Boyd Cornder Cap Concessions

[Harvey]

Suggestions that the Roosters will get $350k in salary cap concessions because their captain will miss the first 12 weeks to overcome repeated discussions.

Justification is that they are entitled because he suffered the injury in a rep match.

What are your views?

Mine are that it is unfortunate that he will miss time and for his best. Is was obvious that he was already impacted before he was selected and there were questions being asked around his selection.

It probably was negligent of the NRL/NSWRL to let him play in the origin match.

I would consider the fact that he was concussed by the minimal impact in the origin game a further symptom of the problems he was facing and to suggest that the repeated concussion problems were a result of that knock is drawing a long bow.

Can Maguire arrange for Packer to be selected for NZ and aggravate his foot injury?

 

[jadtiger]

Suggestions that the Roosters will get $350k in salary cap concessions because their captain will miss the first 12 weeks to overcome repeated discussions.

Justification is that they are entitled because he suffered the injury in a rep match.

What are your views?

Mine are that it is unfortunate that he will miss time and for his best. Is was obvious that he was already impacted before he was selected and there were questions being asked around his selection.

It probably was negligent of the NRL/NSWRL to let him play in the origin match.

I would consider the fact that he was concussed by the minimal impact in the origin game a further symptom of the problems he was facing and to suggest that the repeated concussion problems were a result of that knock is drawing a long bow.

Can Maguire arrange for Packer to be selected for NZ and aggravate his foot injury?

Its a joke to be honest,Cordner has been like a punch drunk fighter for a few years.i doubt if 12 weeks will make the slightest difference (remember Fulton was the same) but i am sure the NRL will sling another 350k at the rorters since they didnt make the GF last year.
Consistency is not an NRL feature.

 

[TigerVinnie]

They have known about these issues for a long time, still played him in the finals and origin but now he needs a rest?

Opens up a can of warms for any long term re-occuring injury

 

[tigger]

Suggestions that the Roosters will get $350k in salary cap concessions because their captain will miss the first 12 weeks to overcome repeated discussions.

Justification is that they are entitled because he suffered the injury in a rep match.

What are your views?

Mine are that it is unfortunate that he will miss time and for his best. Is was obvious that he was already impacted before he was selected and there were questions being asked around his selection.

It probably was negligent of the NRL/NSWRL to let him play in the origin match.

I would consider the fact that he was concussed by the minimal impact in the origin game a further symptom of the problems he was facing and to suggest that the repeated concussion problems were a result of that knock is drawing a long bow.

Can Maguire arrange for Packer to be selected for NZ and aggravate his foot injury?

I can't see why it being concussion would, or should, make any difference. There are plenty of types of injuries that would keep a player out for 12 weeks.

If this happens, then every club should receive a salary cap discount for every player who is injured in a rep game and requires time out of the game, regardless of the injury or the length of unavailability.

That would include players selected for any representative side. Not just SOR or Australia.

Can't see it happening but, from my perspective, it's all or nothing,

 

[cochise]

Suggestions that the Roosters will get $350k in salary cap concessions because their captain will miss the first 12 weeks to overcome repeated discussions.

Justification is that they are entitled because he suffered the injury in a rep match.

What are your views?

Mine are that it is unfortunate that he will miss time and for his best. Is was obvious that he was already impacted before he was selected and there were questions being asked around his selection.

It probably was negligent of the NRL/NSWRL to let him play in the origin match.

I would consider the fact that he was concussed by the minimal impact in the origin game a further symptom of the problems he was facing and to suggest that the repeated concussion problems were a result of that knock is drawing a long bow.

Can Maguire arrange for Packer to be selected for NZ and aggravate his foot injury?

I can't see why it being concussion would, or should, make any difference. There are plenty of types of injuries that would keep a player out for 12 weeks.

If this happens, then every club should receive a salary cap discount for every player who is injured in a rep game and requires time out of the game, regardless of the injury or the length of unavailability.

That would include players selected for any representative side. Not just SOR or Australia.

Can't see it happening but, from my perspective, it's all or nothing,

It already happens.

 

[Deleted member 3518]

Suggestions that the Roosters will get $350k in salary cap concessions because their captain will miss the first 12 weeks to overcome repeated discussions.

Justification is that they are entitled because he suffered the injury in a rep match.

What are your views?

Mine are that it is unfortunate that he will miss time and for his best. Is was obvious that he was already impacted before he was selected and there were questions being asked around his selection.

It probably was negligent of the NRL/NSWRL to let him play in the origin match.

I would consider the fact that he was concussed by the minimal impact in the origin game a further symptom of the problems he was facing and to suggest that the repeated concussion problems were a result of that knock is drawing a long bow.

Can Maguire arrange for Packer to be selected for NZ and aggravate his foot injury?


Its a joke to be honest,Cordner has been like a punch drunk fighter for a few years.i doubt if 12 weeks will make the slightest difference (remember Fulton was the same) but i am sure the NRL will sling another 350k at the rorters since they didnt make the GF last year.
Consistency is not an NRL feature.

