Luke Lewis

[Regan]

Was talking to a mate of Luke Lewis the other day and was told that when he stops playing first grade he has a contract to be a trainer for the sharks at $250.000 a season for three years maybe the Tigers could do that to get around finding TPA's for players

 

[boonboon]

If true it needs to be emailed to the NRL as that is blatant salary cap cheating

 

[Demps]

Weak

Lewis sucks, over rated and over the hill.
He can run waters for the drug cheats.

 

[Eye_Of_Da_Tiger]

Would explain why Skandos been on our books for so long.In all seriousness the salary cap is a joke or at least it's treated like one. Clubs are not equall who ever finds the loopholes wins comps.Third party payments ,guaranteed jobs after footy, houses boats and cars, loading, and so on and so on.It's out of control.Its only sure to disadvantage the honest.

 

[angry_ant]

Think this happens with a lot of the bigger name players in clubs being 'guaranteed' jobs with the team after they finish. Isn't that the same scenario that led to Skandalis signing his final contract??

 

[Newtown]

If true it needs to be emailed to the NRL as that is blatant salary cap cheating

It is clearly happening everywhere to overcome the joke of a Cap which is not being enforced by the NRL I wonder who took over Schubert's job after he retired from the RL?

 

[happy_tiger]

Just remember this money would have to come from the salary cap to be an issue

They would be penalizing themselves by doing that

Where would the Sharks find 250 K a season to pay for a trainer ??

They are broke remember

 

[alexaki]

Even with all their cheating the good ole SHARKIES still can't be competitive…....

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.1.5_

 

[jirskyr]

I don't think it is cheating at all - it is fair to give someone a job if they aren't playing footy, even if it is crazy paid. How can NRL say Lewis isn't entitled to a post-career gig, even a shady one.

 

[cqtiger]

I don't think it is cheating at all - it is fair to give someone a job if they aren't playing footy, even if it is crazy paid. How can NRL say Lewis isn't entitled to a post-career gig, even a shady one.

You're just being sarspadidious, Jirskyr

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.1.5_

 

[TrueTiger]

If Lewis finishes playing and is unemployed why can't he take up the job at Sharkies,wouldn't it be totally different than playing and being in the cap…he would be in the coaching staff, I think..

I'm not right into salary cap,to confusing with TPAs etc... :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

Even though 250k is a hell of a lot as a trainer... 😱pen_mouth: 😱pen_mouth:

 

[softlaw]

If the future job has been promised to him, as an incentive to sign on to play now, then it's part of his expected earnings from that playing.
It therefore has to be declared.

 

[happy_tiger]

If the future job has been promised to him, as an incentive to sign on to play now, then it's part of his expected earnings from that playing.
It therefore has to be declared.

Only if it involves the salary cap

If it doesn't it means nothing , you can do any deal you wish

 

[supercoach]

These things have been going on for years and who knows if cleaning contracts, or service contracts have been given to relatives of our players as a sweetener in contract negotiations. Remember many years ago a famous Balmain player who wanted to remain a amateur as he wanted to try out for the olympics, mother was paid a motza to do the flowers at the league club. ( so it was rumored at the time).

I suppose it would be a big risk for a player to enter into this sort of agreement as nothing could be put on paper so the club could back out when the time came after his football life

 

[softlaw]

Anything that is part of the deal to get him to sign on to play has to be declared.

So if the sharks have said 'you play for $x per season and after that we will employ you for 3 years as a trainer for $750k' then that's all part of what he's being payed to play - ie. it's part of his remuneration package to play.
Same as if a team lines up a media job for a player's partner, on the proviso that they sign on to play.

Proving the link is the issue.

 

[happy_tiger]

Anything that is part of the deal to get him to sign on to play has to be declared.

So if the sharks have said 'you play for $x per season and after that we will employ you for 3 years as a trainer for $750k' then that's all part of what he's being payed to play - ie. it's part of his remuneration package to play.
Same as if a team lines up a media job for a player's partner, on the proviso that they sign on to play.

Proving the link is the issue.

Only if its salary cap related

If you want to pay someone 250 k to put out witches hats that your prerogative , but will probably send you broke

 

[Geo]

Anything that is part of the deal to get him to sign on to play has to be declared.

So if the sharks have said 'you play for $x per season and after that we will employ you for 3 years as a trainer for $750k' then that's all part of what he's being payed to play - ie. it's part of his remuneration package to play.
Same as if a team lines up a media job for a player's partner, on the proviso that they sign on to play.

Proving the link is the issue.

Only if its salary cap related

If you want to pay someone **250 k to put out witches hats** that your prerogative , but will probably send you broke

Thought this was about Luke Lewis not Royce Simmonds…

Anyway coaching staff/Trainers..S&C statsmen etc don't come under the salary cap you can pay them what you wish/afford....

 

[softlaw]

The issue isn;t if that $250k should count against the salary cap in 2 or 3 years time when he retires - it's whether that future employment guarantee was an inducement for him to sign to play now.

You can offer to pay them anything you want - however - if you are using that offer as an inducement for them to play for the club then it should be counted under the cap while they are playing. ie. "you agree to play for us for the next few years and we will guarantee you a $250k/yr job (doesn;t matter what sort of job) for three years afterwards." That is using the promise of future employment as an inducement to play for the club now.

I can;t find the full guidelines (if anyone can, please post a link), but this is the NRL page that provides a (very badly written) summary:
http://www.nrl.com/nrlhq/referencecentre/salarycap/tabid/10434/default.aspx

The relevant line summing up the overall approach the NRL applies is hidden away half way down the page:
"If a player is receiving money from any person as a way of inducing him to play for the club, then that money will be included in the Salary Cap."

ie. using a guaranteed future job offer to induce a player to play for the club should be counted. As I said above however, proving it is the issue. A nod and a wink of 'yeah, we'll look after you when you're playing days are over' is almost impossible to prove.

 

[happy_tiger]

Anything that is part of the deal to get him to sign on to play has to be declared.

So if the sharks have said 'you play for $x per season and after that we will employ you for 3 years as a trainer for $750k' then that's all part of what he's being payed to play - ie. it's part of his remuneration package to play.
Same as if a team lines up a media job for a player's partner, on the proviso that they sign on to play.

Proving the link is the issue.

Only if its salary cap related

If you want to pay someone **250 k to put out witches hats** that your prerogative , but will probably send you broke

Thought this was about Luke Lewis not Royce Simmonds…

Anyway coaching staff/Trainers..S&C statsmen etc don't come under the salary cap you can pay them what you wish/afford....

Royce looks after tennis balls ,Skando looks after witches hats

Don't confuse them Geo

It took Sheens years to train them

The day they got it wrong Payten missed a semi and we lost

 

[Geo]

Royce looks after tennis balls ,Skando looks after witches hats

Don't confuse them Geo

It took Sheens years to train them

The day they got it wrong Payten missed a semi and we lost

Sorry to burst you bubble Hap…It was actually Folkes who was responsible for Tennisballgate....Skando was still playing that year