Should the NRL adopt an ARL style contract simular the ARU

[Baron Vo Mandor]

My thoughts are god yes.

Gallop says it will only benefit the wealthy clubs I disagree as long as players recieve it across the board then it wouldnt affect a players choice of which club they go to.

 

[Kurt Angle]

No, just increased payments for playing rep football should suffice.

As stated, s14 clubs by themselves can't afford top line NRL players. To get them they need mega funding assistance from the ARU.

The ARU therefore only has the 7 back positions and MAYBE the back 3 positions on offer.

The won't spend money buying 10 NRL centres when they only have two spots.

Therefore when they only buy 2 guys, they will buy guys like Gasnier, instead of plonkers like Phil Graham.

Gasnier will also play rep footy in RL, and if his compensation from these games is worthwhile, there is no way the ARU can afford our stars, they'll only take guys who can't play rep footy.

 

[Perth Red]

Here's a novel thought... The ARL actually promote international RL, get more fixtures for the Kangaroos, draw bigger crowds and better sponsorship for the national side then use that money to pay them!

 

[Thomas]

No, just increased payments for playing rep football should suffice.

As stated, s14 clubs by themselves can't afford top line NRL players. To get them they need mega funding assistance from the ARU.

The ARU therefore only has the 7 back positions and MAYBE the back 3 positions on offer.

The won't spend money buying 10 NRL centres when they only have two spots.

Therefore when they only buy 2 guys, they will buy guys like Gasnier, instead of plonkers like Phil Graham.

Gasnier will also play rep footy in RL, and if his compensation from these games is worthwhile, there is no way the ARU can afford our stars, they'll only take guys who can't play rep footy.

f**k....I can't believe it. I actually agree with you. The saving grace for the ARU is that there are only 4 teams to support. The NRL doesn't.

Only those contracted by the ARU get decent money in RU. The general players, the Josh Valentines and Tom McVerrys, are on a pittance when compared to the ARU players and their salaries are more in line with those in the NRL.

 

[Razor]

No.

 

[Cletus]

No way. If they are going to top up contracts they should just increase the cap. Topping up contracts will just lead certain clubs being disadvantaged. How much would Souths get out of it? Nothing.

 

[Green Machine]

I think the whole idea of the distribution of money should be put under the microscope. The new world of competing with the AFL and Rugby Union should be brought into the 21st century. I think the NRL should examine how to eliminate or reduce the impact of player managers artificially inflating a player’s price with the mention of Super League or Rugby Union on yearly basis. I would like to see a proviso put in the contract of every player earning $100k and over. All contracts over $100k will have 10% kept in trust until the player signs a stat dec prior to the first premiership match, that they committed to play in the NRL in the following season. If the player signs before the first premiership match, they will be considered for representative football for that season and receive the extra 10%. No player who signs will be released under any circumstances to play for any Super 14s team. Players will only be allowed to go to Super League in the following season if the player and his club can’t agree on a new contract. I would like to see the top 20 players centrally contracted to the NRL. Players who want to receive the big money would be drafted one each to the bottom clubs. If players don’t want to receive a bonus, they stay with the club they are contracted to and come under the rules of the salary cap. If a player elects to take an extra $200k on top of his contract from the NRL, he would have no say in which club he is drafted to.
Phil Gould wrote an excellent article on Sunday about how the NRL must go out and find new revenue streams. He suggested that all major sponsor agreements for the clubs should be negotiated by the NRL on behalf of the clubs. Clubs would be free of having to worry about attracting major sponsors and only have to worry about revenue on match days,

 

[Iafeta]

The salary cap's sole purpose is to provide an exciting competition through evenness between the club's rosters.

Initiating exemptions designed to keep the top players only helps make the top clubs better.

Also, given this is an ARU issue mainly, where does this leave New Zealand based or eligible players? Will more Kiwis turn to the dark side to try and get listed as an NRL exemption under the salary cap?

