PNG Chiefs discussion

Flippedy said:
Bringing PNG into the comp is becoming the the worst decision that the NRL has ever made. I’m sure it will rake in loads of money for them, which is probably all they’re worried about anyway, but all it’s done so far is unsettle all the other teams and make a mockery of contract negotiations. The team is literally going to be made up of players from other teams with little or no actual native PNG players in it, so what’s the point of it except $$$$.
Click to expand...
Ring back the 13 import rule.
 
Last edited:
Jedi_Tiger said:
strange as Stefano allegedly had an offer of 1 million from tigers and went to melbourne for 800k to be coached under Bellamy

I can't see why Hudson young can't say he wants to take 900k and go to png to be coached by Willie Peters
Click to expand...
They did say if their was a small amount of difference ( 100 k ) that they would accept the offer
 
wstigers11 said:
Am I right in thinking the AFL also distribute more revenue to struggling clubs? Unlike the NRL that gives every club rich or poor the same amount?
Click to expand...
They do, it's called the Club Funding Model. If a club is struggling they will step in via administration and financial support.

It's essential to ensure all their teams and fans are looked after.
 
Jedi_Tiger said:
strange as Stefano allegedly had an offer of 1 million from tigers and went to melbourne for 800k to be coached under Bellamy

I can't see why Hudson young can't say he wants to take 900k and go to png to be coached by Willie Peters
Click to expand...
Idk about the Melbourne deal but it’s different with png so they can’t abuse the tax free system by giving all the players unders on the cap but they would still end up with more money due to it being tax free
 
supercoach said:
So if we offer him 1.5mil and he has zero intention of signing with us that puts his cap value at 1.5 mil. Going to be extremely hard to put a genuine cap value on players and of course clubs will be able to work the system
Click to expand...
What we are willing to pay someone is not necessarily the market value as we do have to pay overs because we are an unattractive club. All of that is taken into consideration when assigning market value. the only time its black and white is when a player is walking out on a contract...they cant sign for less elsewhere...i.e. Luai.
 
jstigers said:
PNG can only compete by offering tax-free money. Who wants to live in a high crime 3rd world shithole where they have to live in a compound because all the local doctors and engineers make it unsafe unless there is a barbed-wire fence around the compound. Tax-free money is the only reason the PNG club doesn't die. As soon as they remove tax-free money, the club dies.
Click to expand...
Players won't last more than 1-2 seasons there. They will grab the big dollars for a couple years then go running asking for early releases on compassionate grounds.

It's not just the players to think about, their wives and children are basically going to be confined to a compound with not much to do. The schooling environment won't be great, their kids wont have the same upbringing and opportunities they have in Australia. Their education and social environment will completely change for the worse, and if your kid has any desire to play team sports and develop, they can say goodbye to that. They will get over it very quickly.

Just look at the struggles the Warriors have with retaining Australia players, they have at least one player a year asking to return to Australia on 'compassionate grounds' like AFB, Barnett, Walsh, Cleary etc etc. and Auckland is a nice a city.
 
Last edited:
The issue is the Chiefs have been TOO successful in attracting big name players...done a helluva lot better than Bears tbh in attracting names,and theyre not kicking off until a year later
But...just about everyone theyve hired will be north of 30 by 2028..all .got a lot of miles on the clock...most started NRL in their teens..some playing all year round with Rugby....
...and PNG clearly seen as a super top up.
Whether they have the physical capability and motivation to see out their contracts is questionable IMO,particularly living in a 3rd world country
Hudson Young is only 27..has upside in him and more top level achievement.....tho Canberra is not a huge upgrade on Port Moresby I understand
 
As long as they are made to maintain the Hunters team in Brisbane and made to have a Flegg do not care about PNG. West Tigers just need to get their house in Line.
 
Tom Shines said:
As you say … they attempted a draft in Rugby League 30 years ago , and the players didn’t cop it and went to court and won … Rugby League clubs are much more self interested than the AFL , and the players seem to have a louder voice ..it seriously wouldn’t last one offseason before someone challenged it … we see the behaviour of players trying to get out of contracts all the time … there would be no chance of some entitled wonder kid rookie going to some bottom feeder club he didn’t want to ..there is also Rugby Union as a viable option for them whereas AFL players only have one option

Yes , there is going to be strong and weak clubs … and I’m worried that our club is going to continue to be one of the weak ones … but I wouldn’t be relying on a draft to come along as a fix unfortunately
Click to expand...
Terry Hill was the one who challenged it
 
Wiz said:
Why was it OK for the storm to sign Stefano for $200k less than we offered but it’s not OK for the Chiefs to do it with Hudson Young?
Click to expand...
I don't think that's actually what the NRL are proposing, I have a feeling it's been misreported.

I am guessing it's the old rule where clubs can't register BS contracts; I don't think 900K vs 1.1M would count.

NRL also have internal metrics about what players are being paid (obviously they see every contract) and what is the going rate for certain calibre players.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 1,981 (members: 1, guests: 1,980)
Back
Top