Salary Cap

[Gronk]

Reading shit like this makes me wonder why the NRL have done nothing about it.

August 2013

The Dragons are not happy that the Wests Tigers have been given a salary cap exemption, allowing Luke Brooks to play against St George this weekend.

The Wests Tigers yesterday wrote to NRL Salary Cap Auditor Ian Schubert asking for permission to breach the second tier salary cap by allowing the talented pair to play against St George-Illawarra Dragons at the Sydney Cricket Ground on Saturday.

Official Statement

The St George Illawarra Dragons have requested a meeting with the NRL to discuss the application of the Salary Cap rules after receiving notification from the NRL of their endorsement of a salary cap breach at another Club on Thursday.
The NRL formally advised the Club of their endorsement of the Wests Tigers application to breach their Second-Tier salary cap by playing two NYC players in the NRL Round 24 clash against the Dragons at the Sydney Cricket Ground, Moore Park on Saturday.
The NRL advised that this is not the first breach by the Wests Tigers and the reasons given were due to their “extremely high injury toll” and “less than anticipated success rate in the competition”.
NRL Salary Cap Auditor Ian Schubert informally phoned Dragons CEO Peter Doust on Wednesday to discuss the merits of flexibility within the salary cap rules before making reference to a specific example in relation to the Wests Tigers ahead of this weekend.
“The Dragons have for a number of years been an advocate for ‘flexibility’ with respect to certain rules of the salary cap and their interpretation and are pleased that the Management of the NRL are prepared to consider this in the move forward sense," said Doust.
"However, we believe that any such ‘discretion’ applied by the NRL needs to be appropriately and widely considered.
“It was not until the end of the telephone conversation that this specific issue relating to the Wests Tigers seeking to play an additional player this weekend was raised.
“We ourselves as a Club have been faced with similar circumstances throughout this year and have followed the rules of the salary cap and I will certainly be sharing these examples.
"I am also aware of other Clubs who have also faced similar circumstances and have also complied with the rules as setout by the NRL."
The Dragons have sought the meeting to seek further information surrounding this process as the Club believes the application of such discretion has been ill conceived.
“This circumstance, from the information with which we have been provided and from what we can see, is an issue of roster management, not injury management and the fact that both teams are not in contention for the Finals should not be a consideration.
“We have eight NRL Players on the sidelines ourselves and from where we sit, the decision reached doesn’t seem to be a very equitable.
"We have expressed our disappointment to the NRL, asked for more specifics and believe the specifics should be assessed more fully.
“It is clearly too late in relation to this weekend as they have already made their determination to allow the Wests Tigers to breach the Salary Cap rules, but I would still have asked for a meeting even if it didn’t impact our Club this weekend as we definitely want clarity and definition for the future.
"I think any Club CEO would be interested in understanding what all this means … we may even need to adjust our strategies in relation to recruitment and roster management moving forward off the back of a determinations such as this."

http://www.triplem.com.au/sydney/sp...lary-cap-meeting-over-wests-tigers-exemption/

 

[Gronk]

But if you are the Roosters, that's OK.

June 2011

DECIMATED by injuries and Origin commitments, the Sydney Roosters were yesterday forced to approach the NRL for a salary-cap exemption just to field a team this weekend.
After summoning a battalion of replacements to cover 13 top-liners in the Tri-colours' casualty ward, the Roosters maxed out their $350,000 second-tier salary cap ahead of last Saturday's win over New Zealand.
But their roster fell into dire straits 48 hours after fulltime when Shaun Kenny-Dowall (ankle) was ruled out and star trio Mitchell Pearce, Nate Myles and Anthony Minichiello were called up for Origin.
Their absence left coach Brian Smith and CEO Steve Noyce with no choice but to ask the NRL for relief in order to blood more second-tier re-inforcements for Monday night's trip to Melbourne. Smith was unable to name his side until late yesterday as he waited on a deal to be struck with NRL salary cap auditor Ian Schubert.

