Storm say they will decide inglis fate AND HOW ABOUT THIS

The melbourne storm have come out and said that they will ultimatley decide where greg inglis will go in 2011 there is a disbute that inglis court fees and who will take care of that SO WHICH EVER CLUB WANTS INGLIS THEY MUST TAKE CARE OF HIS LEGAL ISSUES FROM LAST YEARS COURT CASE. there is also the case of paying out greg inglises contract with the melbourne storm.

I still think that greg inglis will go to souths sydney but it is wrong he should hounour the commitment that he made with the broncos i think that it is unfair that souths can use billionaire$$$ to pay out inglises contract and his legal bills.

I THINK THIS DEAL WHEN IT BECOMES OFFICAL WILLL THROW RUGBY LEAGUE DEALS INTO DISSREPUTE.

souths have a very talented playing roster take a look at this

Rhys wesser 200,000 plus

Nathan Merrett 200,000 plus

Greg Inglis 500,000 plus

Beau Champion 200,000 plus

Chris Sandow 200,000 plus

Issac Luke (wouldnt be cheap)

Sam Burgess ( recently signed a big deal to be beileived more than 300,000)

John Sutton ( be on big money)

Ben ross ( wasted money)

Michael Crocker ( wasted money)

AND STILL INTERESTED IN BURGESS BROTHERS

AND A VERY TALENTED TOYOTA CUP ROSTER

i wouldnt be suprised if rusty is pulling a few shiftys

I am very suprised that souths can fit this deal happen when a big player becomes avalble it almost seems like they have massive money to spend remember WHEN THEY WERE INTERESTED IN JARRYD HAYNE they were rumoured to have offered him round about 500,000 something last year.

I know that SOUTHS SAY THEY HAVE HEAVILY BACKED THIRD PARTY DEALS IF YOU BELEIVE THAT.isnt that what melbourne said before it was revealed they were cheating.

I EVERY CLUB got billionaires to help them out with third party deals we should have got danny green to make THE QUADE COOPER DEAL MORE ATTRACTIVE

THIS IS A JOKE

INGLIS SHOULD HOUNOUR HIS COMMITMENT OR GET OUT OF RUGBY LEAGUE AND GO TO THE OTHER GAME RUGBY UNION

Make the salary cap $10m.
Ban third party deals - if Rusty or Stallions want to donate to their club, then so be it - let them, and let the club spend the money how they want.
All player payments through the club - that way, if a player accepts a payment from other than the club, they know it's not legitimate and they are deregistered (unless commercial business deal e.g. to promote Mars Bars or wheat Bix or whatever, signed off by the salary cap auditor).
Clubs will then pay what they can afford to players. Make a players contract reflect what they sign on for and receive.
Yes, we'll get $1m a season players.
We may even lose a Club or two due to financial stress.
But what we've got at the moment isn't working.
All the payers to one Club? Do you think that Scott Prince, Jonathan Thurston and Cooper Cronk will all play at the same club? No.
Clubs will pay overs for playmakers so that this talent is distributed evenly, rest down to market forces.
Suggestion may not be everyone's cup of tea.

"I would love to see Ryles tell these yapping flapping assholes what he thought of their "advice. He's a big, solid fucker who looks in good shape. His statement on on Brown seemed to hold some held back anger .. I reckon you would see these…"

"What Frank said...and being THE FUCKING WORST at anything is, well, the fucking worst. Coming first iis noteable, but so is coming Last....Being THE Losers means you are a long fucking way, the furthest from being the winner. Bad luck is not why you…"

Replies

playthedoors November 9, 2010 at 6:01pm

Make the salary cap $10m.
Ban third party deals - if Rusty or Stallions want to donate to their club, then so be it - let them, and let the club spend the money how they want.
All player payments through the club - that way, if a player accepts a payment from other than the club, they know it's not legitimate and they are deregistered (unless commercial business deal e.g. to promote Mars Bars or wheat Bix or whatever, signed off by the salary cap auditor).
Clubs will then pay what they can afford to players. Make a players contract reflect what they sign on for and receive.
Yes, we'll get $1m a season players.
We may even lose a Club or two due to financial stress.
But what we've got at the moment isn't working.
All the payers to one Club? Do you think that Scott Prince, Jonathan Thurston and Cooper Cronk will all play at the same club? No.
Clubs will pay overs for playmakers so that this talent is distributed evenly, rest down to market forces.
Suggestion may not be everyone's cup of tea.
playthedoors November 9, 2010 at 6:10pm

Yep, but just because the cap is $10m doesn't mean you need to spend $10m. Spend what you can afford.
We're lucky in that unlike soccer, there is a finite talent resource pool.
Joey November 9, 2010 at 6:52pm

Then we will be left with the 3 teams winning the comp year in year out. Terrible idea IMO
Army of one November 9, 2010 at 7:07pm

I am not saying there should be no salry cap i am just saying that souths should not be able to get anthony mundine and andrew forest to pay for the greg inglis deal
joshb78 November 10, 2010 at 12:20pm

Eff the Broncos. Their club has more third party deals than anyone. I hope Inglis goes to the Rabbitohs. Hopefully they can eff up his career like they have with Asotasi, Crocker et al. Cheating mongrel deserves nothing less. QLDer indeed!
Bourbon Man November 10, 2010 at 12:23pm

Neither Russell Crowe nor Danny Green are billionaires!

Not that I care too much because it doesn't really effect us, but I can't understand how the NRL Salary Cap auditor can use his 'discretionary powers' to determine that GI's legal bill falls under the salary cap, yet Matt Orford's and Greg Eastwood's transfer fees do not!
iamnot November 10, 2010 at 12:37pm

I don't have a problem with Souths signing him. However, if Melbourne want to play hard ball, all other clubs should pull out, and therefore he is forced to stay in Melbourne, and have to fit under their cap. They would then have to release some more players (Hopefully Cronk) in order to keep him and his legal bill...
The Badger November 10, 2010 at 12:40pm

Maybe $10M in real terms is a touch high but certainly it needs to be a more level playing field so clubs are not disadvantaged because of inability to attract 3rd party deals due solely to one team town v 12 in Syd - well you know what I mean.

Perhaps $10M (on paper) with NRL attaching values to players so 3rd party $$$ are irrelevant. That way clubs can spend what they want but not go over the NRL paper $$$. This would certainly stop things like Lockyer getting peanuts on the cap and gazillions off cap etc etc etc. It would also assist the salary cap work how it's suppose to.

Hey - it's an idea!
Clint November 10, 2010 at 1:52pm

I'm just glad he didn't go to the Broncos - Don't care where else he goes, as long as it's not there.
George Taylor November 10, 2010 at 2:26pm

Wherever he goes , guarantee he will be homesick within 6 mnths and asking for a release.

Yet another over paid Rugby League player that was never taught to honour a contract, deregister him from the NRL and make an example of him, it might teach these young upstarts to think before they sign, might even teach them a thing or two about loyalty as well.