Salary Cap to rise to 5.8m in 2013

[Rooster_6]

The other point is the greedy players part. They are restricted big time on the amount of money they can earn by the cap. If a player can get an extra $150-200 k in third party deals as long as its not an affiliated sponsor to there club they should be allowed too but I think the current cap takes a percentage of that. I may be wrong but that's how I understand it. The current rise also from my understanding is more to do with the minimum wage. It's so the players at the bottom of the scope can get an increase not so much the top tier players.

Third party deals with companys that don't have any association to the club are unlimited and have no effect on the cap what so ever. They also can't be organised by the club, however the NRL have been pretty light on this so far. Clubs can offer up to 50k in third party sponsors on top of a players salary but no more, these can be club sponsors or other organisations affiliated with the club. I hope that makes sense.

The minimum wage is expected to rise for 50k to 80k which is a big plus. What does it really mean though? If I had to take an educated guess I'd say in the top 25 at most clubs only 5 players are on minimum wage. Meaning their pay rise of 30k accounts for 150k of the 800k. It's a very small part of the rise but a necessary one and something which has been a long time coming, but the rise is by no means 'one for the battlers'.

The big positive of this is now a player in Reserve grade can earn up to 80k without even having a first grade contract. This means playing reserve grade can now be seen as a viable career option for a lot of kids coming out of Toyota Cup. Far too many kids leave our game before they've even reached their potential, a stronger player pool will only a good thing for the game and it's potential expansion. Of course only some clubs will be able to afford strong Reserve Grade sides but if they can I think they will benefit immensely from it.

[Guest]

Rooster_6 what about these articles?

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226385347654

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/...-1226349264546

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226349290817

There is no doubt when negotiations officially started many were saying that they would fall well short of what they have got. Kent himself who wrote many of those articles conceded he got it wrong and they have got more than expected.

People always compared numbers to the AFL which to me is unfair considering their game and what position the NRL was negotiating from. They were half owned by News who with 9 held first and last options on the rights. Not to mention they were in a position where the former rights were $500 million over 6 years. From that position to get what could actually end up more than the AFL is above expectations.

Regarding the cap there is nothing unprofessional about it all. We are just lucky that our players union is a joke, I mean look at the American sports. Don't worry the NRL was won this battle hands down.

Also expansion will come but you must secure what you have first.

[Guest]

ha the new commission is full of it. All they sit around and pat each other on the back saying how clever they are now they are on the commission.
The stuff that is good was started by the previous mob or done by externals.

The new CEO could be what kick starts everything and could be the saving grace.

the "billion $ deal" was done well before the commission and Gallop stood aside that that to give impartiality
No one is sure the "billion $ deal" has actually been paid yet and all it will breed is more greed, more ads, more crap from Ch9 and higher fees for foxtel

[Rooster_6]

Rooster_6 what about these articles?

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226385347654

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/...-1226349264546

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226349290817

There is no doubt when negotiations officially started many were saying that they would fall well short of what they have got. Kent himself who wrote many of those articles conceded he got it wrong and they have got more than expected.

People always compared numbers to the AFL which to me is unfair considering their game and what position the NRL was negotiating from. They were half owned by News who with 9 held first and last options on the rights. Not to mention they were in a position where the former rights were $500 million over 6 years. From that position to get what could actually end up more than the AFL is above expectations.

Regarding the cap there is nothing unprofessional about it all. We are just lucky that our players union is a joke, I mean look at the American sports. Don't worry the NRL was won this battle hands down.

Also expansion will come but you must secure what you have first.

What about those articles? They're all written by Paul Kent... the guy is an idiot he'll write & say whatever he wants just to get some attention.

You say it's unfair to compare the NRL & AFL but in 2011 (which is what data the 2012 negotiations were based on) NRL out-rated AFL on TV, especially pay TV where we accounted for a ridiculous percentage of the top 100 most watched programs on Foxsports. In our 3 free to air games per week Ch9 raised 100m in advertising revenue. AFL on the other hand raised 120m over their 4 free to air games. You say we can't compete with AFL and it's unfair but all the data said otherwise, the only clear advantages they had over us we flexibility in time scheduling & 1 extra game per week.

More expectations of a billion dollar deal..

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/l...226-1twjz.html

And as much as I can't stand the guy Rothfield has been proven to be nearly 100% correct in this article in which he stats (like many others during early May, except for of course Paul Kent) that Ch9 lodged their bid of 1bn dollars.

http://www.news.com.au/national-old/...-1226347338822

To say the IC did this all on their own and we would have never achieved it under the old administration is nothing more than a fallacy.

The 1bn dollars was always par. Not that par is a bad thing, credit where credit is due, it's not an easy financial market at the moment. I still don't think the negotiations were a great success and you'll find plenty of others who feel the same because the terms and conditions written into the contract are still screwing the game over.

Don't blame it on the Players Association, every business has to deal with annoying and difficult stakeholders, the best get it done with no excuses. The cap for 2013 should have been agreed upon some time ago, the cap still being undecided for the 4 years after that is fair enough. If you don't think changing the cap for a season that has already begun a month and a half ago isn't unprofessional then what is?

Again I'm not for or against expansion, my stance of the point is irrelevant but the IC need give the stance of the subject. It's not ok that 2014/2015 was hinted at by the NRL and there's people, sponsors & millionaires pumping money and time into these bids if there's no hope of anything happening for some time, they deserve a better answer than what has currently been given.