Noyce last night told The Daily Telegraph that a "one-off exemption" had been granted to allow NSW Cup pair Willie Mataka and Brad Takaraingi (making his debut) to play against the Storm, who will also field a weakened team without Maroons quartet Cameron Smith, Cooper Cronk, Billy Slater and Dane Nielsen.
The Dragons - with six Origin stars absent - plucked veteran winger Reece Simmonds from the local Illawarra competition and a five-year NRL absence to tackle Gold Coast on Friday night.
Noyce said the Roosters might again have to rely on Schubert's benevolence before Origin III in round 17, and felt his club's dilemma was further proof of the need for stand-alone Origin weekends.
"We've been talking to the NRL for a few weeks about our second-tier cap because it was getting low with all the replacements we've had to make," Noyce said. "We've been in talks with Ian Schubert about some relief and provided him with all the relevant details about our injury list."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...de-against-storm/story-e6frexnr-1226071357673

 

[Twizzle]

Isn't that what we tried to do ?

 

[Karl15]

I’ve been quietly puzzled about some of our selections this year, but the news of the salary cap breaches and reading some of the articles about how the second tier salary cap works has explained some of the decisions made by the coaching staff
In the NRL Media Guide published at the start of the year out top 25 squad was (I’ve categorised them into positions)
Outside Backs – Champion Hopoate Morgan Radradra Robinson Takarangi Toutai
Halves – Matterson Norman Sandow
Back Row – Edwards Gower Mau Maeroa Pauli, Sefa Paulo, Terepo Watmough
Front Row – Fa’asao Lussick Mannah, Junior Paulo, Wicks
Hookers – De Gois Peats
As I understand it, the only way a player from outside the top 25 can play first grade is if the NRL deems that all possible other players in the top 25 who can play that position are unavailable through injury and disciplinary reasons
The players outside our top 25 who have played first grade this year are :
Rd 1 – none
Rd 2 - none
Rd 3 – John Falou (wing)
Rd 4 – John Falou (wing)
Rd 5 – John Falou and Bareta Faraimo (wings)
Rd 6 - John Falou (centre( and Bareta Faraimo (wing)
Rd 7 - John Falou and Bareta Faraimo (wings)
Rd 8 - John Falou and Bareta Faraimo (wings)
Rd 9 - None
Rd 10 – Luke Kelly (halfback)
Rd 11 – Luke Kelly (halfback)

I suspect earlier in the year we were given an exemption to play Folau and Faraimo due to the injuries suffered by Champion Radradra and Toutai.
After the Brisbane game, Semi Radradra returned and possibly gave the NRL reason to look at our second tier, and saw Ryan Morgan in reserve grade and said he could play on the wing, you should be playing him ahead of Falou and Faraimo. This would explain the seemingly baffling decision to bring Ryan Morgan out of reserve grade against Melbourne ahead of the in-form Faraimo (hat trick v Broncos) and Falou (2 tries v Newcastle)

It may also explain his decision to bring Sandow back against Souths last week. I suspect Parra used Sandow’s car accident as a reason to the NRL why they didn’t play him against the Warriors. We then came out and publicly said Sandow was dropped because of form not because of off-field. This backflip could have been the straw that tipped the NRL into dishing out the huge punishment it did, feeling the club lied to it about it’s reasons about dropping Sandow and didn’t deserve to be looked after when they were only paying lip service to the NRL’s instructions.
It would also explain why Sandow was brought back into the side. The NRL might have happy to let Folau play because of injuries to Toutai and Champion plus Hoppa in Origin, but not let Kelly play because Sandow was available. I suspect Brad Arthur doesn’t want Sandow in his halves at any cost (& with his defensive issues I’m not sure I blame him – it’s no co-incidence our defence has been much better since Kelly came up) so to get around this picked Sandow at fullback and could use Kelly as his one non – non top 25 player the NRL would allow
Bear in mind, these are just theories, but if I am right about Sandow being on the outer, Brad is going to have a tough time picking Kelly this week as 7 backs are available – Robinson Radradra Takarangi Hoppa Morgan Norman Sandow. My prediction – Sandow will be named at 14 as the back up hooker (replacing De Gois who is injured) giving Arthur a reason to pick Kelly at halfback

 

[emjaycee]

