Wests Tigers need to settle up with Robbie Farah so the NRL club can settle down

[foreveratiger]

I'm sure i've heard of that happening, but maybe it might be a case when a player retires from the game as to moving on.

In regards to the contract I don't mean deferring his payments, restructuring his contract with NRL approval so that even if he is at another club we would be paying out the remainder over a couple of years as oppose to in one hit as part of the new club deal?
Is that not possible?

How is it you can have some players that are still paid by a number of clubs?

Yes they could restructure the remaining year of the contract over a number of years, but Farah would have to be on board with that and I doubt he's feeling particularly amicable about any of this.

Why would he ? He would loose money in interest in whatever he chooses to invest his money .
Big difference getting all that money in 1 year as appose to over a number of years in regards with your interest in return.
His already sacrificed past Contracts to stay with the Club he ain't that stupid to even entertain this thought .

 

[innsaneink]

.

Please spare the game from the headlines of this ridiculous public spat.

Blame the media…. The club doesn't go to the media with this. Farahs manager however is a different story.
I agree tho... Just pay him and piss him off

 

[cktiger]

Pretty sure that Phil Gould speaks for himself (seriously, who in their right mind would think Ayoub would influence him to write an article) and knows more about how rugby league teams are run than anybody on this forum.
Saying that , he must know they could get the loot to pay him out - or he wouldn't suggest they did.
The thing that surprised me most was him calling Farah a mate.

 

[innsaneink]

I really can't understand it. The tigers have always said they'll pay him his money.

Is this the ayoub media machine again twisting the facts as to why Robbie was dumped?

Not the full amount to walk out the door. He asked for a release last year to walk and they refused.
They want someone to pay part of the contract **<big>but they also want a certain amount that clubs are not prepared to pay. So he and the club stay in limbo.</big>**
The smart thing would be to accept that and suck it up and use him.
Got nothing to do with Ayoib just another name people like to blame in this forum for this clubs dumb decisions.

What's the certain amount?

Please provide a link for this

 

[innsaneink]

I'm sure i've heard of that happening, but maybe it might be a case when a player retires from the game as to moving on.

In regards to the contract I don't mean deferring his payments, restructuring his contract with NRL approval so that even if he is at another club we would be paying out the remainder over a couple of years as oppose to in one hit as part of the new club deal?
Is that not possible?

How is it you can have some players that are still paid by a number of clubs?

Yes they could restructure the remaining year of the contract over a number of years, but Farah would have to be on board with that and I doubt he's feeling particularly amicable about any of this.

Why would he ? He would loose money in interest in whatever he chooses to invest his money .
Big difference getting all that money in 1 year as appose to over a number of years in regards with your interest in return.
His already sacrificed past Contracts to stay with the Club he ain't that stupid to even entertain this thought .

Settle petal.
It was merely a suggestion of what could be done under the rules…

 

[foreveratiger]

I'm sure i've heard of that happening, but maybe it might be a case when a player retires from the game as to moving on.

In regards to the contract I don't mean deferring his payments, restructuring his contract with NRL approval so that even if he is at another club we would be paying out the remainder over a couple of years as oppose to in one hit as part of the new club deal?
Is that not possible?

How is it you can have some players that are still paid by a number of clubs?

Yes they could restructure the remaining year of the contract over a number of years, but Farah would have to be on board with that and I doubt he's feeling particularly amicable about any of this.

Why would he ? He would loose money in interest in whatever he chooses to invest his money .
Big difference getting all that money in 1 year as appose to over a number of years in regards with your interest in return.
His already sacrificed past Contracts to stay with the Club he ain't that stupid to even entertain this thought .

Settle petal.
It was merely a suggestion of what could be done under the rules…

Nah your kidding :laughing:

Even to suggest the thought wouldn't even be entertained by someone with half a brain .

 

[Nelson]

Yes they could restructure the remaining year of the contract over a number of years, but Farah would have to be on board with that and I doubt he's feeling particularly amicable about any of this.

Why would he ? He would loose money in interest in whatever he chooses to invest his money .
Big difference getting all that money in 1 year as appose to over a number of years in regards with your interest in return.
His already sacrificed past Contracts to stay with the Club he ain't that stupid to even entertain this thought .

Settle petal.
It was merely a suggestion of what could be done under the rules…

Nah your kidding :laughing:

Even to suggest the thought wouldn't even be entertained by someone with half a brain .

Really, the interest? They could make a lump sum payment of the 2017 salary up front so that it was earning interest over the entire period (as opposed to a wage being paid over the entire calendar year) which would result in a negligible loss of interest, if any. Plus the overall tax burden would be lower if it were spread over two years as opposed to one (although not a lot less).

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Stupid question.

If we pay him out and release him, he's still counted in 2017 cap? Is there any cap relief to be gained whatsoever by just paying him out? If so, that's not an acceptable outcome for the club. The club won't just give him his $900K without any cap relief, and for another club to benefit from it.

Let's not forget that there is a minimum that a player like Farah will have to be registered for at another club. If it is say $400K, WT could realise some relief by only having to pay the difference of what he is owed for 2017\. If they were really that desperate to be rid of him, they could top it up with a bit more just to sweeten the deal.

