NRL to Discuss New Rule re Breaking Contracts

[cochise]

So it looks like it’s going to happen. Do we think the RPLA will have a position that contracts should not be legally binding? It goes both ways, club and player. If players can break contracts then clubs should also be able to say no.

Imagine if we could tell packer and Josh, sorry you aren’t able to fulfil your contract because you can’t get a game in first grade.

No way the RLPA will agree to that so we will get some safety net thing for compassionate grounds.

We need proper safeguards against managers

There will be safety guards, you just won't be able to earn more money when you use them.

 

[the_third]

So it looks like it’s going to happen. Do we think the RPLA will have a position that contracts should not be legally binding? It goes both ways, club and player. If players can break contracts then clubs should also be able to say no.

Imagine if we could tell packer and Josh, sorry you aren’t able to fulfil your contract because you can’t get a game in first grade.

No way the RLPA will agree to that so we will get some safety net thing for compassionate grounds.

We need proper safeguards against managers

There will be safety guards, you just won't be able to earn more money when you use them.money

In all honesty it sounds good.

Maybe a panel for special consideration, a RLPA nominee, NRL nominee and a judge. Managers wouldn’t have a chance.

No more JAC garbage about how he wants to go for his family (unless he gets a hundred grand or so). Such a terrible example to set.

 

[Blake]

Manly were offering $700k a season to Aloiai for 2022 & 2023. It seems they will pay him $700k for 2021 if he can get a release. That is $2.1M over 3 years.
If the NRL says he can only leave if he doesn't earn more money in 2021 why wouldn't Manly just rearrange the contract to make it $350k, $875k, $875k for a total of 2.1M over 3 years? It is a back ended contract but every contract affected by this rule would have to be larger at the end when the current contract expired.

It would be much easier to add 50% of the players original contract to the destination clubs salary cap and compensate the origin club the same amount on their salary cap. This includes deterrent, fine and compensation.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

The NRL should follow the money.

 

[happy_tiger]

Still can't understand why we don't have a NRL representative at every club who is present at every contract talk / meeting

 

[TigerWest]

Still can't understand why we don't have a NRL representative at every club who is present at every contract talk / meeting

Not sure why you are thinking this, the club and the player’s managers are big boys, but the NRL do need to tighten the ability of the breaking of contracts for financial gain and they appear to have started this.

There are loop holes, probably need to keep amending them as they find them, if possible.

 

[happy_tiger]

Still can't understand why we don't have a NRL representative at every club who is present at every contract talk / meeting

Not sure why you are thinking this, the club and the player’s managers are big boys, but the NRL do need to tighten the ability of the breaking of contracts for financial gain and they appear to have started this.

There are loop holes, probably need to keep amending them as they find them, if possible.

Because the last comment this NRL rep makes to the player / player manager and club is " If this contract is broken in any way by any party involved in the player and player manager will be stood down for a minumum 2 years and the club playing for fun for 2 years " " and that includes receiving any external payemnts "

 

[TigerWest]

Still can't understand why we don't have a NRL representative at every club who is present at every contract talk / meeting

Not sure why you are thinking this, the club and the player’s managers are big boys, but the NRL do need to tighten the ability of the breaking of contracts for financial gain and they appear to have started this.

There are loop holes, probably need to keep amending them as they find them, if possible.

Because the last comment this NRL rep makes to the player / player manager and club is **" If this contract is broken in any way by any party involved in the player and player manager will be stood down for a minumum 2 years and the club playing for fun for 2 years "** " and that includes receiving any external payemnts "

Wow, you are a hard bugger aren’t you? I don’t think that would be legal would it?

 

[Newtown]

In practice, anything like this is going to be to difficult to legally enforce.

As others have pointed out, it's doubtful that the RLPA will ever agree either.

While it drives fans and management mad, I'll never begrudge a bloke who is able to earn more and provide for his family by moving clubs in what is relatively speaking, a short and risky career path.

