What's new
The Front Row Forums

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!

Sam Burgess retires

Shire_seaeagle

Juniors
Messages
33
If I'm correctI think Manly are still paying ( or just finished last year) Stewart & Matai's contract and were forced by Greenberg to include them under the cap. It has actually taken a large chunk of Manly's salary cap space last few years.

100% they will find some technicality to give Burgess the money and Bunnies the cap space ala Greg Inglis.

Disgraceful double standard!!
 

Springs09

Juniors
Messages
1,903
If this is a new injury acquired during this contract period and he medically needs to retire, then Souths shouldn't have to pay him a cent of the rest of his contract given he is incapable of fulfilling it. He can lodge an insurance claim to try and get some or all of the value of his contract paid out.

However...

If securing full payment of the remaining contract is a determining factor in Burgess's decision to retire i.e. he'll only retire if he gets paid out, then it should be blocked. Someone retiring through injury should be physically incapable of playing.

Also, if Souths re-signed Sammy with this injury already in place and just hoped they'd be able to strap him together, then f**k em. They've made their bed and now they can lay in it. Same goes for if they also just thought they could needle him up indefinitely and make him play through it, leading to more damage.

If he signed in 2018 for five years and retired after 2 and Souths pay him the whole contract then he has technically played 2 years for $6m. Can't have clubs paying players like that and not counting it towards the cap.
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
12,389
If I'm correctI think Manly are still paying ( or just finished last year) Stewart & Matai's contract and were forced by Greenberg to include them under the cap. It has actually taken a large chunk of Manly's salary cap space last few years.

100% they will find some technicality to give Burgess the money and Bunnies the cap space ala Greg Inglis.

Disgraceful double standard!!

Yeah i dont ever want to side with Manly... because my Pop would roll in his grave if i ever did... So f**k Manly forever...

but also, fair point.
It's just an attempt to legalise salary cap rorting... once you open that door, it's f**king open and the roosters should go ahead and ink Tedesco, Latrell, Keary and co to 20 year, 300k a year deal, and just hand that risidual money when they're medically retired with half a dozen premiership rings.

With the other half dozen going to the Broncos and the Thoroughbred of course.
Everyone is cool with that.
 

lynx000

Juniors
Messages
1,411
Yeah i dont ever want to side with Manly... because my Pop would roll in his grave if i ever did... So f**k Manly forever...

but also, fair point.
It's just an attempt to legalise salary cap rorting... once you open that door, it's f**king open and the roosters should go ahead and ink Tedesco, Latrell, Keary and co to 20 year, 300k a year deal, and just hand that risidual money when they're medically retired with half a dozen premiership rings.

With the other half dozen going to the Broncos and the Thoroughbred of course.
Everyone is cool with that.
We aren't winning jack shit in the foreseeable future until we sort out our spine and attack and defence.
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
12,389
We aren't winning jack shit in the foreseeable future until we sort out our spine and attack and defence.

Being able to sign players to extrodinary long contract and then just settling the debt outside the cap, once they retire, will help in solving that problem though.

Which is kind of the point
 

unforgiven

Bench
Messages
3,138
The treatment of Inglis & Farah for one.
These 2 are not even a similar situation, the Tigers offered Farah an ambassador role as an inducement to leave the club, then hid it. It was at least a big mistake in the management of the cap, at worse it was blatant cheating!
 

Someguy

First Grade
Messages
7,139
Isn’t this type of thing how the Dragons got Le Gaz back?
Signed him for a pittance for the back end of 2010, gave him a big four year upgrade and then he announced his retirement the next year?

please Melbourne got stripped of the right to earn points that season due to salary cap infringement, don’t suggest that the Dragons premiership is in some way tainted due to their own cap
 

Tiger5150

Bench
Messages
3,797
These 2 are not even a similar situation, the Tigers offered Farah an ambassador role as an inducement to leave the club, then hid it. It was at least a big mistake in the management of the cap, at worse it was blatant cheating!

If by "hid it" you mean announced it in the Telegraph then yeah.

First time ever I've heard of making a player leave and paying some of his salary at his new club as salary cap cheating.
 

Lambretta

First Grade
Messages
8,689
Yeah i dont ever want to side with Manly... because my Pop would roll in his grave if i ever did... So f**k Manly forever...

but also, fair point.
It's just an attempt to legalise salary cap rorting... once you open that door, it's f**king open and the roosters should go ahead and ink Tedesco, Latrell, Keary and co to 20 year, 300k a year deal, and just hand that risidual money when they're medically retired with half a dozen premiership rings.

With the other half dozen going to the Broncos and the Thoroughbred of course.
Everyone is cool with that.

I am a Roosters fan and I would bloody well hate it if this sort of rorting was allowed

In Sam's case I am unsure about the best way to proceed.

If you sign a contract there has to be an understanding that you will fulfill the terms of that contract.

