Forget the blog about Parra signing him.
And my question is - how could Souths or most clubs sign him?
Any club signing him would have to have at least $500k left in their cap. Apart from the Eels, I think nearly all clubs have finished their major recruitment.
So if Souths sign him their salary cap would require a major investigation. And they can't say he has signed for less, because if he was prepared to sign for less he would be prepared to pay his own legal bill and not go through this garbage.
Replies
1) Sportsmen such as NRL players ARE overpaid. C'mon, not even our top politicians earn what these guys do! Only the heads of corporate bodies such as insurance giants and banks earn these sort of dollars .... and we all know what we think of them!!
While YES I understand that an NRL player has a "limited lifespan" with regards to what and when he can earn, and most of them don;t really have any skills they can transfer to life outside of sport, so they need to earn to compensate ... geeez ... players of the past, even at the start of the explosion of money at clubs, still had to find a way to earn a crust outside of Rugby League .... LIKE THE REST OF US SCHMUCKS !!!!
2) In this modern era OF HIGHLY PAID SPORTSPEOPLE, the NRL doesn't have a huge earning capacity, that is sustainable for players to remain where they want .... hence, we have issues like the Melbourne $torm and the salary cap cheating. I know I would like to see my team, Parra, retain a lot of the players that would have/could have made a difference to our club's future and success, and it's painful to see them play for other clubs.
3) the days of loyatly and a persons word being bond .... ARE GOOOOOOONE.
If memory severs me correct, the $torm said to Inglis they would pay his various legal costs. Now I have a feeling this was before the whole salary cap debacle blew up, so they were again blissfully roarting the system and cheating the cap with paying for Inglis' legal costs ..... BUT .... their word should be good. While I think Inglis should pay for his own bloody mess (ie - the legal fees and costs there from), if the $torm management said they would pony up ... then they should.
Sorry about getting on my well worn soapbox, but the salary cap is a sticky subject and an absolute minefield.
I would like to see the cap raised, but I also undestand sustainability from the clubs and their revenues, coupled with the anounts the NRL are able to kick in from sponsorship, corporate deals and television rights (I recall on one of the NRL shows that the NRL gives a 5% greater share to players from the corporate head/ruling body as compared to the AFL).
I also have to agree with sixtiesboy ..... if ANY club says it can afford Inglis, regardless of who they are, there needs to be an audit done on their books