 

[Green Machine]

I see the NRL topping up Andrew Johns’ contract at the financially struggling Newcastle as doing on harm to last season’s wooden spooners. If Andrew Johns stays healthy, I see no reason why Newcastle can’t win the premiership. Infact, the NRL have kept Newcastle competitive by helping Johns to stay at Newcastle. I see no difference with New Zealand players. If they are in the top 20 players in the game, I see no reason why they can’t be included in a centrally contracted pool. Doing something is better than doing nothing,

 

[Woods99]

I see the NRL topping up Andrew Johns’ contract at the financially struggling Newcastle as doing on harm to last season’s wooden spooners. If Andrew Johns stays healthy, I see no reason why Newcastle can’t win the premiership. Infact, the NRL have kept Newcastle competitive by helping Johns to stay at Newcastle. I see no difference with New Zealand players. If they are in the top 20 players in the game, I see no reason why they can’t be included in a centrally contracted pool. Doing something is better than doing nothing,

Yeah, throw your money away for no good purpose. There are only a handful of players that the ARU would be interested in, so pay all the other half-back/hookers, under size forwards, etc etc. A total waste of money.

You guys would be better off putting money into some kind of international body, with decent funding, and adequate authority.

And if anything is left over, put something into brand creation, and find a name for your game.

How can you get into the GAISF unless you have a proper name?

 

[salivor]

No, Gallop is right that it'll only benefit the select few. Just look at the ARU, the Warratahs will have to start wearing green and gold jersey's soon with the amount of talent they are stockpiling, all the while the Reds and Force are easy beats.

 

[gecko7]

The danger from the ARU is massively exagerated theres only 4 super 14 teams. It's mainly players just trying to beef up their contract by appearing to be in demand from the ARU. Theres only a couple of players the ARU will seriously challenge for and the reality is that if ARU is serious theyll outbid RL unless the NRL compromises the salary cap and therefore the eveness of the entire comp. However I believe rep players should get paid alot more per game for internationals or origin than they currently get.

 

[russ13]

No, just increased payments for playing rep football should suffice.

As stated, s14 clubs by themselves can't afford top line NRL players. To get them they need mega funding assistance from the ARU.

The ARU therefore only has the 7 back positions and MAYBE the back 3 positions on offer.

The won't spend money buying 10 NRL centres when they only have two spots.

Therefore when they only buy 2 guys, they will buy guys like Gasnier, instead of plonkers like Phil Graham.

Gasnier will also play rep footy in RL, and if his compensation from these games is worthwhile, there is no way the ARU can afford our stars, they'll only take guys who can't play rep footy.

Union in OZ have two sub-standard teams. They will pay over the odds for players to go to the Queensland & WA union team to give them creditability.

Union can't afford not to be successful even in the short term.

Also they have an ageing player base with very little emerging talent. The NSW & ACT union teams will need top-ups in the next few years.

So it is more than just one or two players they need & I don't want to see them get any. I want the Australian public to be forced to endure watching union talent that comes from union sources. If this happens union in Australia will be on its way to oblivion.

To keep these players in RL I think golden handcuffs idea that Green machine mentioned has merit.

Oh & Woods99, rugby league has a name. Look in the dictionary if you have any doubts.

 

[Woods99]

Union in OZ have two sub-standard teams. They will pay over the odds for players to go to the Queensland & WA union team to give them creditability.

The Reds are going through a rough patch, but remember that the Waratahs beat them for the first time in Super Rugby in Brisbane only last year. They will be back. The Force are starting out. The Swans lost 26 games straight in the early years of their move to Sydney.

Union can't afford not to be successful even in the short term.

And won't be. The game is played in the best schools, has the richest followers and sponsors. How will it ever not be successful here?

Also they have an ageing player base with very little emerging talent. The NSW & ACT union teams will need top-ups in the next few years.

Ridiculous statement. There is a huge avalanche of talent coming through, as there always has been. All the ARU has to do is to cherry pick the rugby juniors that it wants, rather than just letting them go to league. They are starting to do that.

One name to remember is Kurtley Beale. It's about time Australia produced a young star, isn't it? All the young league stars seem to be New Zealanders.

So it is more than just one or two players they need & I don't want to see them get any. I want the Australian public to be forced to endure watching union talent that comes from union sources. If this happens union in Australia will be on its way to oblivion.

The Australian public loves the Wallabies. Check out the number of Wallabies shirts you see, here, and overseas.

Oblivion? Rugby did almost die out after the second World War. But it has been a slow, continuous rise since then. A sport that appeals to the AB demographic will not die.

To keep these players in RL I think golden handcuffs idea that Green machine mentioned has merit.

Oh & Woods99, rugby league has a name. Look in the dictionary if you have any doubts.

Which dictionary? But whatever dictionaries say or don't say, you need to face reality. Rugby means rugby. League means a competition.

A rugby league is a rugby competition. Deal with it. Get a name, and a life.

