General Questions

[Iafeta_old]

I've raised these elsewhere, but I find them still a little bit convoluted and unresolved.

Two points I'm not too sure of but find interesting:-

Part 1 Steve Price and Ruben Wiki's post playing career contracts: I always thought it was somewhat a given that Steven Price would be retained by the Bulldogs in an administrative role post NRL playing career, in a career progression that would include becoming CEO of Canterbury, until reaching his final dream job of the NRL CEO position. Similarly, IIRC there was discussion that Ruben Wiki would be involved with coaching Canberra post career.

Further to this, these players off the top of my head have evolved from players to coaches/off field administrators at their respective clubs post retirement;

Robbie Kearns - Forward coach at Storm
Kevin Walters - Assistant coach at Brisbane
Jason Taylor - Premier League coach at Parramatta
Brad Fittler - kicking coach at the Roosters
Richie Blackmore - waterboy at Warriors
Greg Alexander - kicking coach at Penrith
Ricky Stuart - Premier League coach at Canterbury
Bradley Clyde - Marketing Manager at Canterbury

Stacey Jones talks in his autobiography about being offered a role as a Development Coach to stay at the Warriors.

Furthermore, I would have thought it'd be a nice gimmick in the NRL to offer these positions either internal to the club, or external to the club via training and building relationships that would

A:- Secure the player a career post football
B:- Secure the player to finishing his career in the NRL as opposed to union or the ESL

I'd like to know the ins and outs of Price and Wiki's contracts, because I could understand if for instance we were only paying each of them $200,000, a figure clearly and well below the indicated market value of the players and below offers able to be met elsewhere. My assumption is the facts bandied amongst the media were true, that they were offered and signed for between $350-$400K a year, a fair or over market value transaction. As such, what is the NRL's concern with the Warriors signing these two to post football careers, and as its outside of the playing roster realms then what legal right do they have to question it? The NRL I would gather under Employment Law would have no right, obligation, or moral stand point in getting involved with a person's post NRL career contract. It'd be a restraint of trade, or restriction of employment rights, or even discrimination, I would think if they were to apply those rules to the law.

As I say, if clearly they've been paid a pittance for 3 years, and then offered wildly inflated "top up" post career contracts to make up the balance then it is a systematic rort of the salary's cap mission. Otherwise, if its the quoted figures in the media for 3 years, plus the additional post career options then IMO its none of the National Rugby League's prerogative to get involved with it.

Point 2 The Warriors flew players/player agents to Auckland Excuse me, but, so?

If this is genuinely a clause in the salary cap, it places Sydney clubs, who are at close distances, in extremely healthy and favourable positions. For instance, said player is offered a similar amount by Warriors and Roosters, lives in Sydney, as most professional rugby league players still do, but has to fork out $500 + accommodation to check out the Auckland option, and as does the player's agent, then it's highly likely their decision is going to be influenced to go to the Roosters - which is a major point of favouritism to them and against the mission of what the salary cap is designed for.

Of course, if its the wider family, a week to Queenstown, and systematic rorting by involving other attractions such as Queensland or any tourist option, then I'd consider it a rort. I don't think the NRL could be that naive to disallow the Warriors a chance to market their environment to prospective employees.

As such, the reports I hear went along the lines of:-

Ruben Wiki; signed contract faxed through to Warriors Headquarters.

Steven Price; wife Jo flew to Auckland for half week to check out facilities, schooling at Warriors expense.

Both seem relatively harmless and fair treatment. Neither appear a "rort".







Am I missing more to this? Or are both these points rather odd clauses to raise and could be raised elsewhere in many other cases.

 

[Jesbass_old]

Hi Iafeta. Nice to see you posting on our boards again.

For your first point, I read somewhere, (heh, full of qualifiable evidence, aren't I... ), that any payment used to influence a player to join a club or remain at a club is supposed to be declared as part of the salary cap. Assuming that is true, (and I've only read it second hand, so it may well be incorrect), post-career occupations, such as staff roles, should be included in the salary cap audit as those finances were used to lure the player to the club.

