NRL agrees to review third-party agreements in a bid to end salary cap rorting

[Tiger_Watto]

You can not stop players earning an income from their own intellectual property..

Would not happen in any other industry…

Exactly… The NRL are flogging a dead horse if they think they are going to dictate terms of money to the Athletes & the RLPA from outside the game.

The NRL need to review why they have a Salary Cap first and foremost. Its obvious the 'even playing field', 'ensure clubs spend within their means' etc isnt working.

They need to knuckle down and come up with a new system before the next EBA to ensure they can move past this 'money' problem. While money is involved, they will never achieve the desired outcome.

 

[happy_tiger]

You can not stop players earning an income from their own intellectual property..

Would not happen in any other industry…

Then let them do it off their own backs ….. not club or player management involvement

Bring back the draft , bloody Tezza Hill :imp:

 

[underdog]

You can not stop players earning an income from their own intellectual property..

Would not happen in any other industry…

Then let them do it off their own backs ….. not club or player management involvement

Bring back the draft , bloody Tezza Hill :imp:

Exactly what geo said AND exactly what Happy said.

Having said that they need to scrutinise who organises the deal - the only two persons that should be allowed to be involved in TPAs are the player or their manager. No-one else - Club officials cannot get involved.

 

[jirskyr]

The champion data of the salary cap is "no consecutive premiers in the NRL era".

What is interesting beyond that is only 7 unique teams have played consecutive GFs (Roosters 02-03, Roosters 03-04, Melb 06-07, Melb 07-08, Manly 07-08, Melb 08-09, Melb 16-17), with only 3 clubs having achieved it at all.

Not completely surprising the link between continued GF presence and salary cap rorting - Melbourne confirmed SC rorters, Manly now reported SC rorters, Roosters…

Managing the cap is like real police work - always understaffed and under resourced compared with the criminals. But eventually you catch a significant proportion of them, especially the ongoing offenders. Roosters are super-smart operators but I would not at all be surprised if something came up over the next few years.

Anyhow TPAs as part of the rorting - sure, we expect that. Is it a huge issue? I would say no, the salary cap does work, it's just a pain to police it. But what other option do you have? I'm supportive of a TPA review, you can say it's all talk, but anything is better than nothing. I personally think ongoing scrutiny of TPAs will eventually bring down the dodgy ones, and clubs will try to look elsewhere to exploit the rules.

So overall I feel TPAs appear to annoy supporters more than actually being a major black mark against the code. People guess that clubs MUST be over the cap but nobody can prove it. So let's continue to take steps to scrutinise / police the TPAs and not get in the way with complaints or snide comments?

We have to remember also the NRL has to work with the RLPA. So not only can they not shut down TPAs, as Geo said, but there's a limit to which they can demand transparency without the RLPA buy-in.

Have people not noticed the increase in power / profile of the RLPA in direct parallel with the increased TV revenues, existence of the ARLC and increased efforts of the NRL to manage / police salaries? It is the players' legal option to control NRL power - you heard it from Jimmy Maloney, they are trying to get in front of the code issues.

So in that respect I sympathise with the NRL, they have a lot of powerful members to contend with and can't just summarily make changes. I would expect that actually the Manly salary cap issue gives NRL more political clout to start making changes, changes they've probably had tabled for some time.

 

[barra]

The champion data of the salary cap is "no consecutive premiers in the NRL era".

What is interesting beyond that is only 7 unique teams have played consecutive GFs (Roosters 02-03, Roosters 03-04, Melb 06-07, Melb 07-08, Manly 07-08, Melb 08-09, Melb 16-17), with only 3 clubs having achieved it at all.

Not completely surprising the link between continued GF presence and salary cap rorting - Melbourne confirmed SC rorters, Manly now reported SC rorters, Roosters…

Managing the cap is like real police work - always understaffed and under resourced compared with the criminals. But eventually you catch a significant proportion of them, especially the ongoing offenders. Roosters are super-smart operators but I would not at all be surprised if something came up over the next few years.

