I agree it was a shame that no one said anything about the lack of TV rights money in comparison to AFL, which is overpaid by the way. A couple of people did hint at it, by saying we sell ourselves short.
Its the one shame that the fact that the only rugby league talk shows on TV are shown on the 2 channels that own the rights and therefore are unlikely to buy into the argument that league rights are not being paid their worth. The one place you will hear that view is one ABC's offsiders on a sunday morning whenever Roy Masters is on.
On the salary cap issue, well one simple fact is it has to remain or you simply have an english premier league situation where only a couple of clubs can win. 15 seasons and only 4 different winners. All those big soccer leagues are the same, in the last 23 seasons and only 5 seperate winners in Spain and 19 of those titles have been shared between 2 clubs. Italy 5 winners in the last 16 years.
I mean even with a salary cap you still see the advantage the richest club has, Brisbane are the only side to truley show any sort of dominance of the comp. In the last 16 years, we have had 9 different winners, Brisbane 6 times (including SL), No other side has won more than twice.
No salary cap would be a disaster. There is a blow up every year about england and rugby union, but to be honest have we lost a lot. I mean rugby has taken maybe one high profile a player a year since they started grabbing our stars. Rogers, Sailor, Tuqiri, Schifcofske, and now Tahu. Thats about it over about 6 years. A couple of fringe players as well. Thats it. Rugby only really has room for a couple of league stars, because if they aren't going to wallabies there is no point. Schifcofske is different, he wanted to move back to qld, and the reds matched his canberra salary.
England, well yeah there are about 50 aussie players over there. But 20 of them are 30 years or older. Of the other 31 I'd say maybe 6 are genuine starting NRL players. And of all those players maybe Flannery, Bailey and Barrett would be regarded as possible rep players.
Been a bit of a blow up about Matt King, but I think waldron was right. Matt King has no nest egg, late bloomer only probably got in the money last 2 years. And Berrigan is 30 next year.
I think there whole threat is overblown. Our juniors are huge. For every star that goes another arrives. Rugby would be my only worry salary cap wise, because they can affect our share of the pie. But they can't bring too many across, they just don't have space.
the ESL mainly affects clubs depth.
If you took salary cap away it would simply reward rich clubs or clubs with rich backers. It would also suddenly disadvantage those who had most recently had to shed players because of their success.
I think a strong point about the concessions were also made, that quite simply not all clubs could afford it. And to be honest many clubs simply make business decisions, they won't keep the long serving player because it doesn't make sense. If you keep the 30 plus fading star you may lose the 19 year old who wants to play first grade.
The salary cap has made the comp so even, its great and when we get a decent tv contract it will rise and all players will get more. I don't want an english premier league where the only way my club might win is if a russian billionaire comes in and bank rolls it ala Chelsea.
