Chris Grevsmuhl

[Tim Sheens]

I think the NRL are opening themselves up in Dangerous Territory by allowing Contracts to be broken.

Not for 1 minute am I suggesting that there isn't players out there with " Personal Matters " away from football that are breaking Contracts to accommodate such matters.

However take Parramatta for example they allow Keiron Foran to break up his contract due to issue's outside football, they had to offload player's such as Nathan Peats and Junior Paulo but that was due to Salary Cap breaches but had Foran gone before they could of potentially not had lost either of them…In the end they had no choice but Foran now will be in Warriors colours come Round 1 next year, is that fair? Some will say sucked in cause Parra broke some Salary Cap Rules.

Will Clubs and player's use this compassionate grounds card to break contract's? Hell yeah but the NRL should enforce a 1 year away from football if you have a legitimate reason, Contract's are easily broken these Days to suit Clubs and player's when it's convenient for either party.

Not an easy solution.

Maybe a "transfer trade period" can come into play during the Season where Clubs have a period to negotiate and release players from there Contracts if both parties agree.

They already have it in place FaT, with the June thirty deadline.

 

[foreveratiger]

I think the NRL are opening themselves up in Dangerous Territory by allowing Contracts to be broken.

Not for 1 minute am I suggesting that there isn't players out there with " Personal Matters " away from football that are breaking Contracts to accommodate such matters.

However take Parramatta for example they allow Keiron Foran to break up his contract due to issue's outside football, they had to offload player's such as Nathan Peats and Junior Paulo but that was due to Salary Cap breaches but had Foran gone before they could of potentially not had lost either of them…In the end they had no choice but Foran now will be in Warriors colours come Round 1 next year, is that fair? Some will say sucked in cause Parra broke some Salary Cap Rules.

Will Clubs and player's use this compassionate grounds card to break contract's? Hell yeah but the NRL should enforce a 1 year away from football if you have a legitimate reason, Contract's are easily broken these Days to suit Clubs and player's when it's convenient for either party.

Not an easy solution.

Maybe a "transfer trade period" can come into play during the Season where Clubs have a period to negotiate and release players from there Contracts if both parties agree.

They already have it in place FaT, with the June thirty deadline.

Yeah I know they do but I think something more of actually trading players.
Well your right FG cause they could use this practice if Clubs choose to.

 

[Nelson]

I think the NRL are opening themselves up in Dangerous Territory by allowing Contracts to be broken.

Not for 1 minute am I suggesting that there isn't players out there with " Personal Matters " away from football that are breaking Contracts to accommodate such matters.

However take Parramatta for example they allow Keiron Foran to break up his contract due to issue's outside football, they had to offload player's such as Nathan Peats and Junior Paulo but that was due to Salary Cap breaches but had Foran gone before they could of potentially not had lost either of them…In the end they had no choice but Foran now will be in Warriors colours come Round 1 next year, is that fair? Some will say sucked in cause Parra broke some Salary Cap Rules.

Will Clubs and player's use this compassionate grounds card to break contract's? Hell yeah but the NRL should enforce a 1 year away from football if you have a legitimate reason, Contract's are easily broken these Days to suit Clubs and player's when it's convenient for either party.

Not an easy solution.

Maybe a "transfer trade period" can come into play during the Season where Clubs have a period to negotiate and release players from there Contracts if both parties agree.

I don't see what the problem is, it's always an option for two parties to a contract to agree to release each other from their obligations under the contract.

 

[foreveratiger]

I think the NRL are opening themselves up in Dangerous Territory by allowing Contracts to be broken.

Not for 1 minute am I suggesting that there isn't players out there with " Personal Matters " away from football that are breaking Contracts to accommodate such matters.

However take Parramatta for example they allow Keiron Foran to break up his contract due to issue's outside football, they had to offload player's such as Nathan Peats and Junior Paulo but that was due to Salary Cap breaches but had Foran gone before they could of potentially not had lost either of them…In the end they had no choice but Foran now will be in Warriors colours come Round 1 next year, is that fair? Some will say sucked in cause Parra broke some Salary Cap Rules.

Will Clubs and player's use this compassionate grounds card to break contract's? Hell yeah but the NRL should enforce a 1 year away from football if you have a legitimate reason, Contract's are easily broken these Days to suit Clubs and player's when it's convenient for either party.

Not an easy solution.

Maybe a "transfer trade period" can come into play during the Season where Clubs have a period to negotiate and release players from there Contracts if both parties agree.

I don't see what the problem is, it's always an option for two parties to a contract to agree to release each other from their obligations under the contract.

IMO it does become a problem if the player wants to leave as Clubs manage there books and Salary Cap with plans that a certain player is going to honour there Contracts.