Fulton was just before or at the infancy of the concussion revelation . The fact is he played in a nsw game , got the straw that broke the camels back , and that’s all she wrote for his career most probably .

Seems pretty clear cut they should get the compensation.

 

[JC99]

Multiple clubs have already used this rule and got cap concession. Bulldogs got it for Foran after he got hurt playing for NZ. Canberra have done it for Rapana and Bateman, and Batemans shoulder injuries stem from a birth defect but NRL still gave them compensation

Pre existing injuries aren't taken into account when the NRL decides on compensation for rep game injuries s

 

[hank37w]

So considerate of the Rorters to have Boyd Cordner's health as a priority and rest him for half the season before wheeling him out for more of the same.

Seems like they want the best of both worlds by trying to get salary cap relief and then use up every last bit of him at the business end of the season.

Like someone else has said, he's been punch drunk for a while now and if they were really concerned for his health they would talk him into retiring.

Like they say, "stick a fork in him, he's done."

 

[Needaname]

It’s not a farce In reality. I don’t see any problem with short term / long term retirements. If the game was serious about maintaining its level of product. You would consider cap dispensentions for any injured player probably in the top 10 of their position. Or top 100 players.
It would ensure there is a better product all year round.
Hands up whose excited at the start of the season about certain team chances only for a season injury to cruel their star player. Hated it when Hodgson was ruled out for Canberra. Billy for two seasons. Us when Lawrence, Faz and Benji were done. Why not fund continuity of team talent.
Doesn’t have to be a cap dispensation but maybe a loan option. Which team was it mentioned the other day are stacked for backrowers? Canberra? I’d be more in favour of the Roosters or any team for that matter loaning/borrowing a player out of the 17 starters of a side for the length of time of the injury.

 

[Fade.To.Black]

They have known about these issues for a long time, still played him in the finals and origin but now he needs a rest?

Opens up a can of warms for any long term re-occuring injury

There'll be no can of worms though. It will be, as it has been for years, rules for some teams and different rules for others.
Cordner seems like a good bloke, but this stinks.
Like the OP posted, Madge should select Packer for NZ and then WT can just use any blow-up in his existing injury as a career-ender and we get a truckload of cash in compo. Unfortunately we aren't one of the chosen ones so the NRL would just reply with "sorry, but yaknow, it was an existing injury blah blah blah".
Farce.

 

[jirskyr]

I'm still waiting for the precedent where a player sits out 12 weeks of footy from his first concussion. Cordner has known and long-term concussion issues, and his Origin selection was questionable in the first place, based on his known condition, let alone the decision to put him back on after that first head knock.

I don't think there's an NRL supporter around who was surprised to see Cordner go down hard after a head collision, and basically everyone called him out for the series.

The Roosters are asking dispensation for a decision that has been taken due to consistent and repeated head trauma, not a unique outcome from a rep game.

If this is the way it works, then per OP, select your worst or injured players for rep games, maybe even down as far as Tonga vs Samoa, and run them out, casts and stitches and moonboots and all, let them exacerbate the existing injury, then write off a cool 1/3rd million.

 

[gallagher]

I'm still waiting for the precedent where a player sits out 12 weeks of footy from his first concussion. Cordner has known and long-term concussion issues, and his Origin selection was questionable in the first place, based on his known condition, let alone the decision to put him back on after that first head knock.

I don't think there's an NRL supporter around who was surprised to see Cordner go down hard after a head collision, and basically everyone called him out for the series.

The Roosters are asking dispensation for a decision that has been taken due to consistent and repeated head trauma, not a unique outcome from a rep game.

If this is the way it works, then per OP, select your worst or injured players for rep games, maybe even down as far as Tonga vs Samoa, and run them out, casts and stitches and moonboots and all, let them exacerbate the existing injury, then write off a cool 1/3rd million.

So a club can just select their worst player for a rep match? How's that work?

 

[jirskyr]

I'm still waiting for the precedent where a player sits out 12 weeks of footy from his first concussion. Cordner has known and long-term concussion issues, and his Origin selection was questionable in the first place, based on his known condition, let alone the decision to put him back on after that first head knock.

I don't think there's an NRL supporter around who was surprised to see Cordner go down hard after a head collision, and basically everyone called him out for the series.

The Roosters are asking dispensation for a decision that has been taken due to consistent and repeated head trauma, not a unique outcome from a rep game.

If this is the way it works, then per OP, select your worst or injured players for rep games, maybe even down as far as Tonga vs Samoa, and run them out, casts and stitches and moonboots and all, let them exacerbate the existing injury, then write off a cool 1/3rd million.

So a club can just select their worst player for a rep match? How's that work?

I was joking of course, I have yet to see a player run out in a moonboot.

The point being the injury allowance is supposed to be compensation for new injuries incurred by rep players, not for concussion-prone has-beens who continue to get selected for rep because their club is institutionalised at the Origin level.

