Tigers boss says more play will mean more pay

G

Guest

Guest
Tigers boss says more play will mean more pay GLENN JACKSON
May 21, 2010

A 32-ROUND competition, in which every team plays each other twice and trial matches are scrapped, is one of a range of submissions that will be sent to the NRL today in a bid to overhaul the salary cap system.

Wests Tigers chief executive Stephen Humphreys will put forward the submission in the belief the players, who have long complained about being overworked, will warm to the prospect of playing more football if it means more rewards.

All clubs have until close of business today to provide submissions for salary cap reform to NRL chief executive David Gallop. Many proposals are expected to centre on rewarding long-serving players, changes to third-party arrangements and concessions for marquee stars, but Humphreys's model will be one of the left-field suggestions.

Another came from North Queensland boss Peter Parr, who suggested uniform match payments of $1000 or $2000 a game for every player on top of the current $4.1 million cap, the move designed to reward players who play more.

Humphreys's concept, though, will give the players even more time on the field. The game's newest chief executive believes a competition in which every team plays each other twice - at home and away and would include two byes - would be fairer and would increase revenue from broadcasters.

''I know the players have a heavy workload, but I think we should investigate this,'' Humphreys said.

He has proposed playing the extra six rounds early in the year - scheduling those matches at night and in four quarters because of the warmer weather. ''Clubs don't really earn anything of significance from the trials,'' Humphreys said. ''If we're going to be able to grow the cap, and not put the clubs at significant financial risk, we're going to have to grow the revenue - and you can do that by playing more games.

''Whilst the players may not love it, they might come around to it if it will fund an increase in the cap, and subsequently increases payments.''

He had canvassed some of his players for input about the idea.

''It all depends how you frame the question - if you ask, 'Do you think you should play more footy?' the answer will be no, but if the question is, 'If in order to get an increase in the cap, and an increase in payments, you were required to play a few extra games …' you get a different answer,'' he said.

Parr will suggest a model in which the cap remains about the same figure it is now. But under it all players competing across an NRL round would receive a uniform figure, the exact amount depending on how much extra the code receives from the new broadcast deal.

Parr believes the proposal would simplify the cap, doing away with a match payments system that often leads to minor breaches.

''And you won't see too many blokes pull out with a niggle,'' he said. ''It doesn't keep the stars, but we'd be about rewarding players for actually playing NRL.''

The suggestions from the club bosses will be presented to a five-man working party that has been given the job of recommending cap reform.
 

Mighty_Tiger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
3,284
Only problem I see with putting this as 32 rounds (each team plays 30 games + 2 byes) and being approved would be if we expanded like expected in 2yrs time (CC Bears and Perth) what happens then - we add another 4 rounds?

There has to be a limit to how many games can be played, increasing the round amount is a definate way in which revenue is increased seeing more money avaliable to players but how far do we take it?

There are other options being talked about such as current salary cap + 1-2k match payments per player, per round. Problem with this is thats another 1mil a year or there abouts to spend yet clubs already are finding it tough enough to make the salary cap spendeture possible

Be interesting to see what other options are thrown up today
 

innsaneink

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
38,221
Location
...ahead of you....
I hope theres no expansion any time soon, the talent is spread thin enough, and the amount of dud games were seeing now - we dont need more
 

tigergran

New member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
452
Hi everyone

I would welcome any plan that allows each team to play each other twice in the season. If it means no expansion, then so be it.

I hope it gets a positive reaction.

Tigergran
 

AndTheKungFoSing

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
2,579
Location
Behind You!
Put SOO and the ANZAC test at the end of the season… not during the season aswell...

I see absolutely no reason why teams cannot play each other twice, and why the season can't be extended... I doubt it'll get the nod though, but it should!
 

hadds75

New member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
507
32 weeks + semis is too long. You will get players playing without any passion.

You know you play your 32 weeks, then theres 4 weeks for semis, 2 week end of season trip, 4 week kangeroo tour for some, and that only leaves 10 weeks for time off and pre season.

I think the only option would be if this was the case, wed have to do an almost english premier league type style season where some weeks (not often) you play 2 games a week, say on wednesday night or somthing. This means you could still get the comp done in 25 weeks or so. It would obviously test out depth etc.
\
\
But there is one right point int his article and thats the current system isnt that fair if you only play half the teams twice. Obviously if you dont play melbourne or saints you are far bettter off than playing other teams
 

innsaneink

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
38,221
Location
...ahead of you....
@hadds75 said:
32 weeks + semis is too long. You will get players playing without any passion.