 

[foreveratiger]

Nelson in regards with interest your correct .

Farah would have a good Account and if he was to buy a House for $900,000 and negative gears that he would be doing better when lodging his Tax return .
If he was to make some sort of agreement of getting $300,000 with the Club for the next 3 years his investments wouldn't be as good .

Then again why would you even consider doing such a thing after such events ?

I would much rather get that money in the one year as there is many things out there to invest your money on and without doubt he would be connected with an astute Financial adviser.

 

[Byron_Bay_Fan]

All this schmozzle is because other players were not pulling their weight and Farah as capt had the hide to tell them that it was not good enough. No wonder he got in poopy moods. He always performed 100% and sillily expected others to do likewise.

 

[balmain boy]

It's funny how the panthers didn't just pay Jennings out a few years ago. I seem to remember him playing origin and reserves the same year.
Soward get a full pay out this year? He played a bit of reserves too.

Very Hypocritical of Gus Gould.
As I've mentioned before he is a shrewd operator.
This is only to improve the Panthers position as the dominant team in the west.
None of his players have just been payed out.
Gus knows if we do this we can't keep the same side we've got or even if we manage to next year we can't improve our player ranks.
This will set us back a number of years.
In my opinion he is trying to force Justin Pascoe into making a move that will not benefit the tigers.

Whilst I agree it is getting beyond the joke, I cannot understand people can't accept that Robbie Farah is the first player to challenge the whole Salary Cap excuse and the system of shrewd retention and recruitment.
I doubt any club or coach in our position would be able to do anything otherwise.

Can anyone explain to me why the money that is so called owed to Robbie, which is totalling close to $400,000 over this year and next, (on the basis that everyone is saying Robbie is playing on 750,000 contract plus the money he's owed from earlier years) is required to be paid under this years salary cap and not able to be provided over later years through a job with the club?

Yes, as others have said Gus is looking after the Panthers and nothing more. Perhaps he's annoyed they missed out on Cherrington. When was the last time the Panthers simply released a player and paid them out in full? Not ET, nor Grant, Lewis, Gordon, Jennings to name a few. It is extremely rare to happen, he knows it and his ulterior motive is completely transparent.

 

[bobo125]

Gould can be a sticky character no doubt

the thing that is surprising me is - some of the people on this forum that dont like farah want him gone but dont want the club to pay him out

why ?

you say the club loses out if it pays him out …. how ?

as is, if he stays, he'll be playing in reserves
there can be no argument that if the team needs him he'll be recalled because right now... the team needs him.
there is no hooker ????

so if hes not playing in firsts and still being paid how is the club benefiting ??

i dont get it

If the coach is going to be at the tigers in 2017, the club needs to SUCK IT UP and pay Farah his money and end this circus once and for all

If the club knows something that we all dont about the coach and 2017 - thats a different story altogether ...

if not, end it... suck it up...pay him... puit this whole thing to bed once and for all !

 

[Geo]

purple monkey dishwasher Robbie…

 

[bobo125]

purple monkey dishwasher Robbie…

on the rocks geo ?

 

[Geo]

purple monkey dishwasher Robbie…

on the rocks geo ?

Makes as much sense as Gus's 2 cents…don't you think...?

 

[balmain boy]

Gould can be a sticky character no doubt

the thing that is surprising me is - some of the people on this forum that dont like farah want him gone but dont want the club to pay him out

why ?

you say the club loses out if it pays him out …. how ?

as is, if he stays, he'll be playing in reserves
there can be no argument that if the team needs him he'll be recalled because right now... the team needs him.
there is no hooker ????

so if hes not playing in firsts and still being paid how is the club benefiting ??

i dont get it

If the coach is going to be at the tigers in 2017, the club needs to SUCK IT UP and pay Farah his money and end this circus once and for all

If the club knows something that we all dont about the coach and 2017 - thats a different story altogether ...

if not, end it... suck it up...pay him... puit this whole thing to bed once and for all !

Because chances are Robbie doesn't want to retire just yet, which is what would effectively happen if we paid him out in full. We wouldn't let him play for another club if we pay him out so he'd be sitting around taking the cash but never playing again.

We're waiting for a club to come in and pay something like 400k of his contract so that we can put that towards re-signing ET and maybe get another player too.

Robbie's getting his money regardless. Yes paying him just under a million to play nsw cup is a waste of money and the club gets no value out of that. It's not what anyone wants. But paying him out in full is an absolute last resort.

 

[Nelson]

Gould can be a sticky character no doubt

the thing that is surprising me is - some of the people on this forum that dont like farah want him gone but dont want the club to pay him out

why ?

you say the club loses out if it pays him out …. how ?

as is, if he stays, he'll be playing in reserves
there can be no argument that if the team needs him he'll be recalled because right now... the team needs him.
there is no hooker ????

so if hes not playing in firsts and still being paid how is the club benefiting ??

i dont get it

If the coach is going to be at the tigers in 2017, the club needs to SUCK IT UP and pay Farah his money and end this circus once and for all

If the club knows something that we all dont about the coach and 2017 - thats a different story altogether ...

if not, end it... suck it up...pay him... puit this whole thing to bed once and for all !