No way was Cordner good enough to play Origin this year on form, but he was selected as incumbent, despite having huge injury clouds over his multiple concussions. And the coach is ex-Roosters. Lo and behold Cordner goes down in the first hard collision.

Not knocking the bloke as a warrior, but they are looking after his well-being VERY after the fact. Origin had very little to do with his long-term struggles with head knocks.

 

[supercoach]

It’s not one concussion that is the problem with Cordner, its multiple concussions over a long period. Most of these have occurred during the NRL home and away games. It’s completely different to say Foran who dislocates a shoulder in a rep match.

I guess to be fair the NRL has to give any club cap relief for any player forced out of the game for a extended period due concussion no matter if it’s a club game or a rep game. Although the flood gates would open for some clubs to rort the system

 

[happy_tiger]

You sign a player with concussion problems ...you wear those problems

I feel for Boyd and his injury ..the bloke has been a warrior for the Roosters , NSW and Australia

But the Roosters playing these ...oh poor us games .....low poo if you ask me

Tell me there is no connection between Vlandy's and Politis ...both Kytherans

 

[Tiger_Steve]

My logical and well thought through response is if it involves the Rorters - don’t allow it! Simple.
Hate em with a passion only reserved for narcissistic world leaders!

Feel for Cordner as he is one of the games nice guys (I think). But it’s high time those in authority stop with the win at all costs mindset and honestly put long term player welfare at the apex of their thinking. He is done. Sad but true.

350K for the Rorters is just plain wrong. This injury did not originate from the match. Focus needs to be on why he took the field in the first place!

 

[JC99]

I'm still waiting for the precedent where a player sits out 12 weeks of footy from his first concussion. Cordner has known and long-term concussion issues, and his Origin selection was questionable in the first place, based on his known condition, let alone the decision to put him back on after that first head knock.

I don't think there's an NRL supporter around who was surprised to see Cordner go down hard after a head collision, and basically everyone called him out for the series.

The Roosters are asking dispensation for a decision that has been taken due to consistent and repeated head trauma, not a unique outcome from a rep game.

If this is the way it works, then per OP, select your worst or injured players for rep games, maybe even down as far as Tonga vs Samoa, and run them out, casts and stitches and moonboots and all, let them exacerbate the existing injury, then write off a cool 1/3rd million.

So a club can just select their worst player for a rep match? How's that work?

I was joking of course, I have yet to see a player run out in a moonboot.

The point being the injury allowance is supposed to be compensation for new injuries incurred by rep players, not for concussion-prone has-beens who continue to get selected for rep because their club is institutionalised at the Origin level.

No way was Cordner good enough to play Origin this year on form, but he was selected as incumbent, despite having huge injury clouds over his multiple concussions. And the coach is ex-Roosters. Lo and behold Cordner goes down in the first hard collision.

Not knocking the bloke as a warrior, but they are looking after his well-being VERY after the fact. Origin had very little to do with his long-term struggles with head knocks.

You're incorrect. The allowance isn't for new injuries, the NRL CEO himself said that isn't taken into account when the NRL decides whether to give a club compensation.

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

How much is Cordner on 350K for 12 games not even half a season so he must be on at least $700k a year minimum as Tooves once said there's gotta to be an investigation.
If its granted he should not play rep football again for his own safety

 

[Fade.To.Black]

I'm still waiting for the precedent where a player sits out 12 weeks of footy from his first concussion. Cordner has known and long-term concussion issues, and his Origin selection was questionable in the first place, based on his known condition, let alone the decision to put him back on after that first head knock.

I don't think there's an NRL supporter around who was surprised to see Cordner go down hard after a head collision, and basically everyone called him out for the series.

The Roosters are asking dispensation for a decision that has been taken due to consistent and repeated head trauma, not a unique outcome from a rep game.

If this is the way it works, then per OP, select your worst or injured players for rep games, maybe even down as far as Tonga vs Samoa, and run them out, casts and stitches and moonboots and all, let them exacerbate the existing injury, then write off a cool 1/3rd million.

So a club can just select their worst player for a rep match? How's that work?

I was joking of course, I have yet to see a player run out in a moonboot.

The point being the injury allowance is supposed to be compensation for new injuries incurred by rep players, not for concussion-prone has-beens who continue to get selected for rep because their club is institutionalised at the Origin level.

No way was Cordner good enough to play Origin this year on form, but he was selected as incumbent, despite having huge injury clouds over his multiple concussions. And the coach is ex-Roosters. Lo and behold Cordner goes down in the first hard collision.

Not knocking the bloke as a warrior, but they are looking after his well-being VERY after the fact. Origin had very little to do with his long-term struggles with head knocks.

You're incorrect. The allowance isn't for new injuries, the NRL CEO himself said that isn't taken into account when the NRL decides whether to give a club compensation.

How do they come to the decision of who gets what re: compensation? As usual it's a hotch-potch dogs breakfast that changes from one club to the next. Disgraceful.
Will be interesting to see if PVL and his cronies cave-in to the Roosters request to play underage Suualli.