Anyhow TPAs as part of the rorting - sure, we expect that. Is it a huge issue? I would say no, the salary cap does work, it's just a pain to police it. **But what other option do you have?** I'm supportive of a TPA review, you can say it's all talk, but anything is better than nothing. I personally think ongoing scrutiny of TPAs will eventually bring down the dodgy ones, and clubs will try to look elsewhere to exploit the rules.

So overall I feel TPAs appear to annoy supporters more than actually being a major black mark against the code. People guess that clubs MUST be over the cap but nobody can prove it. So let's continue to take steps to scrutinise / police the TPAs and not get in the way with complaints or snide comments?

We have to remember also the NRL has to work with the RLPA. So not only can they not shut down TPAs, as Geo said, but there's a limit to which they can demand transparency without the RLPA buy-in.

Have people not noticed the increase in power / profile of the RLPA in direct parallel with the increased TV revenues, existence of the ARLC and increased efforts of the NRL to manage / police salaries? It is the players' legal option to control NRL power - you heard it from Jimmy Maloney, they are trying to get in front of the code issues.

So in that respect I sympathise with the NRL, they have a lot of powerful members to contend with and can't just summarily make changes. I would expect that actually the Manly salary cap issue gives NRL more political clout to start making changes, changes they've probably had tabled for some time.

The other option is player ratings/values.

Transparent, based on facts and no restraint of trade etc.

 

[sheer64]

Not holding my breath.

 

[steve-o]

I'm not holding my breath either. They've done reviews into TPAs before (one of them was led by the storm's CEO), and nothing ever comes of them. What Kul said is exactly right. The NRL should've centralized player payments years ago. What's the point in passing on the cap funding for each club to then use their own payroll system to then pay the players? Centralizing player payments out of NRL quarters will not only mitigate against salary cap rorting and dodge TPAs, but it will also save the game money through the standardization of the payroll process!
If the NRL decide they don't want to abolish TPAs, the very least they need to do is provide complete transparency.
The NRL can absolutely limit players from earning extra money from their IP… All they need to do is have it agreed to in the CBA (which would no doubt be difficult to get the RLPA to agree to). Unfortunately the new CBA has just been signed (hasn't it?), so nothing will change for a further 5 years.
This game makes me sad. So much potential, all ruined by a useless administration, greedy players/managers and self interested club powerbrokers.

 

[Fraze23]

If the NRL want to regulate TPA's in a fair way then they should be arranged through the NRL and not the club. The players are entitled to earn whatever they can, that isn't the issue. The issue is with clubs organising the TPA to subsidise salaries. If a TPA really is from a third party and independent of the club (like they're meant to be) and they really wanted player x involved with their business, then surely it wouldn't be a problem to arrange that through the governing body and not the individual club.

 

[gallagher]

If the NRL want to regulate TPA's in a fair way then they should be arranged through the NRL and not the club. The players are entitled to earn whatever they can, that isn't the issue. The issue is with clubs organising the TPA to subsidise salaries. If a TPA really is from a third party and independent of the club (like they're meant to be) and they really wanted player x involved with their business, then surely it wouldn't be a problem to arrange that through the governing body and not the individual club.

But you could see why a business based in Melb would only want to provide a TPA to a Melb based player.

 

[supercoach]

You can not stop players earning an income from their own intellectual property..

Would not happen in any other industry…

Then let them do it off their own backs ….. not club or player management involvement

Bring back the draft , bloody Tezza Hill :imp:

Bloody Dennis Tutty…bring back the transfer fee !!

 

[mike]

PR exercise. Never undertake a review or form a committee unless you know what the outcome will be.

You are a fan of Yes Mnister I see.

 

[diedpretty]

You can not stop players earning an income from their own intellectual property..

Would not happen in any other industry…

Thats just BS Geo when you have an 81 yr old granny stumping up TPAs - she says Foran was on her books for 3 years - doing what? helping her with the crosswords? maybe the knitting…......

