Due to over 80 players being unable to take the field in the first 3 rounds, the NRL are looking at making the squads larger. Now, i do not mind it, though imagine the CBA again with the minimum wage dispute? It is understandable with the mandatory 11 day stand down for concussions, but if you have an extra 8 players with 120k minimum, teams wont have the cap space atm to have that, meaning a new negotiation has to happen to up the cap.
Overall i dont mind it if it can be sorted quick.
https://www.zerotackle.com/nrl-plan-to-increase-squad-size-from-30-to-38-145203/
Replies
Yes yes and yes. Id be happy if the last 8 players were paid as is from reggies. Ie that would mean players that are not in our top 30 such as Cini, Hands, Yates even Lume Lume " he is not allowed to appear again without special disspensation . he is not in our top 30". Would be available for selection. It would make it so much easier to drop players for a bad game when we could bring up a junior for a game or two etc. The salary cap would not need to change in this instance, Its basically continue as is but you can select the boys from reggies at any time.
I would also like to see an increase in game day reserves to 18 or 19 men a game to instantly cover HIA. No extra interchanges just the ability to replace a HIA victim immedaitley with like for like. ie half goes down , a backup half can go on.
Issue is that the RLPA will come up saying if they are listed in a squad then they are a part of a squad. Being a part of the squad means they get the minimum salary. So the RLPA will say if they sign a deal to be in a squad in general and not waiting til after mid year to play NRL then they get the minimum. Plus they obviously will be stipulated with a contract of NSW cup salary, RLPA again will step in to protect the players.
I am with you BE, i want this and think it is great for the game that more players get a chance to be in a squad. How many players missed the opportunity over the years of playing because they weren't in a squad and didn't get an exemption to play? A fair few i imagine. This is a reward for those in NSW cup to keep going; Hands, Cini, Lumelume, Yates, Keir. These players might not get a top 30 deal ever or again, this is their chance to be recognised.
If that is indeed the RLPA's stance then a simple NRL rule change can be implemented, that maintains the current language, the current wage agreement and the current status of all concerned.
The simple rule is: A club may maintain a secondary squad of 8 players "Development squad" so deemed to be a able to go up and down from Reggies to the First grade 30 squad. They can be enabled to cover Injuries / mandatory HIA standdowns , NRL no fault standdown rule, etc from a player in the top 30.
This maintains a ready squad of 30 players at all times from the club to choose 17 players on game day. These 8 designated players are seen as development players and will be on a seperate wage tier as is now recognised by the RLPA. No need for salary cap intervention, no need for changes in player designations, no need for any wage tinkering.
The players injured, HIA standowns etc are placed onto the offical "injured list squad" and can be replaced by one of the 8 whilst remaining on that list. When the injured player is deemed worthy enough they can be reinstated into the "top 30 squad" and taken off the injured squad list. The development player returns to the develoment squad list and continues in reggies etc.
You could just do like we have with development contracts, have a reserve squad list, only 8 reserve players that can be called up at any time. Only issue there too is say Cini plays first 10 weeks then plays the whole year on the reserve squad the RLPA will demand he is upgraded.
But could have a rule that they can only play maximum 10 games or something, unless upgraded.
Now your getting it.👍👍. Players sign a development squad contract not a top 30 contract and understand thats what they have signed no matter how many or how little games they play in firsts. They are effectively agreeing to be in a squad that may or may not be enacted into firsts but agree to be developed, no matter how many games they play that year. Hey if they play good they will get an NRL contract from a club somewhere the following year.
Its a developement oppurtunity like reggies are now but has the added development element of maybe some first grade exposure at times.
The NBA does something similar with its G League, every NBA team can sign up to two "two way" players, ie they can play in either the NBA parent team or the G League affiliate, but they are limited to 50 games per season including playoffs.
The NRL equivalent could be limited to 15 games including finals.
if there is a salary cap in the nrl, then there should also be a salary cup for that extended squad or what ever you want to call it, otherwise those teams such as rorters, storm, broncos will "stockpile" players for those times when they are required.
imagine the rorters if they could do that??? they have 4 fullbacks currently, how many more would they have - they could buy gutho and kennedy for example and sit them in ressies...
No they couldn't. The salary cap is based on the 30 highest players at the club. Players 31-38 would have to be on less than player 30
That torpedoes any chance of creating a 20 team competition any time soon!
It can definately.
Yet the NRL still fail to notice the importance of recognising grass roots. I have for years mentioned the NRL should give each team a country area in their state.
So like Parramatta get Darwin, not in NSW but been there for a while, Penrith Bathurst, then give Sharks say Orange, Dragons Dubbo etc.
Brisbane get Toowomba, Melbourne go to central Victoria, even Geelong etc.
Then they can poach players from these areas. If a great player is from Dubbo then Dragons get first dibs at them.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next