 

[Iafeta_old]

So the crime was that the Warriors declared it under contract for Steve Price, whereas the Bulldogs possibly had a gentlemen's agreement in place with him?

Its just too coincidental a large list of players retire one day, and the next are involved with roles within their club.

 

[KeepingTheFaith_old]

Unless he's recieving money this year or last from his "post retirement job" then I'm not sure how it's relevant. I understand it might still be required to be included in the salary cap regardless of whether he's being paid extra or not, but it seems like a pretty srange rule. I'm probably missing something but the whole thing seems odd.

 

[spykid_old]

It does seem like a strange rule, what other profession would have that kind of restriction...?
So do the players get hit up for that? How are they penalised? It's all very confusing.

 

[KeepingTheFaith_old]

Hey Iafeta. Just saw something on Fox Sports that may answer your second question. If the report is accurate it would seem players/managers were given free flights whenever they wanted.

 

[mosh_old]

As such, what is the NRL's concern with the Warriors signing these two to post football careers, and as its outside of the playing roster realms then what legal right do they have to question it?.

The fact is, by signing the NRL's registration form and agreeing to take part in its competition, players accept the NRL rules, from knock-on to kick-back

It is fairly simple. The contract that the player’s sign via their clubs are legally binding with the NRL and the NRL states terms clearly.

Payments outside the contracts must be declared. The NRL would have no problem if a player sells his used undies in front of his house each Saturday afternoon, if and only if, it was declared as the legally binding contract requires them to. This is the breach and the issue at hand.

The NRL I would gather under Employment Law would have no right, obligation, or moral stand point in getting involved with a person's post NRL career contract. It'd be a restraint of trade, or restriction of employment rights, or even discrimination, I would think if they were to apply those rules to the law.

Actually no it is not a restraint of trade. A restraint of trade is:

"Where any provision of any contract constitutes an unreasonable restraint of trade", (Illegal Contracts Act, 1970 s 8).

The NRL can then restrict trade, unless declared as agreed when signing the NRL Registration forms, until they are contracted to a particular club and essence the NRL. The NRL can also bring forward evidence that the restriction is based on players agreeing to advertise the NRL and its product and any other trade in-between comes in conflict with the agreement both parties signed.

Also the NRL can argue that the restriction which exists on a player is reasonable considering that once he leaves he can then pursue that trade and is not a restriction like you see in many law suits where one business may restrict another business to compete with them for 20-50 years.

If the player can provide evidence that he or she cannot pursue that trade after he retires and he has declared the trade with the NRL, then the court will favor his claim when the NRL breach their end of the bargain by disallowing the player from continuing the trade.

And lastly the NRL does allow players to trade during the period they are contracted to a club and after their careers but it must be declared

 

[jaws_old]

I think there is far sinister agenda going on. It's comon knowledge Gallop is a Sharks supporter and will stop at nothing to see the Cronulla Sutherland Sharks take out their first premiership. Gallop lives for the Sharks and regards anyone else as scum. Fortunately DMM and I are awake to his evil scam. Fear not Warriors fans Wiki is here for life.

As Warriors Fan Club President I will not let you down. The WFC is your friend.

 

[MarkW_old]

The points have been pretty well summed up there by other posters I think Iaefta.
One thing I have been told from a releaible source is that some if not all of the ex-Aussie players in particular were given very healthy travel expense kickbacks that weren't included in their contracts or written in the accounts book to the tune of 30k or more.
All that plus the whole jobs after retirement deal and whatever other under the table payments were made will inevitably put the club well over the cap as far as I can tell.

 

[Iafeta_old]

Price has previously expressed an interest in sports administration but his agent George Mimis denied post-career employment was part of the inducement for him to switch from the Bulldogs at the end of 2004.

"In our discussions with the Dogs and Warriors ... we were talking about the prospect of employment post-retirement but at no point has Price been offered any guaranteed income or any formal role. There's no document guaranteeing him something," Mimis told The Daily Telegraph newspaper.


-------------

One nail dragged out of the coffin?

I'm assuming the same thing has happened with Wiki, discussions, no documentation. Case closed on that matter if thats the case.