I?ve been quietly puzzled about some of our selections this year, but the news of the salary cap breaches and reading some of the articles about how the second tier salary cap works has explained some of the decisions made by the coaching staff
In the NRL Media Guide published at the start of the year out top 25 squad was (I?ve categorised them into positions)
Outside Backs ? Champion Hopoate Morgan Radradra Robinson Takarangi Toutai
Halves ? Matterson Norman Sandow
Back Row ? Edwards Gower Mau Maeroa Pauli, Sefa Paulo, Terepo Watmough
Front Row ? Fa?asao Lussick Mannah, Junior Paulo, Wicks
Hookers ? De Gois Peats
As I understand it, the only way a player from outside the top 25 can play first grade is if the NRL deems that all possible other players in the top 25 who can play that position are unavailable through injury and disciplinary reasons
The players outside our top 25 who have played first grade this year are :
Rd 1 ? none
Rd 2 - none
Rd 3 ? John Falou (wing)
Rd 4 ? John Falou (wing)
Rd 5 ? John Falou and Bareta Faraimo (wings)
Rd 6 - John Falou (centre( and Bareta Faraimo (wing)
Rd 7 - John Falou and Bareta Faraimo (wings)
Rd 8 - John Falou and Bareta Faraimo (wings)
Rd 9 - None
Rd 10 ? Luke Kelly (halfback)
Rd 11 ? Luke Kelly (halfback)

I suspect earlier in the year we were given an exemption to play Folau and Faraimo due to the injuries suffered by Champion Radradra and Toutai.
After the Brisbane game, Semi Radradra returned and possibly gave the NRL reason to look at our second tier, and saw Ryan Morgan in reserve grade and said he could play on the wing, you should be playing him ahead of Falou and Faraimo. This would explain the seemingly baffling decision to bring Ryan Morgan out of reserve grade against Melbourne ahead of the in-form Faraimo (hat trick v Broncos) and Falou (2 tries v Newcastle)

It may also explain his decision to bring Sandow back against Souths last week. I suspect Parra used Sandow?s car accident as a reason to the NRL why they didn?t play him against the Warriors. We then came out and publicly said Sandow was dropped because of form not because of off-field. This backflip could have been the straw that tipped the NRL into dishing out the huge punishment it did, feeling the club lied to it about it?s reasons about dropping Sandow and didn?t deserve to be looked after when they were only paying lip service to the NRL?s instructions.
It would also explain why Sandow was brought back into the side. The NRL might have happy to let Folau play because of injuries to Toutai and Champion plus Hoppa in Origin, but not let Kelly play because Sandow was available. I suspect Brad Arthur doesn?t want Sandow in his halves at any cost (& with his defensive issues I?m not sure I blame him ? it?s no co-incidence our defence has been much better since Kelly came up) so to get around this picked Sandow at fullback and could use Kelly as his one non ? non top 25 player the NRL would allow
Bear in mind, these are just theories, but if I am right about Sandow being on the outer, Brad is going to have a tough time picking Kelly this week as 7 backs are available ? Robinson Radradra Takarangi Hoppa Morgan Norman Sandow. My prediction ? Sandow will be named at 14 as the back up hooker (replacing De Gois who is injured) giving Arthur a reason to pick Kelly at halfback

Whilst it all seems feasible and you have put a lot of effort in, why wouldnt the NRL tell us to play Matterson if he was top 25 before allowing Kelly to step up?

 

[strider]

i've stopped trying to make sense of it all

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

I think the point is that the NRL Media Guide doesn't necessarily know who is in our Top 25 paid players at any time.

 

[Chipmunk]

Whilst it all seems feasible and you have put a lot of effort in, why wouldnt the NRL tell us to play Matterson if he was top 25 before allowing Kelly to step up?

I think the point is that the NRL Media Guide doesn't necessarily know who is in our Top 25 paid players at any time.

I've also heard others comment that Matterson is also a Top 25 paid player.

Perhaps due to Matterson is yet to play NRL, even though he is one of the Top 25 paid players in the club, the club seeked an exemption on the grounds that the club doesn't believe Matterson is NRL standard at this stage.

After all, although he is Top 25, it would be hard for the NRL to argue that he is of NRL standard if he's yet to play 1 NRL game.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Not disputing Matterson's inclusion in particular. Disputing the whole list as authoritative source. There's a fair chance that our Top 25 includes players not even at the club, but they are hardly going to list them in the media guide

 

[emjaycee]

I've also heard others comment that Matterson is also a Top 25 paid player.

Perhaps due to Matterson is yet to play NRL, even though he is one of the Top 25 paid players in the club, the club seeked an exemption on the grounds that the club doesn't believe Matterson is NRL standard at this stage.

After all, although he is Top 25, it would be hard for the NRL to argue that he is of NRL standard if he's yet to play 1 NRL game.

And yet they choose to argue that the rest of our squad is?
:lol:

 

[not graham olling]

I've also heard others comment that Matterson is also a Top 25 paid player.