 

[ali]

No, just increased payments for playing rep football should suffice.

That's the solution! Furthermore increase the percentage of their match fees that are put in a trust for when they retire from RL. This is the money they lose if they switch to Union.

Centralised contracts would be a disaster.

 

[taipan]

Yeah, throw your money away for no good purpose. There are only a handful of players that the ARU would be interested in, so pay all the other half-back/hookers, under size forwards, etc etc. A total waste of money.

You guys would be better off putting money into some kind of international body, with decent funding, and adequate authority.

And if anything is left over, put something into brand creation, and find a name for your game.

How can you get into the GAISF unless you have a proper name?

Judging by the standard of players in the Reds and Force,they need an army of converts.Millions spent on development since becoming professional ,and union is still unable to develop a grassroots production line.This waste of money ,should be subject to an Enron investigation.
We have a name for the game rugby league the entertaining code of rugby.

The name rugby league has nothing to do with entry to the GAISF dope.
What do you want us to call it "victim of Vichy ball",no thats been suggested elsewhere.

 

[taipan]

The Reds are going through a rough patch, but remember that the Waratahs beat them for the first time in Super Rugby in Brisbane only last year. They will be back. The Force are starting out. The Swans lost 26 games straight in the early years of their move to Sydney.



And won't be. The game is played in the best schools, has the richest followers and sponsors. How will it ever not be successful here?



Ridiculous statement. There is a huge avalanche of talent coming through, as there always has been. All the ARU has to do is to cherry pick the rugby juniors that it wants, rather than just letting them go to league. They are starting to do that.

One name to remember is Kurtley Beale. It's about time Australia produced a young star, isn't it? All the young league stars seem to be New Zealanders.



The Australian public loves the Wallabies. Check out the number of Wallabies shirts you see, here, and overseas.

Oblivion? Rugby did almost die out after the second World War. But it has been a slow, continuous rise since then. A sport that appeals to the AB demographic will not die.



Which dictionary? But whatever dictionaries say or don't say, you need to face reality. Rugby means rugby. League means a competition.

A rugby league is a rugby competition. Deal with it. Get a name, and a life.

Kurtley Beale LOl LOl LOl the best junior union can supposedly come up with,born and bred on rugby league.Take up spinning silk,you could make a bedroom smile.
The game is played in the best schools hey Woods.You mean the most expensive.Come down from your ivory tower FFS.
Look at the Torque survey last year,and see where the money is (we are talking disposable income and the professional/managerial/ wealthy followers of the game).

For once you have got it right" a rugby league is a rugby competition".Hallelujah brother,by jove he has got it.:lol: Written spoken and authorised by Woods99 this 14th day of April 2006.

Back to subject ,there has to be a fund such as the one involving a percentage of the players' test monies,plus an accelerated top up for the more games a player has in tests.
Lets assume you get $8-10,000 for SOO match.The player has 25% of his monies kept in the fund for when he retires,the NRL/ARL adds say 5% for the 1st game,6% for the 2nd and so on.It would encourage top players to continue to play SOO and tests,because they could see the loot growing pro rata.

 

[Green Machine]

Yeah, throw your money away for no good purpose. There are only a handful of players that the ARU would be interested in, so pay all the other half-back/hookers, under size forwards, etc etc. A total waste of money.

You guys would be better off putting money into some kind of international body, with decent funding, and adequate authority.

And if anything is left over, put something into brand creation, and find a name for your game.

How can you get into the GAISF unless you have a proper name?

Do you think we should insert a hyphen in there Woods? You must be worried that Rugby League is starting to lobby international organisations like GAISF, Woods? A lot of things take time, just ask BARLA. It took them 25 years to achieve total free gangway, access to universities and armed forces in the UK. I loved your letter to the Herald on Saturday. Agree with you on the poor standard of Australian Rugby Union:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/fighting-tigers-prove-they-are-worthy-of-a-little-respect/2006/04/14/1144521506287.html

Super solution
The article by the ever incisive rugby analyst Spiro Zavos (SMH 11/4/06) caused me to nod my head in agreement. Rugby union does not need Mark Gasnier any more than it needed Wendell Sailor, big-hearted loveable character as he is. For my money Super 14 is a failure. We do not have the depth to support more than three franchises. South Africa is likewise, no problems with a New Zealand four, so Super 10, home and away, is surely the answer.

Anthony Wood, Copacabana