Poupou Escobar
Post Whore
- Messages
- 90,306
Why would you think that is my argument?
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!
Why would you think that is my argument?
To illustrate that not all TPAs are equal, or have the same purpose. Some are paid by companies wanting to associate their brand with a player. Others are paid by (whoever) to help one club reduce their costs under the salary cap, therefore gaining an advantage over other clubs.
I did too. Apologies.
Because it is the only thing besides abject stupidity or malignant trollery that would explain why you have replied to every post I have made on this topic since making it VERY clear from my first post on the topic that i am talking about TPAs that have absolutely nothing to do with the club.
I have a mate who lives not as far north but in Hervey bay and he said the same thing. Darwin however is always f**king hot. It's a merkin of an area.
Are any of us talking about legitimate TPAs? We are discussing how difficult it can be for the NRL to determine what is legitimate and what isn't. This is why whistleblowers like Waldron and Seward were required for the NRL to make their big busts. Incidentally, all after the Craig Wing fiasco as well, which you seem to think was the last big issue around TPAs.
Ive been very clear from the start Im talking about legitimate TPA's, including quoting the Wing case which started it. Then you stated that a TPA such as Wings should be included
I lived in Townsville. It gets cold (below 10 degrees), and yes it's also far less humid in winter. I've never lived in Darwin but I've been there plenty of times in plenty of different months and it was always hot and humid.
I wasn't talking about Craig Wing. I don't think his situation applies in 2024 other than being an example of why the NRL recognises the existence of legitimate TPAs. I don't think the Wing fiasco would reoccur these days.
Quote it or stfu
I think you are intentionally being dumb. No one is f**ken arguing that situation wasn’t a restraint of trade. But it’s isolated to Wing unless you want to suggest the same circumstances exist today.
It wasn’t asked to because arguing a restraint of trade for a general group of people is very difficult. Really needs to be for specific people.
FMD the CBA states it acknowledges the need for the salary cap. This means the players accept the fact the salary cap has rules that could restrain how much they get paid. Under your idiotic scenario, why bother with Nike? Why can’t Penrith just pay Chinry $6m straight up? With your reasoning the NRL not laying penalty to Penrith is a restraint of trade. Your mob should just do it.
Ok cool we agree that if a payment has zero to do with the club it’s cool. But I highly doubt that was the original f**king point.
The Craig Wing "fiasco" happens multiple times every year. It is exactly what a legitimate TPA looks like which is the whole point. It took Craig Wings "fiasco" to establish the concept of a "legitimate" TPA that is excluded from the cap.
If it happened multiple times a year why are you quoting that incident from over 20 years ago? When has it happened since?
Now you're just repeating what I said, but arguing against me as though I said the opposite. Are you deliberately trying to misrepresent me to win points?
My point was about it not being a restraint of trade. The NRL doesn't have any power to prevent players earning money. It just prevents clubs from accruing competition points if they are spending too much on players, including where they try to circumvent the cap through TPAs. We've seen this with the Storm (2010) and Eels (2016) fiascos that occurred well after the Craig Wing fiasco of 2003.
