Of course not. But his choice has created a problem for the game and he isn't immune from consequences. You can't have him developing in the best rugby comp, either code, in the world and building his profile while at the same time being an 18 month walking billboard for union. It makes us look like a development comp and provides 18 months of advertising on the biggest sport in Australia for the code that has been trying to kill us since the beginning. I even think roosters should get cap dispensation to drop him it's that serious. At the very least word needs to come from high that he is persona non grata when it comes to rep footy.
I agree with this completely.
We can’t go down the route of ‘tear up his contract’ or have clauses in contracts that mean if you sign with Union your contract is null and void, as then, players who are disgruntled, or have been tapped up, will simply sign a short term deal with RU to get out of their existing contract, before re-signing to another NRL team.
I agree on the salary cap dispensation route. If a player signs with Union, they are immediately unavailable for NRL duty, the NRL can even pay their wage, but essentially, they are left to rot. I’d also say they should never be let back in our game.
That might sound an over reaction, but hear me out. $1.6m sounds a lot, and it is, but it’s a lot cheaper than having development pathways set up across the board. The Wallabies only need about 30 players at any time, and probably a maximum of 8 could come from league - it’s probably more cost efficient and easier not to bother with development pathways, and just use the NRL as a breeding ground and pay overs for the individuals once they’re cherry ripe. And if that works for the Wallabies, why wouldn’t it work for the mega rich French clubs, who already buy in the vast majority of their talent anyway.
I doubt it would get that far, but it could feasibly happen. So f**k em - any player who goes to Union ain’t welcome back and anyone who signs with union rots without game time and with no platform to promote Union. I’d even go as far as saying all NRL contracts should have an extra year on top of the club contract that is an ‘NRL’ contract, so that they can’t just keep the fact they’ve signed with union quiet. So if a player signs for 3 years with the Roosters, the contract is actually a 4 year NRL contract (with no financial value attached to the 4th year), with the first 3 years at Roosters, if they don’t sign a new extended contract at the end of the 3rd year, either with Roosters or with another NRL club (that again would have an extra year signed to the NRL), they sit out a year.