Also Clubs miss out on potential players they might want to purchase on the market place cause they think that player will be honouring there Contract.
In some situations these circumstances work for some Clubs as some players don't see out there true value and are happy to grant that release.

 

[Nelson]

IMO it does become a problem if the player wants to leave as Clubs manage there books and Salary Cap with plans that a certain player is going to honour there Contracts.

Also Clubs miss out on potential players they might want to purchase on the market place cause they think that player will be honouring there Contract.
In some situations these circumstances work for some Clubs as some players don't see out there true value and are happy to grant that release.

Yeah but the club doesn't have to agree to the release and they can make it conditional if they like. If they wanted to get even mildly creative about it they could include a term that the player not sign with another club within 6 months unless they receive compensation from the new club. There would probably be a restraint of trade argument about the validity of such a clause but it might hold. The point is that it's well open to the clubs to protect their interests more aggressively if they want to. I assume they don't out of self-interest (it might make them a less appealing option for players).

 

[foreveratiger]

IMO it does become a problem if the player wants to leave as Clubs manage there books and Salary Cap with plans that a certain player is going to honour there Contracts.

Also Clubs miss out on potential players they might want to purchase on the market place cause they think that player will be honouring there Contract.
In some situations these circumstances work for some Clubs as some players don't see out there true value and are happy to grant that release.

Yeah but the club doesn't have to agree to the release and they can make it conditional if they like. If they wanted to get even mildly creative about it they could include a term that the player not sign with another club within 6 months unless they receive compensation from the new club. There would probably be a restraint of trade argument about the validity of such a clause but it might hold. The point is that it's well open to the clubs to protect their interests more aggressively if they want to. I assume they don't out of self-interest (it might make them a less appealing option for players).

I agree with your thoughts Nelson

 

[galea_11]

seen coen hess 1st time in the finals . he is a future star play SOO nin 2 yrs at rate he played finals as a rookie

watched game with a raiders junior he said coen highly rated by in junior levels good luck cowboys losing him

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I think the NRL are opening themselves up in Dangerous Territory by allowing Contracts to be broken.

Not for 1 minute am I suggesting that there isn't players out there with " Personal Matters " away from football that are breaking Contracts to accommodate such matters.

However take Parramatta for example they allow Keiron Foran to break up his contract due to issue's outside football, they had to offload player's such as Nathan Peats and Junior Paulo but that was due to Salary Cap breaches but had Foran gone before they could of potentially not had lost either of them…In the end they had no choice but Foran now will be in Warriors colours come Round 1 next year, is that fair? Some will say sucked in cause Parra broke some Salary Cap Rules.

Will Clubs and player's use this compassionate grounds card to break contract's? Hell yeah but the NRL should enforce a 1 year away from football if you have a legitimate reason, Contract's are easily broken these Days to suit Clubs and player's when it's convenient for either party.

Not an easy solution.

Maybe a "transfer trade period" can come into play during the Season where Clubs have a period to negotiate and release players from there Contracts if both parties agree.

I don't see what the problem is, it's always an option for two parties to a contract to agree to release each other from their obligations under the contract.

IMO it does become a problem if the player wants to leave as Clubs manage there books and Salary Cap with plans that a certain player is going to honour there Contracts.

Also Clubs miss out on potential players they might want to purchase on the market place cause they think that player will be honouring there Contract.
In some situations these circumstances work for some Clubs as some players don't see out there true value and are happy to grant that release.

Clubs do the same. They'll move on players they feel they get no value out of. It works both ways.

 

[supercoach]

I can not see any problem with players requesting releases as CB said it works both ways and just like when a club wants to shop a player around, the player has the right to dig his heels in if he wants to stay put. In most cases a club will allow a player to walk because nobody wants a unhappy player, but they will also put some clauses in the release, because they do not want to give another club an advantage.

Anyway from where I sit he comes with way to much baggage and would not be cheap

 

[ricksen]

It's a tricky one, as the current system is abused by both players and clubs, as alluded to above.

But a genuine trading system would assist both sides IMO. Players would be less inclined to force a move if they didn't have complete control of where they'd be released to (full and semi-no trade clauses could protect the players on this a tad, if necessary), and clubs would get some compensation for losing juniors that want to move on to a bigger club for TPA $$ etc.
That's not even touching upon compensation for clubs developing jrs that then leave as free agents, but that's another rant for another day.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Mid season trade window would be useful.

Can't stop players and clubs renegotiating contract terms as long as both sides are happy to agree to the revised covenants.

 

[balmain boy]

Trading players would be an easy option, don't know why we can't when every other sport in the entire world allows this to happen!

And Hess will be playing Origin within 2 years no doubt. Massive talent, way ahead of any of our young back rowers.

 

[sheer64]

Gus really fought hard to get him to the Panthers over a long period of time.