The logic is:
- He is still a good player and has value on the market, he is just not a good fit (as claimed) for the Tigers side.
- Just paying him out means the club would wear the full amount off the salary cap for 2017.
- Just paying him out would mean he could turn around and play for another club against the Tigers and he is still a good player - strengthening opponents is not a good thing.
- The Tigers get some value out of playing him in reserves, and he's available for selection in first grade in the event of injuries/change of coach/change of heart/whatever.
- The Tigers probably expect that he is not actually prepared to sit the season in reggies and will want out because he thinks he should be playing first grade footy (which he should on ability and form).
- Some rival club will want him at some stage. St George, Cronulla or Parra may want him before the 2017 season starts. If not some other club will be hit with an injury at some point and he will be a very tempting option. The prospect of first grade footy will also be tempting for him. If another club wants him then the Tigers will not be paying full freight.
- His effort last Saturday in lashing out probably also opens up the possibility that he will do something over the coming months to trigger a termination.

 

[bobo125]

Because chances are Robbie doesn't want to retire just yet, which is what would effectively happen if we paid him out in full. We wouldn't let him play for another club if we pay him out so he'd be sitting around taking the cash but never playing again.

We're waiting for a club to come in and pay something like 400k of his contract so that we can put that towards re-signing ET and maybe get another player too.

Robbie's getting his money regardless. Yes paying him just under a million to play nsw cup is a waste of money and the club gets no value out of that. It's not what anyone wants. But paying him out in full is an absolute last resort.

im not technically up to speed like may others on this forum are so bare with me…...

if the club ends his contract and pays him out in full - they still can direct him not to play in the NRL again ??

I get the hope of another club picking him up - but we had this issue last year.
Almost 12 months exactly
most clubs have already spent or allocated their cap for 2017 so chances them having a spare 400k is remote

paying him out in full and ending this entire saga.... last resort... i get that... but as a club, as a team...as a circus...does anypne seriously want this to go on for another 12 months... ?

 

[cktiger]

Because chances are Robbie doesn't want to retire just yet, which is what would effectively happen if we paid him out in full. We wouldn't let him play for another club if we pay him out so he'd be sitting around taking the cash but never playing again.

We're waiting for a club to come in and pay something like 400k of his contract so that we can put that towards re-signing ET and maybe get another player too.

Robbie's getting his money regardless. Yes paying him just under a million to play nsw cup is a waste of money and the club gets no value out of that. It's not what anyone wants. But paying him out in full is an absolute last resort.

im not technically up to speed like may others on this forum are so bare with me…...

**if the club ends his contract and pays him out in full - they still can direct him not to play in the NRL again ??**

I get the hope of another club picking him up - but we had this issue last year.
Almost 12 months exactly
most clubs have already spent or allocated their cap for 2017 so chances them having a spare 400k is remote

paying him out in full and ending this entire saga.... last resort... i get that... but as a club, as a team...as a circus...does anypne seriously want this to go on for another 12 months... ?

If they paid him in full for next year they would be within their rights to stop him playing for another NRL team for that period.
Effectively they are paying him not to play.

 

[bobo125]

The logic is:
- He is still a good player and has value on the market, he is just not a good fit (as claimed) for the Tigers side.
- Just paying him out means the club would wear the full amount off the salary cap for 2017.
- Just paying him out would mean he could turn around and play for another club against the Tigers and he is still a good player - strengthening opponents is not a good thing.
- The Tigers get some value out of playing him in reserves, and he's available for selection in first grade in the event of injuries/change of coach/change of heart/whatever.
- The Tigers probably expect that he is not actually prepared to sit the season in reggies and will want out because he thinks he should be playing first grade footy (which he should on ability and form).
- Some rival club will want him at some stage. St George, Cronulla or Parra may want him before the 2017 season starts. If not some other club will be hit with an injury at some point and he will be a very tempting option. The prospect of first grade footy will also be tempting for him. If another club wants him then the Tigers will not be paying full freight.
- His effort last Saturday in lashing out probably also opens up the possibility that he will do something over the coming months to trigger a termination.

point by point….

yeps i get hes not a good fit the team as per the coaches directive

wearing the full amount in cap for 2017 - either way, if hes in reserves the team dosnt benefit unless hes playing ?

strengthening opponents is not a good - so the club dosnt want him but dosnt want anyone else to have him either ? ? ?

the value of having him play in reserves is questionable
if by chance he gets called up and plays a man of the match game - then the circus starts up in full flight again - "why is he playing in reserves, the coach is this and that... he we go again

the club thinks he wont be prepared to sit in reggies and want out ?
so the club is "hoping" by playing him in reggies he will quit and therefore get out of paying him his owed contracted money ?

hoping he will do something to trigger a termination ?
again... hoping to get out of paying his contract ?

can you see why this is so messy

i dont get it.... surely someone can see how ridiculous this all is and just say enough
pay him, the club moves on
the saga is over from the clubs point of view
the coach gets what he wants
and 2017 there is no farah issues at the club at all ?