If you are forced to retire through injury then the club shouldn't be forced to pay you. But that would put players in danger of playing through injury when they shouldn't and doing long term damage

If they pay him out, it opens the door for cap rorting, if they don't pay him it does Sam who signed wanting to play but unable to do so a disservice

There's no easy solution that can keep Sam, Souths, the NRL and other clubs happy.

Its a shite state of affairs

I hope Sam can play on, I really do. But only if it doesn't damage him and he can still be effective
 

Cockadoodledoo

First Grade
Messages
5,045
Souths or more importantly Bennett know they wasted their money on Burgess and he lacks the ability to play 20+ games anymore due to constant injury and suspensions and want to free up money to sign the likes of Mitchell and Fafita. Even when he does play, his impact is limited and he is always giving away dumb penalties.

They hope by paying him the money for nothing, he will walk away and then pick up more money from fat media deals. That said with Greenberg being close mates with fatso Richardson, he is odds on to rubber stamp it.
 

Tiger5150

Bench
Messages
3,797
I am a Roosters fan and I would bloody well hate it if this sort of rorting was allowed

In Sam's case I am unsure about the best way to proceed.

If you sign a contract there has to be an understanding that you will fulfill the terms of that contract.

If you are forced to retire through injury then the club shouldn't be forced to pay you. But that would put players in danger of playing through injury when they shouldn't and doing long term damage

If they pay him out, it opens the door for cap rorting, if they don't pay him it does Sam who signed wanting to play but unable to do so a disservice

There's no easy solution that can keep Sam, Souths, the NRL and other clubs happy.

Its a shite state of affairs

I hope Sam can play on, I really do. But only if it doesn't damage him and he can still be effective

Its more straightforward than that.

IF Souffs & Sam are telling the truth that this injury is new and wasnt pre-existing at the time of his last contract, then Sam will be paid out via the insurance company, Souffs wont be out of pocket.

If either Souffs or Sam are telling porkies and it can be proven, one of them will lose out. Well that is what is supposed to happen, more likely Todd rides in and saves teh day
 

unforgiven

Bench
Messages
3,138
If by "hid it" you mean announced it in the Telegraph then yeah.

First time ever I've heard of making a player leave and paying some of his salary at his new club as salary cap cheating.

He didn't want to leave so we offered him a role to get extra money after he retired, it was an inducement to leave the club and should have been included in the cap! The club then didn't disclose the offer in his release paperwork to the NRL, which they are required to do. When asked about the contract we told the NRL the contract had been misplaced.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,800
If he signed in 2018 for five years and retired after 2 and Souths pay him the whole contract then he has technically played 2 years for $6m. Can't have clubs paying players like that and not counting it towards the cap.

Surely if the club was rich enough/stupid enough to blow money like this then it would be easier to give him a two year contract then a very well paid job after retirement?
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
12,389
I am a Roosters fan and I would bloody well hate it if this sort of rorting was allowed
I dont think anyone wants it, but once the can of worms is open, the roosters and any other club who wants to win, would be silly not to exploit it.
 

LineBall

Juniors
Messages
1,719
Do players ever organise their own insurance for such circumstances? Would the premiums be too expensive to make it work?
 

Legion

Juniors
Messages
400
If you are forced to retire through injury then the club shouldn't be forced to pay you. But that would put players in danger of playing through injury when they shouldn't and doing long term damage

Absolutely agree. Clubs pay for a players services. Every player knows the possible risks.
Any payout for injury should be paid through insurance.

League players have access to the best medical advice in the country.
There is no doubt that they would be advised of any risk of long term damage if they continued to play.

Then it would be up to them to decide what's more important, money or their long term health. It would be 100% their decision.
If a player was stupid enough to play on against good medical advise just for more money, then more fool them.
 
Messages
15,545
In the industry I work for, we often take out debtors insurance against some of our larger customers... Just on the off chance that they may go broke down the track. They cover us for about 80% of the customers outstanding debt at any one time and for every order that the customer places with us, the insurance company takes a very small percentage of the total invoice. We have strict rules in that the insurance company must agree to the customers credit limit and that we should always keep the customer within the bounds of that limit and that they should always pay us on time.

In theory, if, later that customer should fold then we pay an excess to the insurance company and they then pay us 80% of what we are owed.

In practice, we do all of the above and hold up our side of the bargain and then once a customer folds and we make a claim, the insurance company does everything within it's power to make our lives a living hell.

They ask for every single bit of information we posses on that customer, from emails dating back several years to invoice and files and whatever else we can provide. Then it takes them months to trawl through all of that information looking for any sort of tiny inkling of a hint that we may have done something wrong and they may be able to back out of paying the claim. Even when they can't find anything untoward, they generally accuse us of doing something wrong anyway, just on the off chance that we may decide that dropping the claim is easier than having to argue with them.

From what I understand, even in the NRL, insurance companies operate using a similar method... Making a claim and having it paid is tougher than climbing Everest on one leg carrying a midget on your back.
 
Top