Suspensions should be replaced by fines

[hellteam]

Once again, if Luke didn't have a poor judiciary record he would be playing on the weekend. His past indiscretions have come back to haunt him.

Why would I care if Isaac Luke isn't playing in the grand final?

 

[redvscotty]

There is a few holes, but it would be pretty easy to enforce.

The players have to pay the NRL the fine personally. It's not deducted from their pay, they pay it, just like anyone would pay a speeding fine.

All payments from the club to the player should be monitored under salary cap rules, so that would stop them being able to pay it.

But will they enforce it if the 10k fine is just replaced by a boat?

 

[Captain Apollo]

There is a few holes, but it would be pretty easy to enforce.

The players have to pay the NRL the fine personally. It's not deducted from their pay, they pay it, just like anyone would pay a speeding fine.

All payments from the club to the player should be monitored under salary cap rules, so that would stop them being able to pay it.

Your last sentence is where the hole is. There are so many ways to legally manoeuver around it to render it unenforceable and the NRL would not be able to trace it. You only have to look at the salary cap scams uncovered over the last decade to see that.

 

[Different kind of Rabbit]

The idea is not a terrible one, especially for lower grade infractions but it would never work in the real world.

I think the current system is on the right track in terms of penalties and loading for repeated offences however its the bone heads that are running it that cause the issues.

I think the NRL could easily fix this with two minor changes.

1. They need to have very clear definitions of what makes up a particular infringement and the difference in grading's. The judiciary needs to have a website with the guideline booklet available there and perhaps even examples of each grade of infraction by way of pictures or even youtube clips.

2. The judiciary needs to have a spokesperson who comes out at a set time once a week, on the footy show or some other rugby league program and goes through the previous weeks sightings, charges and even some of the contentious non charges. They need to explain decisions that are made so that the public can understand what has happened and the thought process behind what has occurred.

I'm not saying that everyone will agree with the decisions that are made under a system like this but at least you get a clear explanation as to how the decision has come about.

With more transparency, you will see less complaints.

 

[BranVan3000]

What do you propose the fines be? 2000 bucks for a swinging arm?

I'm on 400k, 5 minutes to go in the Prelim, and Thurston makes a break through the middle. I can either grab for the shirt and miss the tackle, or throw a swinging arm and take him the f**k out, which should also knock him around enough that he may not be looking straight when he tries to kick the winning field goal.

$2000 bucks is nothing, in fact, the club would probably give me a nice little gift to compensate if we make it through due to my heroics.

Ridiculous suggestion.

By that logic why not just throw in the weakest top 17 player to do the same?

 

[papabear]

So you're advocating a percentage based fine depending on the offense?

So Luke's tackle gets him a 5% fine. He gets paid 400k, so it's a 20k fine.
Jarryd Hayne does the same tackle. He's on 800k though, so he pays 40k.

Seems fair and logical.

:crazy:

I think the whole idea is unfair.

But whilst you have blokes playing on 80k or whatever you can hardly hit them with a 20k fine for something that happens on the field.

 

[Loose Cannon]

I think someone may have replaced the OPs brain with a turnip.

May have? 😀

 

[Twizzle]

No way it favours the rich clubs.

Canberras best player might be on 600k of the salary cap.

he gets fined 1/10s of his official salary for a shoulder charge that 60k or 1/10th gone for him.

Broncos best player might be on 450k on the salary cap and another 550k in the TPP he gets 1/10 fine of his official salary for a shoulder charge then he goes for 45K, it isn't fair.

Not to mention the Brisbane bloke will probably get fixed up by Andrew Gee.

It should only happen if there was some faith and integrity surrounding the salary cap which currently there isn't. Because its in the NRLs interest to keep the roosters and broncos doing as well as possible, not that the broncos do anything with their 10 million squad.

Well here's a thought, take it out of their salary cap. It punishes the cub not the player, then I guess the club can deal with the payer

Increase the cap by say, $100K then if they get more than $100K in fines it comes out of their real cap.

