury are unlikely ...
(ii) there is no pre-arranged media coverage
(iii) the Player is not (directly or indirectly) paid.

Fourth, under section 3.1 (v) the player must:

not to enter into any Non-Playing Agreement or Third Party Agreement without the prior written consent of the Club.

Fifth, under section 3.2(a) the Player may:

make public appearances and contribute to the press, television and radio provided that:
(i) the consent of the Club has been obtained, which consent must not be unreasonably withheld and
(ii) such appearances and contributions do not conflict with the interests of, or bring into disrepute, the NRL, the Club or the Game.”

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ANZSportsLawJl/2012/4.pdf

Where is the clause that mentions that an NRL contract can exclude a player from playing in the NRL competition?

 

[rugby league fan]

Yep. Speaking to one of them last week and he's been offered contracts by a few clubs. Wants to stay at Parra though

That is what i am talking about.
How important is the young player your talking about to our club.?
Where does the club regard these players.
Are they a priority.
I think allot depends where the club and how highly the club regards these individuals.
We have a few young quality players coming through. Our opinion might be one & the clubs opinion might be another.

 

[Happy MEel]

Where is the clause that mentions that an NRL contract can exclude a player from playing in the NRL competition?

It looks as though development contracted players can play in the NRL from June 30 so I think that’s irrelevant.

 

[Chipmunk]

It looks as though development contracted players can play in the NRL from June 30 so I think that’s irrelevant.

But they cant play from March to June, so it's relevant.

That old contract makes an interesting observation in regard to the old second tier players outside the cap. At no stage did a second tier NRL contract limit a players ability to play in the NRL. It was cap limitations that stopped them being picked.

A Development Contract limits a players ability to play in the NRL, as they can't be selected under the contract terms. That would be completely illegal if anyone decided to challenge it (which will never happen, because they'd either upgrade the player or let them go). No one is going to court over a $60k Development Contract.

 

[parrathruandthru]

That is what i am talking about.
How important is the young player your talking about to our club.?
Where does the club regard these players.
Are they a priority.
I think allot depends where the club and how highly the club regards these individuals.
We have a few young quality players coming through. Our opinion might be one & the clubs opinion might be another.

I think its no coincidence that there are 20 squad spots available for 2020

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Klemmer has two years on his contract and Newcastle could not sign Klemmer but eventually they did. Mate, if a player wants to go, he’s gone. Contracts mean shit

That’s because Klemmer’s cap space was worth more than him staying while not wanting to be there. A promising junior on the other hand, earning f**k all, provides little benefit from an early release.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Paying him is irrelevant. We're restricting his ability to play in the NRL when he has the ability to do so somewhere else.

It's not about subjective issues like not selecting him. His ineligible because of his contract. That's the restraint.

He will be getting paid to play rugby league, on a contract he agreed to. That’s all the law cares about.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Because he has a contract of employment to play the sport of rugby league. But his contract limits his employment options in the sport of rugby league. It's the contract that's the issue.

These sort of restraint contracts won't ever get tested because no one would bother holding the player to a development contract. They'll either put them in their Top 30 or let them go.

Browns contract is irrelevant. If the Warriors offer him a Top 30 spot for 2019 and we don't want to, then we'll just let him go.

And what if we offer him a contract and he turns it down? Is his existing contract null and void? No f**king chance.

 

[rugby league fan]

I think its no coincidence that there are 20 squad spots available for 2020

Well they better pull there fingers out cause by that stage 2020 they will all be gone.
Clubs are talking to them now. We need to be proactive instead of reactive.

 

[Chipmunk]

He will be getting paid to play rugby league, on a contract he agreed to. That’s all the law cares about.

I disagree.

But in reality we'll make him Top 30 or let him go and spend $60k on someone else who is happy to take the money to train.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I disagree.

But in reality we'll make him Top 30 or let him go and spend $60k on someone else who is happy to take the money to train.

We can’t make him top 30 unless he agrees to a new contract.

 

[Chipmunk]

And what if we offer him a contract and he turns it down? Is his existing contract null and void? No f**king chance.

Why would an existing contract be null and void because someone refused to accept a varied/different contract?

 

[Chipmunk]

We can’t make him top 30 unless he agrees to a new contract.

I'm missing your point Pou Bear.

We'll either offer him another contract or we'll let him go.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I'm missing your point Pou Bear.

We'll either offer him another contract or we'll let him go.

And what if we offer him another contract but he refuses to take it, say because he has a better offer from elsewhere? Do we still have to let him go in your world’s legal system?

 

[Chipmunk]

And what if we offer him another contract but he refuses to take it, say because he has a better offer from elsewhere? Do we still have to let him go in your world’s legal system?

You're missing my argument. My argument is about whether a Development Contract is actually a restraint of trade. This would only be tested if someone challenged it.

We wouldn't have to let him go anywhere unless it was challenged. But who's going to challenge a short term Development Contract?

In reality, NRL contracts in general are just current employment arrangement deals and they're only in place until someone comes along and offers someone a better deal. Whether the contract ends next week or in four years time, once someone offers someone a better deal the player prefers, both parties seem pretty happy to part company.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You're missing my argument. My argument is about whether a Development Contract is actually a restraint of trade. This would only be tested if someone challenged it.

We wouldn't have to let him go anywhere unless it was challenged. But who's going to challenge a short term Development Contract?

In reality, NRL contracts in general are just current employment arrangement deals and they're only in place until someone comes along and offers someone a better deal. Whether the contract ends next week or in four years time, once someone offers someone a better deal the player prefers, both parties seem pretty happy to part company.

So if our extension offer isn’t as good as the Warriors’ offer we’d need to let him go early rather than keep him and try to change his mind?

 

[Chipmunk]

So if our extension offer isn’t as good as the Warriors’ offer we’d need to let him go early rather than keep him and try to change his mind?

This issue has nothing to do with the argument im trying to make. My argument is about contracts challenged in court. This point is far removed from that.

On your point, where is some recent examples where a club has refused to release a player that has been offered a better deal to play elsewhere?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Why would you think the details of this would be publicly available? For all we know this happens in every case where a player signs elsewhere with a year to run on his deal.

 

[strider]

A 6yr multi million dollar deal. That could be avg 500k a year.

It could be just 350k a year

 

[Gary Gutful]

The movement you need is on your shoulder

Left shoulder?