I’ve compiled a Q&A designed to help anyone who is struggling to make sense of the recent cap breach. Hope this makes things more clear for you.
Did the Eels deliberately breach the salary cap in 2014? Yes.
Why? The club believed that it was more important to field a competitive team rather than field a team with players out of position. From its perspective, the club faced the choice to either breach the cap or face the real prospect of finishing last for a third consecutive year.
How is that different from rorting the cap to gain an unfair advantage? The club’s agenda was to fast-track its repairs to their salary cap problem. The club did not intend to compile a team filled with superstars.
Why did the club refuse to heed the warnings from the NRL about facing punishment for breaching the cap? The club decided that it was better to fix their salary cap as fast as possible rather than remain compliant. It was deemed that any forthcoming punishment would be worth it.
Does this mean that the club was aware of a likely punishment? Yes.
When will the club’s salary cap be fully repaired? From 2016 onwards.
Is the club compliant for this year’s salary cap? At the moment, yes. It is, however, facing mounting pressure to remain under the cap. This is affecting team selections on a week-to-week basis.
If this is the case, then how can the club justify signing Michael Gordon mid-season? Through careful salary cap maneuvering. The NRL has been consulted regarding this possible transfer.
Who is responsible for creating the club’s salary cap problem? Several people. Those who were directly in charge of the salary cap during the previous administration’s tenure, namely Peter Nolan and Ricky Stuart, are largely responsible. They grossly overpaid players and removed a large number of players from the 2014 player roster. Yet the salaries of those who were still under contract remained and were included under the 2014 salary cap.
Should the current board bear any responsibility? Yes. They chose to initiate a quick restructure of the club’s salary cap instead of remaining compliant.
Will this salary cap drama affect any further recruitment and retention decisions for 2016 onwards? Yes. The club’s attitude toward signing players has changed dramatically following this cap drama. The club refuses to pay more than what players are worth, which will make it difficult to recruit or retain players who are only attracted to whichever club that offers the most amount of money.
Will the club lose four competition points at the commencement of the 2016 home and away season? Possibly, but doubtful. The club is determined to show that it is being efficiently managed, and that changes have already been implemented to improve its governance. Yet the NRL has previously shown a desire to directly interfere in the running of clubs, and already has a very strong influence over the government of four NRL clubs. Imposing its own measures of control over a large club like Parramatta, however, would be difficult for the NRL to accomplish. Nevertheless, the NRL may have viewed this salary cap breach as an opportunity to effect changes designed to reorganise the Eels according to the NRL’s vision for ‘effective club management’.
Any more questions?
Replies
Explain how the second tier salary cap works.
Your second-tier cap is used up whenever you use players for NRL games who are outside your top 25 player roster. $440,000 is the limit for this cap. When you reach this limit, you can no longer use players from outside your top 25. This was our big problem last year, and is an issue again this year. Players like Folau can't be used too often because otherwise we will breach this cap again.
Thanks for this explanation. Could you please explain how the salary cap impacts week to week selections of players already contracted to us
Whenever a player gets injured or suspended, which has occurred numerous times this season already, we are forced to call upon players from the NSW cup. If a player we call up is not in our top 25, i.e. a player who earns less than our 25th highest paid player, their salary is included under the second-tier cap. I don't know the fine details, but basically the more you use players from outside your top 25, the second-tier cap gets more and more filled up and is limited to $440,000. When you reach this limit, you can longer freely call upon players from outside your top 25, which has been our major issue. This means that BA cannot select the players he wishes if he needs someone to cover for an injured or suspended player.
It's a ridiculous system. All of the clubs hate it. It restricts development of younger players. No-one has really explained why it exists, but we have to abide by it or otherwise we get punished.
Thanks for that
If for example a second tier player is on $100K, say, how much would be incurred per match that person plays.