Joined
Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Contracts read more

Flanagan cant coach dragons this year, even if Mary goes first week.

posted in Contracts read more

Thank God. Talk about dodging a bullet!

posted in Contracts read more

Not a fan, never will be with his attitude.

As a player and a person, seems to want everything given to him with little effort. if he was better than that, Roosters would be trying harder, its that simple.

posted in Contracts read more

If this happens, I’m done. This bloke is an overrated, untalented coward who is not prepared to put his body in the way. This has to be a bad joke.

posted in Contracts read more

I think the biggest problem is his manager…hmmmm…I wonder who that is…

posted in General Rugby League read more

@Cultured_Bogan said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@Swordy said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@Cultured_Bogan said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@Swordy said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@jirskyr said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@supercoach said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@Swordy said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

Can be fixed tomorrow. Players get rated by NRL using a points system.

You can pay them whatever you want, but they have a point value and each team has a points limit of 1000.

“Sorry Teddy, we can pay you 3mil a year of course, but we only have points space of 30, and you are rated at 80 points.”

That would soon sort the crap about money. But you know it won’t happen. RLPA will see it as a way of restricting player rights and will sooky la la. You know who runs the game anyway. Thugs, grubs and germs pretending to be upstanding citizens.

I have been beating this drum for years. If we can’t have a transfer system and a draft system due restraint of trade…we must have a point system

Discussed many times including a week or two ago - it won’t work.

Bet your bottom dollar that arbitrary points allocation to players would be challenged in court - it’s a potential restraint in trade just like anything else.

Already the amount of complete nonsense about the NRL getting referees to influence outcomes, literally every bad call nowadays and some muppet says “oh the NRL clearly wants TEAM X to win”.

Imagine the furore over NRL-decided player ratings!

Points systems are essentially fantasy football - rate a player based on certain criteria that somebody deems to be worth something. What about Origin footballers vs Kangaroos? Tackle busts vs line breaks? Tries vs goals?

If you say that Tedesco is worth 80 points, that limits his capacity to earn, literally. It may points-price him out and he’d have no options, he wouldn’t be able to take a pay cut if he decided that was worthwhile.

And what about changes in player form over a season, or over the course of their contract? How can you plan for the future adequately if you sign Kalyn Ponga to a 4-year deal starting at 30 points and at the end he is worth 100 points?

And with no control on the actual money, just watch Broncos and Roosters sign all the best players in each points bracket.

@jirskyr I disagree. It’s no more a restraint of trade any more than the current salary cap. In fact, a players ability to earn is better because there is no monetary restriction on earnings whatsoever.
You could certainly argue the points allocation, but not on the basis of money. How they are allocated would be difficult, I certainly concede that, but they would be far more consistent and morally reliable than the current money only system which is common knowledge its being cheated.
The only other alternative which makes it difficult, but not impossible, is to publish salaries and connect them to the ATO…which will never happen.

Unless the net total points of all players available in the league equal or are less than the salary cap points available it is a restraint of trade.

Say a talented young player coming through grades starts off a with small points value and then has a break out year or two under contract, gets re-rated for his next contract at much higher value, and all clubs have expended their cap allocations for the period when his next contract is up for negotiation, he gets run out of the game.

Point allocation to players would be a totally arbitrary system because workhorses and stat padders would go for astronomical values and could also be run out of the game when every team has and needs those types of players.

So how is that different to having a salary cap with money? I don’t understand.

I get the bit about valuing older players etc, but thats when one club player, veteran allowances etc come into it, the same as it does now.

Because you can’t limit a players earning power under the current system. TPA’s can sponsor players if they so wish. You can shut out players entirely under a points system.

I see what youre saying. I’m not stupid, just playing devils advocate. There must be a way to make it work because the current system does not and is rife with fraud.
I understand the trade system has to work with the salary cap, but one without the other doesnt cut it, and I know the trade system has been challenged and defeated. But it doesnt mean you cant use it. It is used in many other sports, its just that the players association has agreed not to dispute it in those sports.

posted in General Rugby League read more

@Cultured_Bogan said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@Swordy said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@jirskyr said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@supercoach said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@Swordy said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

Can be fixed tomorrow. Players get rated by NRL using a points system.

You can pay them whatever you want, but they have a point value and each team has a points limit of 1000.

“Sorry Teddy, we can pay you 3mil a year of course, but we only have points space of 30, and you are rated at 80 points.”

That would soon sort the crap about money. But you know it won’t happen. RLPA will see it as a way of restricting player rights and will sooky la la. You know who runs the game anyway. Thugs, grubs and germs pretending to be upstanding citizens.