 

[Geo]

You can not stop players earning an income from their own intellectual property..

Would not happen in any other industry…

Thats just BS Geo when you have an 81 yr old granny stumping up TPAs - she says Foran was on her books for 3 years - doing what? helping her with the crosswords? maybe the knitting…......

That is illegal and deserves to be busted for..

I'm talking about players legally earning money from their own Brand..Billy Slater and Gatorade for example nothing to do with Storm or playing for the Storm..that can not and should not be restricted…

 

[Fraze23]

If the NRL want to regulate TPA's in a fair way then they should be arranged through the NRL and not the club. The players are entitled to earn whatever they can, that isn't the issue. The issue is with clubs organising the TPA to subsidise salaries. If a TPA really is from a third party and independent of the club (like they're meant to be) and they really wanted player x involved with their business, then surely it wouldn't be a problem to arrange that through the governing body and not the individual club.

But you could see why a business based in Melb would only want to provide a TPA to a Melb based player.

And they still would and could. What I am suggesting is they would go through the NRL rather than the Storm, making it a genuine third party, not a dodgy deal organised by the clubs on the side.

 

[InBenjiWeTrust]

The other option is player ratings/values.

Transparent, based on facts and no restraint of trade etc.

Agree, a nominal value of each player can be calculated, and the total value of 30 players. If this value is above the agreed limit - a club is in breach and has to sell players or is automatically disqualified.
The nominal value of each player is adjusted at the end of the season.
So if a club is successful, wins a title, has many representative players it will be forced to sell some of the players if it wants to compete in the next season.
In this system there is no limit on players payments (TPA or whatever).
The criteria for determination of the nominal value shall be transparent and unchanged for the season.
For instance, HB or FB can be priced on different scale than wingers or props. This value may consist of the real stats e.g. number of tries, try assists, break assists, line breaks, meters run, tackles/missed tackles. Additional criteria can be selection to national team/SOO, this could be adjusted based on the team success e.q, Qld wins SOO all players involved are valued more, or if Australia wins WC all Aus rep players are valued more than teams from NZ, Tonga etc.
One of the consequences could be the contract duration, as each club will readjust after each season.

 

[Furious1]

The champion data of the salary cap is "no consecutive premiers in the NRL era".

What is interesting beyond that is only 7 unique teams have played consecutive GFs (Roosters 02-03, Roosters 03-04, Melb 06-07, Melb 07-08, Manly 07-08, Melb 08-09, Melb 16-17), with only 3 clubs having achieved it at all.

Not completely surprising the link between continued GF presence and salary cap rorting - Melbourne confirmed SC rorters, Manly now reported SC rorters, Roosters…

Managing the cap is like real police work - always understaffed and under resourced compared with the criminals. But eventually you catch a significant proportion of them, especially the ongoing offenders. Roosters are super-smart operators but I would not at all be surprised if something came up over the next few years.

Anyhow TPAs as part of the rorting - sure, we expect that. Is it a huge issue? I would say no, the salary cap does work, it's just a pain to police it. **But what other option do you have?** I'm supportive of a TPA review, you can say it's all talk, but anything is better than nothing. I personally think ongoing scrutiny of TPAs will eventually bring down the dodgy ones, and clubs will try to look elsewhere to exploit the rules.

So overall I feel TPAs appear to annoy supporters more than actually being a major black mark against the code. People guess that clubs MUST be over the cap but nobody can prove it. So let's continue to take steps to scrutinise / police the TPAs and not get in the way with complaints or snide comments?

We have to remember also the NRL has to work with the RLPA. So not only can they not shut down TPAs, as Geo said, but there's a limit to which they can demand transparency without the RLPA buy-in.

Have people not noticed the increase in power / profile of the RLPA in direct parallel with the increased TV revenues, existence of the ARLC and increased efforts of the NRL to manage / police salaries? It is the players' legal option to control NRL power - you heard it from Jimmy Maloney, they are trying to get in front of the code issues.