Perhaps due to Matterson is yet to play NRL, even though he is one of the Top 25 paid players in the club, the club seeked an exemption on the grounds that the club doesn't believe Matterson is NRL standard at this stage.

After all, although he is Top 25, it would be hard for the NRL to argue that he is of NRL standard if he's yet to play 1 NRL game.

That gold.

This site and the other site are the best for making up stuff from sauces, I've heard this, I know someone close to the club, a strong rumour......

 

[IFR33K]

i've stopped trying to make sense of it all

Sense???? In all eels forum?????

 

[T.S Quint]

I'm here in peace from the Saints forum. If you weren't that aggressive in chasing a fullback (if that's the case) maybe that was because of an expectation that Hayne woul d get the whole NFL thing out of his system pretty quickly and be back by the June deadline. I never expected him to get as far as he has done and I don't think I was the only one who didn't see him getting onto a franchise practice squad. Even now the odds are against him getting an actual contract which would mean he'd be back in the NRL by the start of the 2016 season. Maybe your club's keeping its options open in case that happens?

While what you say may be true, I believe the Eels just believed that Hopoate would be a capable replacement at fullback.
Which pretty much all of us did as well.

I honestly don't think Robinson has been that bad at fullback. If we end up with Gordon it will be a bit of a bonus, but I'm not banking on that happening.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

See my last post (no disrespect taken).

Because if we looked at all these blokes - while other clubs have been signing or resigning top end fullbacks - it suggests we can't get the job done.

Here's what you had to say on the 23rd of October last year (Post 173 in the 'I Cant Believe it.....' thread).

And obviously different people are claiming different things, but the public announcement was that if hayne comes back it will be to parra, so that makes even more sense that we wouldn't necessarily target a fullback long term.

Seems that at the time you didn't have too much of a problem with us not going hell for leather for a specialist fullback.

EDIT: To be fair, you did call Hoppa as a poor fullback option, and still thought that our recruitment sucked.

 

[T.S Quint]

Lol.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

To be fair, Bigfella certainly wasn't happy with the situation. But he was more understanding

 

[phantom eel]

I've also heard others comment that Matterson is also a Top 25 paid player.

Perhaps due to Matterson is yet to play NRL, even though he is one of the Top 25 paid players in the club, the club seeked an exemption on the grounds that the club doesn't believe Matterson is NRL standard at this stage.

After all, although he is Top 25, it would be hard for the NRL to argue that he is of NRL standard if he's yet to play 1 NRL game.

If Matterson is on top 25 salary, and he is available to play, why would the NRL even think to give us an exemption to select someone else in a position that Matterson usually plays?

It'd be our stupid fault for signing a kid on stupid money this year, when we're (supposedly) arguing the kid isn't ready.... I prefer to think Matterson isn't on top 25 money this season at all - possibly backended to be in future years instead.

 

[Chipmunk]

If Matterson is on top 25 salary, and he is available to play, why would the NRL even think to give us an exemption to select someone else in a position that Matterson usually plays?

It'd be our stupid fault for signing a kid on stupid money this year, when we're (supposedly) arguing the kid isn't ready.... I prefer to think Matterson isn't on top 25 money this season at all - possibly backended to be in future years instead.

Well it would make things a lot easier if the NRL forced all teams to list their Top 25 players at the start of each season wouldn't it.

 

[Haynzy]

Well it would make things a lot easier if the NRL forced all teams to list their Top 25 players at the start of each season wouldn't it.

Dunno if it would make it easier, it might shut a whole bunch of ignorant/know-it-all punters and commentators up though.

 

[Chipmunk]

Dunno if it would make it easier, it might shut a whole bunch of ignorant/know-it-all punters and commentators up though.

I'd actually like to see the abolition of the second tier cap. I think that all teams should list 25 players and all of those players are your salary cap, exactly like it is now.

The change I would make is similar to what Seward has indicated, where teams can change their 25 players throughout the season. So they can bring players in and out of the 25 cap as required. The limitations I would have on this would be that you could only make a certain amount of changes to the 25 player list, lets say 10 changes in a season as an example. This could allow you to use 5 players temporarily and then bring your original 5 players back at some point, or you could use 10 players and once they change with the original player then that player doesn't return to the 25 list. It would be up to each club how they wanted to use their changes.

Your 25 players in your list at any given time would have to equal or be under the cap though.