**You know you play your 32 weeks, then theres 4 weeks for semis, 2 week end of season trip, 4 week kangeroo tour for some, and that only leaves 10 weeks for time off and pre season.**

I think the only option would be if this was the case, wed have to do an almost english premier league type style season where some weeks (not often) you play 2 games a week, say on wednesday night or somthing. This means you could still get the comp done in 25 weeks or so. It would obviously test out depth etc.
\
\
But there is one right point int his article and thats the current system isnt that fair if you only play half the teams twice. Obviously if you dont play melbourne or saints you are far bettter off than playing other teams

So for half the comp they still get 20 weeks off….20 WEEKS!
I get 4
Too long my big fat aRze
 

Tiger_Watto

New member
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
10,717
Location
Maroochydore Qld
I dont think 34 weeks is the answer.

Somehow I'd like to see the NRL work something out so we can have a 'best of 3' Final series format for a Top 6 or 8?
 

Chadman_s_Ghost

New member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
552
I have a proposal that may be considered too 'extreme' for some league people, but I think it would work if teams would embrace it. I have stolen a little bit of Phil Gould's idea, and mixed it with a bit of NFL structure..

The NRL is reluctant to raise the salary cap, not because the NRL doesn't raise enough money- but because they are concerned that some clubs won't be able to spread their finances enough to cover an increase. Currently, all teams use their cap to pay for a squad of 25 players. This I would keep in place. What I would propose to help clubs stay competitive financially is take away probably their 2nd biggest cash drain- junior development. I propose that all funding to juniors, all competitions, all coaching clinics etc be paid for from the NRL coffers. No player under the age of 19 can be signed by an NRL club- they will be contracted to the NRL specifically.

Then, some time in January- you hold a 'rookie draft' for all players graduating out of the junior competitions. This would allow teams that have limited junior areas to choose from a wider range of players to bring into the club. All NRL clubs are still limited to 25 players, so for every youngster you want to select, you release a player from your current roster to fit them in. All players that have played in the NRL that have contracts that expire or are released, become free agents, able to sign anywhere they please- so long as they fit under the cap and the 25 players on the roster. Because there would be 2-3 players a year getting cut from NRL club rosters- the strength of secondary competitions like the Qld cup & Metro cup would increase- maybe increasing sponsership opportunities for those clubs that play in those leagues- as the skill of those leagues increases. Injured players (like Tim Moltzen for the Tigers) can be placed on Injured Reseve for a season, once they go on IR, their salary no longer counts against the salary cap. The club is then free to sign a player from a lower division club to fill the NRL club roster spot- up to the value of the salary cap minus the injured player.

Not sure of the logistics, or if it could work- but I think the theory is good. What do you think?
 

TigersFan4Life

New member
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Messages
752
If everyone plays each other twice they would have to reduce the number of teams in the finals. Playing 30 games and then letting the 8th placed team still have a chance to win it all would be ludicrous. They'd have to go back to the top 5, or a top 6 at most.

In addition, you could almost say that finals would become redundant if everyone played each other twice. Although the fact that some teams are disadvantaged due to rep duty has to be remembered, I guess.
 

magpie_mania

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
1,130
@cultured bogan said:
meh, can't have them playing too many rounds, they sook about player burnout enough as it is…

you go to any workplace in australia and ask the question do you want to earn $400,ooo working 8 months with four onths off or $400,000 working ten months with two months off.of course the players will say burnout e.t.c.to them i say boohoo wanna swap jobs.
 

alien

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
8,966
@magpie mania said:
you go to any workplace in australia and ask the question do you want to earn $400,ooo working 8 months with four onths off or $400,000 working ten months with two months off.of course the players will say burnout e.t.c.to them i say boohoo wanna swap jobs.

If each club gets more home games then the salary cap would increase because clubs would have more money to spend. So players would get more money.
 

AndTheKungFoSing

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
2,579
Location
Behind You!
@magpie mania said:
you go to any workplace in australia and ask the question do you want to earn $400,ooo working 8 months with four onths off or $400,000 working ten months with two months off.of course the players will say burnout e.t.c.to them i say boohoo wanna swap jobs.