Just a quick thought but could be a way of stooping rich clubs from being unaffected by fines.

Dunno if the whole thing would work but its obviously being discussed by alot of people atm.

I really dont like Sterlo's idea of delayed suspensions as the payers will just throw the rule book out the window for the finals, knowing they wont miss any games.

 

[Timmah]

DKoR has it nailed. More transparency

 

[Rod]

I think the whole idea is unfair.

But whilst you have blokes playing on 80k or whatever you can hardly hit them with a 20k fine for something that happens on the field.

Well if it was an 80k player and they copped say a week suspension at 2% or 3% of their salary it would only be $1600 or $2400, not 20k.

I take redvscotty's point about player's on huge salaries though, it seems unfair that Hayne would cop double the fine of Luke, but then again there is a lot that is unfair about the current system is well. Fining someone a percentage of their match fee is commonplace in cricket and they obviously get paid different amounts from each other.

 

[Perth Red]

Dont dump players on their head and you wont miss a GF. not like this rule hasnt been around for very long. Given the injury this year you would think any decent player wouldnt want to do anything close to taking the risk of putting a fellow player in a wheelchair and yet here we are ....

 

[Danish]

Well if it was an 80k player and they copped say a week suspension at 2% or 3% of their salary it would only be $1600 or $2400, not 20k.

I take redvscotty's point about player's on huge salaries though, it seems unfair that Hayne would cop double the fine of Luke, but then again there is a lot that is unfair about the current system is well. Fining someone a percentage of their match fee is commonplace in cricket and they obviously get paid different amounts from each other.

How would that work with back and front loaded contracts?

Say you sign Steve Matai for 3 years. $100k the first year, $800k the 2nd year, $200k the 3rd year. That first year he could just be headhunting people left and right without much fear of losing a bunch of coin given his big money doesn't kick in for 12 months.


You could have a few thugs on rotating loaded contracts so that one of them is always on minimum salary and can just take people out with impunity.

 

[Rod]

How would that work with back and front loaded contracts?

Say you sign Steve Matai for 3 years. $100k the first year, $800k the 2nd year, $200k the 3rd year. That first year he could just be headhunting people left and right without much fear of losing a bunch of coin given his big money doesn't kick in for 12 months.


You could have a few thugs on rotating loaded contracts so that one of them is always on minimum salary and can just take people out with impunity.

I hadn't thought that far ahead, but I guess when the NRL approves every player contract they could also average out a figure for the purposes of the judiciary. So for in your situation above Matai's figure would be $366,666 a year that any fines he might get would come from.

 

[Feej]

How many clubs would be happy to reimburse a player for taking someone like Inglis out a week before the GF? Production of brown paper bags would increase twofold.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I'm struggling to understand why there is this assumption that fines will provide players the chance to take opponents out that suspensions don't. What a load of shit.

In fact hitting a player in the pocket is a much greater deterrent than a holiday. And what about players who are retiring? Why would they be worries by the threat of suspension? And on that topic, how many retiring players go out and mame opponents? None that I can think of, which only proves how ludicrous the suggestion is that players would resort to such an act when fines are the punishment.

In any event, the system should include fines and suspensions. A match fee and a week off instead of two weeks, for example, and the money raised can go back into development or the fund for the Alex McKinnon cases.

 

[redvscotty]

I'd much rather pay a 2k fine and play in the grand final than miss the grand final.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Good for you.

 

[Pete Cash]

Honestly if there was no risk of suspension and I was an nrl coach I'd tell my players to line up the oppositions best player in the first minute and take them out. Have the club reimburse the player cash in hand under the table.

 

[carcharias]

Only very very dumb merkins manage to get themselves suspended for grand finals.

 

[Maximus]

Only RL would cruel its own product by removing its elite players from the field unnecessarily.

The NFL suspended someone for a whole season for smoking weed.

In soccer players are automatically suspended any time they get red carded (whether it's a straight red or 2 yellows).

But no you're right, only rugby league suspends players :roll: