I wrote thisin another blog.
Let's use Papa as the example.
So, he wants to stay at the Eels.
Let's assume the Tigers are willing to cancel his contract and Papa is free to sign elsewhere.
Parra offer 600k per year and Papa is happy with that.
No problem Papa and Parra. You can have each other. But know that there'll be a 50% surcharge on the contract value for salary cap purposes.
So Papa gets his 600k, but the contract will take up 900k of Parra's salary cap.
End result: Very little chance of a contracted bloke like Papa receiving an offer from Parra or any other club.
OR, If he's that desperate to remain at Parra, he'll likely have to take a substantial pay cut. Just watch how keen he'll be to honour his Tigers contract then.
Thoughts?
Replies
I think the whole November 1st area needs to go in general. Need to open a free agent period and have it as a free for all unless that player is signed before that by their club. So say October 7th, a week after the GF, gives players roughly 4-5 weeks to sign before pre-season. What you can allow is a tampering period, say a day or two before the opening of free agency, allowing players to agree to a deal but not sign.
But the RLPA want it to stay the same and we know why, if Papali'i for example was not able to sign until end of this year, he would be risking an injury which lowers their value. Signing in November means if he gets a bad injury he still has the contract and money behind him. That is why they love this timeline. A free agency period is the only way to do it, allow clubs to re-sign players beforehand.
#backflip
The greatest backflips in NRL history
Contracts nowadays mean squat, and don't take Ponga for a Knight until you see the boy dressed in red and blue.
We all remember when DCE shattered the Titans hearts, and he wasn't the first to break his promise.
Slide on to see who else had a change of mind.
Greg Inglis
After Melbourne's salary cap scandal Inglis was looking for a new home.
The Broncos thought they had won him over but after a delay in signing the deal and a closer look at third party agreements, Inglis had a change of heart.
The Souths superstar threatened to joined AFL club Essendon if the NRL didn't approve his contract.
Josh Papalii
The Raiders wrecking ball was meant to join Ricky Stuart at the Eels in 2013 and it only took him less than a month to reconsider his stay at Canberra.
Funnily enough, Papalli linked up with the man he reneged at the Raiders the year after.
James Tedesco
The Raiders were on the other end of a backflip when Tedesco turned his back on a three-year deal worth $650,000 a season.
Canberra were struggling to attract talent to the nation's capital and Tedesco was their big grab.
But after a chat with skipper Robbie Farah, the now NSW fullback stayed at Leichhardt on a much cheaper deal.
Luke Lewis
The Penrtih favourite made rugby league history and became the first player to use the NRL's then newly implemented Round 13 rule.
Lewis agreed to a four-year deal with the Rabbitohs for double his salary, but his heart couldn't leave the foot of the mountains.
Steve Turner
The speedy winger was on the cards to be a foundation player for the Titans in 2006 and was promised the fullback jersey.
Turner's backflip came as the Titans went into pre-season training and as compensation the Storm sent youngsters Smith Samau and Daniel Isaacs.
Tim Moltzen
In one of the messiest contract sagas ever, Moltzen was caught in a tug-of-war with the Tigers and Dragons.
Moltzen reportedly joined the Red V, although had not been released by the Tigers.
Following the sacking of halfback Robert Lui, the number seven spot opened up for Moltzen who pledged his allegiance to the Tigers.
Wayne Bennett
The Brisbane supercoach agreed to join the Roosters in 2006 after his relationship had soured with the Broncos board.
The struggling club had found their saviour, however, Bennett spent the next two seasons at Red Hill
The Canterbury Four
During the Super League war, Canterbury's Jarrod McCracken, Dean Pay, Jim Dymock and Jason Smith all reneged on their deals to sign with the ARL.
Coach Chris Anderson dropped the quartet to reserve grade and their Super League contracts were ruled to be null and void, which allowed them to join the Parramatta Eels.
Daly Cherry-Evans
The Manly halfback performed the greatest ever backflip in rugby league history, turning his back on what was the richest deal the game has ever seen.
Manly tabled a $10 million 'lifetime' contract that DCE simply couldn't refuse.
Money can't buy you everything, but it can certainly buy you Cherry-Evans.
MORE FROM SPORTING NEWS
Copyright © 2022 Sporting News Holdings Limited.
All rights reserved.
Just honour the agreement that has been signed.
Won't work, the salary cap is negotiated so that the players collectively get $160m. If each club did that even once that would nearly $5m less the players would be getting which would violate the CBA
If both parties are ok to dissolve a contract then so be it. Why does there need to be a penalty? Take your example and subsitute Player X who the club no longers wants (because of off-field stuff, personal reasons, severe injury, etc) by your rule you'd be forcing an unhappy marriage together despite both parties wanting to exit.
Tigers can enforce their contract if they want. The question is, do they want a player there who obviously does not want to be there? If the Tigers identify another opportunity and need Papalii's cash to do it, why stand in the way?
There is a guy that does a sporting podcast where I live, and I reckon he has a good idea for this.
When a player signs a contract, the club owns the contract. If a player wants to kick stones, then the club can sell his contract to another club. They might request a new player, or monetary compensation, but they get something in return. The player goes to his new club and fulfills whatever term remains on the contract. The contract exists for the period it was signed.
Stops players bailing out and wanting more money at another location. Also gives the club some bargaining power in a situation where a player wants to leave.
In other words a trade ?
The only current issue is that players can't be traded against their will to just any club. The Tigers couldn't just trade Papa to the Dragons for example, he would have to agree to that.
So if Papa said he wanted to play for the Eels only, the Tigers would have very little leverage.
Yes they would have leverage. They own his contract, the Eels want him. The Tigers don't just have to hand the contract over. They can leverage something in return.
Yes, but if the Eels are the only potential buyer, their leverage is much lower. If they could trade him to anyone like they can in the NBA or NFL, then yes they would have much greater leverage.
Yes true.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next