How long will your professional career span?
 

alien

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
8,966
I like the idea of every team playing the other teams twice. If every team plays the others twice and there are no byes and the season starts at the start of March then the last Round would finish around the end of September. Which means the Grand Final would be played at the end of October. That leaves November for a few test matches. February for maybe a couple of trials and World Club Challenge (which should be at the NRL premiers home ground every other year). It would probably mean that players retire from playing a bit earlier but they would get payed a bit more every year so they still earn as much from the game.
 

prattenpark

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
947
The problem with any sort of draft is that it is considered a restraint of trade under the Trade Practices Act and requires agreement of the Players Associaiton (which they've also refused) and of the ACCC. Personally, I think rugby league is too tribal for that.

30 games a season just sounds like too many to me - would be last team standing. On a positive, Moltz would be back for the final few rounds.
 

magpie_mania

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
1,130
@kaiser said:
@magpie mania said:
you go to any workplace in australia and ask the question do you want to earn $400,ooo working 8 months with four onths off or $400,000 working ten months with two months off.of course the players will say burnout e.t.c.to them i say boohoo wanna swap jobs.

how long will your professional career span?

jobs are thrown at ex footballers.if they want them.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Humphreys' proposal for a longer season may have legs: officials
GLENN JACKSON
May 22, 2010

Wests Tigers chief executive Stephen Humphreys' pitch for a new 32-round competition to fix the game's salary cap woes has received support - albeit qualified - from a range of the top officials in the game - even the representative of the players.

Humphreys told the Herald yesterday that he had submitted a proposal to NRL boss David Gallop that the game embrace an extended competition which would involve every club playing each other twice, at home and away. That would give the code significantly greater earning capacity from broadcasters and sponsors, although it could come at a cost - already weary stars would have to play more football.

It was given some support yesterday from other chief executives - who had until close of business yesterday to submit their own proposals for salary cap reform to Gallop.

Gallop, who met senior players Petero Civoniceva and Darren Lockyer yesterday to discuss their concerns over player payments, also said the suggestion would be considered.

''More rounds of football has obvious benefits, but there's also significant downsides in asking players to play more,'' Gallop said. ''But we're happy to throw that into the mix.''

While not wishing to endorse the plan - or dismiss it - David Garnsey, the chief executive of the RLPA (Rugby League Players' Association) also said it had merits.

''There's a major concern about burnout in our game and adding games doesn't help that, but a lot of that concern revolves around fixtures which are squashed together, with players backing up within 24 or 48 hours,'' Garnsey said. ''If that were to be contemplated, the competition structure would have to be revamped so that players would not have to back up within, 24, 48 or even 72 hours.

''I'm not dismissing it. I'm receptive to all new ideas and there's certainly an attraction with a true home and away competition. A lot of people would love that, as a means of fairness.''

Bulldogs chief executive Todd Greenberg gave firmer support.

''If the trials were scrapped, that gives you three or four more weeks anyway, so that would give you 30 weeks without really blinking. I think it should absolutely be on the table to consider,'' said Greenberg, who like Humphreys had sought submissions from members and sponsors to offer up to the NRL yesterday. ''The common theme is that there's got to be more money available for the grant and the cap to be closer together.''

Gallop was in Coolum yesterday to meet disgruntled players. Both Civoniceva - who has taken on a role effectively representing the player group - and Lockyer have expressed frustration at the lack of equality between rugby league payments and those of other sports.

The two players, in camp with Queensland before Wednesday night's first State of Origin, spoke with Gallop about the bread-and-butter salary cap gripes of representative payments and third party agreements during their meeting.

''It was an opportunity to discuss the game's financial position, and the review of the salary cap,'' Gallop said. ''My advice was that they work on integrating their views with those of the RLPA so that as much as possible they present a single response to some of the issues.

''We discussed the pros and cons of some of the ideas that have been tossed up around the structure of the season. Many of their ideas were very good ones, and they will certainly be put into the mix as we go forward over the next few weeks.''

South Sydney chief executive Shane Richardson, on the working party charged with leading reform, said he hoped that the cap would be simplified. ''We don't need to throw it out, we need to streamline it, make it simpler, clearer,'' Richardson said. ''It's there as a tool for the business plan of the game, not to beat you around the head with.''
 

Latest posts

Members online

Top