So in that respect I sympathise with the NRL, they have a lot of powerful members to contend with and can't just summarily make changes. I would expect that actually the Manly salary cap issue gives NRL more political clout to start making changes, changes they've probably had tabled for some time.

The other option is player ratings/values.

Transparent, based on facts and no restraint of trade etc.

Absolutely barra. Ive said it before a few times on this forum. Point value per player. Clubs have a quota they can fill up too. No restriction on what players can earn and it spreads the talent.

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I think a fair few of us are forgetting one major thing .
Any attempts to change TPAs will result in legal action by players .
As far as I know they can’t be banned in any way, as it would be a restraint of trade .
If things got really hairy , the players could torpedo the Salarycap as well, as that’s also illegal.
It only works now because the players accept it. Same as the AFL.

 

[JD Tiger]

You can change it without the players throwing tantrums (which they are prone to do).

Centralising it is a good idea that's come up in this forum. Cut the clubs out. Let the players know any payments from the club are against the rules and both club and player will be smashed hard. (Like police officers/ judges and bribes are meant to be smashed hard)

There are ways to do it, but the biggest problem I see, is that I doubt whether the NRL wants to do it. They appear as corrupt and as influenced by powerbrokers as some of the bigger clubs are.

 

[momo_amp_medo]

You can change it without the players throwing tantrums (which they are prone to do).

Centralising it is a good idea that's come up in this forum. Cut the clubs out. Let the players know any payments from the club are against the rules and both club and player will be smashed hard. (Like police officers/ judges and bribes are meant to be smashed hard)

There are ways to do it, but the biggest problem I see, is that I doubt whether the NRL wants to do it. They appear as corrupt and as influenced by powerbrokers as some of the bigger clubs are.

It’s never going to be a perfect system. This may be the approach which will get us close…... if ...... the NRL has the balls to implement.
As I said before I doubt that will happen whilst Greenberg and Politis of this world are in control and with influence.

 

[jirskyr]

The other option is player ratings/values.

Transparent, based on facts and no restraint of trade etc.

Absolutely barra. Ive said it before a few times on this forum. Point value per player. Clubs have a quota they can fill up too. No restriction on what players can earn and it spreads the talent.

Problem is player ratings are subjective and would be constantly debated. Who sets them, the NRL? Based on what algorith? And what if you don't agree with or support a given rating? Can a player's rating change over the course of a season? Do you get ratings discounts for club juniors?

Or what happens if you bring on a kid in year 1 as a junior and he tears it up, and in year 2 the NRL tells you he's suddenly gone from 4 points to 9 points based on the previous season, and you have to shed the player because you don't have cap space for a 9?

Are there any sports codes in the world that enforce a player rating cap on teams like this?

And you do end up with a restraint of trade regardless, because players would not be allowed to take pay cuts to play where they wish. If NRL said Thurston was worth 10 in his last contract year, if no club had space for a 10, he'd be out of a job, he couldn't play as a 7 for a salary that suited him.

Players would end up being offered salaries roughly based on their NRL grading, which could then be subject to legal proceedings - that the NRL is stopping Player X from earning money because they won't change their grading.

I'd argue loyalty between players and clubs would decrease even further, because players and clubs could not come to an internal arrangement on reimbursement, they'd be subject to NRL intervention. So if Moses Suli ends up becoming a star, he might want to stay with his mates and junior club at Tigers for a lower salary, but NRL would only permit that if Tigers had sufficient grading cap space, i.e. the deal isn't up to the players, it becomes up to the NRL and how lucky clubs are with their predictions of grading.

For example right now you have salary cap confidence when you sign X players for Y seasons for Z dollar - you know the bulk of the payments you are going to make under the cap in the short-term. But with player gradings, these could change unpredictably year on year, or even within a given year - it all gets taken out of the club's hands.

And you'll still end up with the Broncos and Roosters signing up the best of the 10s, best of the 9s, best of the 8s, best of the 7s etc.