I have been beating this drum for years. If we can’t have a transfer system and a draft system due restraint of trade…we must have a point system

Discussed many times including a week or two ago - it won’t work.

Bet your bottom dollar that arbitrary points allocation to players would be challenged in court - it’s a potential restraint in trade just like anything else.

Already the amount of complete nonsense about the NRL getting referees to influence outcomes, literally every bad call nowadays and some muppet says “oh the NRL clearly wants TEAM X to win”.

Imagine the furore over NRL-decided player ratings!

Points systems are essentially fantasy football - rate a player based on certain criteria that somebody deems to be worth something. What about Origin footballers vs Kangaroos? Tackle busts vs line breaks? Tries vs goals?

If you say that Tedesco is worth 80 points, that limits his capacity to earn, literally. It may points-price him out and he’d have no options, he wouldn’t be able to take a pay cut if he decided that was worthwhile.

And what about changes in player form over a season, or over the course of their contract? How can you plan for the future adequately if you sign Kalyn Ponga to a 4-year deal starting at 30 points and at the end he is worth 100 points?

And with no control on the actual money, just watch Broncos and Roosters sign all the best players in each points bracket.

@jirskyr I disagree. It’s no more a restraint of trade any more than the current salary cap. In fact, a players ability to earn is better because there is no monetary restriction on earnings whatsoever.
You could certainly argue the points allocation, but not on the basis of money. How they are allocated would be difficult, I certainly concede that, but they would be far more consistent and morally reliable than the current money only system which is common knowledge its being cheated.
The only other alternative which makes it difficult, but not impossible, is to publish salaries and connect them to the ATO…which will never happen.

Unless the net total points of all players available in the league equal or are less than the salary cap points available it is a restraint of trade.

Say a talented young player coming through grades starts off a with small points value and then has a break out year or two under contract, gets re-rated for his next contract at much higher value, and all clubs have expended their cap allocations for the period when his next contract is up for negotiation, he gets run out of the game.

Point allocation to players would be a totally arbitrary system because workhorses and stat padders would go for astronomical values and could also be run out of the game when every team has and needs those types of players.

So how is that different to having a salary cap with money? I don’t understand.

I get the bit about valuing older players etc, but thats when one club player, veteran allowances etc come into it, the same as it does now.

posted in General Rugby League read more

@jirskyr said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@supercoach said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

@Swordy said in Politis slams “jealous” critics:

Can be fixed tomorrow. Players get rated by NRL using a points system.

You can pay them whatever you want, but they have a point value and each team has a points limit of 1000.

“Sorry Teddy, we can pay you 3mil a year of course, but we only have points space of 30, and you are rated at 80 points.”

That would soon sort the crap about money. But you know it won’t happen. RLPA will see it as a way of restricting player rights and will sooky la la. You know who runs the game anyway. Thugs, grubs and germs pretending to be upstanding citizens.

I have been beating this drum for years. If we can’t have a transfer system and a draft system due restraint of trade…we must have a point system

Discussed many times including a week or two ago - it won’t work.

Bet your bottom dollar that arbitrary points allocation to players would be challenged in court - it’s a potential restraint in trade just like anything else.

Already the amount of complete nonsense about the NRL getting referees to influence outcomes, literally every bad call nowadays and some muppet says “oh the NRL clearly wants TEAM X to win”.

Imagine the furore over NRL-decided player ratings!

Points systems are essentially fantasy football - rate a player based on certain criteria that somebody deems to be worth something. What about Origin footballers vs Kangaroos? Tackle busts vs line breaks? Tries vs goals?

If you say that Tedesco is worth 80 points, that limits his capacity to earn, literally. It may points-price him out and he’d have no options, he wouldn’t be able to take a pay cut if he decided that was worthwhile.

And what about changes in player form over a season, or over the course of their contract? How can you plan for the future adequately if you sign Kalyn Ponga to a 4-year deal starting at 30 points and at the end he is worth 100 points?

And with no control on the actual money, just watch Broncos and Roosters sign all the best players in each points bracket.

@jirskyr I disagree. It’s no more a restraint of trade any more than the current salary cap. In fact, a players ability to earn is better because there is no monetary restriction on earnings whatsoever.
You could certainly argue the points allocation, but not on the basis of money. How they are allocated would be difficult, I certainly concede that, but they would be far more consistent and morally reliable than the current money only system which is common knowledge its being cheated.
The only other alternative which makes it difficult, but not impossible, is to publish salaries and connect them to the ATO…which will never happen.