It's about moving clubs for more money whilst still under contract. If it continues that some clubs (like Wests tigers) going down or (as happened with Wests Tigers) being stuck at the bottom end of the table for years on end.

 

[happy_tiger]

Still can't understand why we don't have a NRL representative at every club who is present at every contract talk / meeting

Not sure why you are thinking this, the club and the player’s managers are big boys, but the NRL do need to tighten the ability of the breaking of contracts for financial gain and they appear to have started this.

There are loop holes, probably need to keep amending them as they find them, if possible.

Because the last comment this NRL rep makes to the player / player manager and club is **" If this contract is broken in any way by any party involved in the player and player manager will be stood down for a minumum 2 years and the club playing for fun for 2 years "** " and that includes receiving any external payemnts "


Wow, you are a hard bugger aren’t you? I don’t think that would be legal would it?

If you scare the players badly enough they aren't likely to risk their careers are they

Balls in their court ...do the right thing ....accept how lucky you are to do something you love and get paid very well for it and you'll be right ...simples

 

[Papacito]

In practice, anything like this is going to be to difficult to legally enforce.

As others have pointed out, it's doubtful that the RLPA will ever agree either.

While it drives fans and management mad, I'll never begrudge a bloke who is able to earn more and provide for his family by moving clubs in what is relatively speaking, a short and risky career path.

I am no legal guy, but the club and the NRL are not begrudging anybody to earn more money (with in the rules) but my understanding is the players are being told you cannot break there contract (which I would have thought was illegal anyway) just to earn more money.

We will never know, but I wonder if JA (or Matterson) would have broken there contracts for no gain? Maybe it would force clubs to reconsider as well? Doubt it, but maybe.

Without getting into too much detail, I doubt a club would have a legal leg to stand on if, for instance, a rival comes in and offers a minimum wage bloke $400k per year but the club wants to enforce the original minimum wage contract.

But the person is on a contract, are not legally binding and would you not have a case against the other club for trying to coerce a player to break his current contract.

In your your example, what about the current clubs time, effort and money that has been put into the player, do they not count?

I don't begrudge any player chasing better money, but only when his current contract is finished.

They're all considerations that might come up If a case was taken to court.

My point is that the legal system looks beyond the "you signed a contract and have to stick by it" approach.

OK, then may as well not have them?

NRL contacts (or at least the last one I saw) had over 20 pages of conditions. While you may legally or practically be able to end a contract, you need to abide by the conditions while you're under contract.

 

[Papacito]

In practice, anything like this is going to be to difficult to legally enforce.

As others have pointed out, it's doubtful that the RLPA will ever agree either.

While it drives fans and management mad, I'll never begrudge a bloke who is able to earn more and provide for his family by moving clubs in what is relatively speaking, a short and risky career path.

There is nothing preventing this, sign one year contract, Unfortunately this means that if you have a poor season, get injured or standouts appear in your position your value goes down.

I won't begrudge a bloke having the right to change employers when there is more money available there. As long as the employer has the right to terminate an under performing employee at a set severance rate.

All great points.

I believe in NRL contracts that you're required to play to the 'best of your ability' or you risk the contract being terminated.

 

[Papacito]

In practice, anything like this is going to be to difficult to legally enforce.

As others have pointed out, it's doubtful that the RLPA will ever agree either.

While it drives fans and management mad, I'll never begrudge a bloke who is able to earn more and provide for his family by moving clubs in what is relatively speaking, a short and risky career path.

It's about moving clubs for more money whilst still under contract. If it continues that some clubs (like Wests tigers) going down or (as happened with Wests Tigers) being stuck at the bottom end of the table for years on end.

Every club has to deal with this, not just us.

This is why you see clubs offering contracted guys extended and improved deals. It's as much a tactic to stop other clubs poaching players as it is reward.

We did it a few years ago with Corey Thompson who we signed on minimum wage.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

This will be a good initiative if it happens.