News: ARL to block 'Judas' Hunt's $60k demand

[ManlyBacker]

<div class="article-tools" /><p id="font-size" class="widget-fontofreako">THE Australian Rugby League yesterday labelled Karmichael Hunt "a Judas" and warned him he would face a fight in the courts if he wanted to claim his share of the game's retirement fund.</p>

<a href="http://www.silvertails.net/news/4154-arl-to-block-judas-hunts-60k-demand.html">Read the full article</a>

 

[ManlyBacker]

I don't like KHunt and I don't care what happens to him, but he gets my support if he takes the ARL bastards to court. As far as I am concerned he is entitled to be paid out the money he put in. Whether that is as a 23 yo or much later I don't care. It will be very interesting to see the fund's charter and what the courts make of it.

 

[missing_something]

Simple he put money in he can take the money out.

 

[DSM5]

I agree, If the monies his, pay him.  It only looks like mean-spirited payback to deny the guy what seems rightfully his. 

 

[The Wheel]

He will only spend it on Grog, give it to someone who will use it wisely like getting Storm financial advice or investing crap property developments with Craig Mcderrmott

 

[Crusher_Cleal]

What has Hunt done wrong here? He hasn't broken any contracts. He can do as he pleases.

 

[The Wheel]

I belive the conditions of the fund where that the payer had to retire from NRL, not go to SL, Union etc.

The contributions in effect were not the players money going in but supplementary funds from the ARL which the players eligibility to access was based on the number of rep games played and the retirement thing noted above.

 

[ManlyBacker]

I did find this document:
http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:UVgvmpkXA1cJ:www.myfooty.com.au/images/uploaded/CLEAN%2520%26%2520FINAL%2520-%2520NRL%2520-%2520RLPA%2520-%2520v8%2520Unregistered%2520Agreement.DOC+arl+retirement+fund+RLPA+representative+players&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

Clause 17 and 18 refer to these payments. I can't find the MOU which is defined as "the Memorandum of Understanding for the National Rugby League Retirement Account and Representative Account" online, which is a binding agreement with the RLPA, but it looks like they may actually be separate funds.

 

[Duff]

I don't see how this is a story. It's a legal contract, pretty black & white.
It's either his & he's entitled to it or he's breached it & isn't.

 

[TokyoEagle]

In the article it mentions that 1/2 the player's payment is withheld and put into the fund, legally it has to be his if he has not broken any of the rules already in place. If he goes to Rugby he may well forfeit it.

Who does this fund actually benefit ?
Does the ARL top up the players payments ? If not, why would the players agree to have 1/2 their payment withheld.
Where does the money go if a player is ineligible to collect ?

 

[Fluffy]

The article mught state its half their payment but technically it may be something different.

I currently get 12% superannuation but the way its written is weird. not complainingn though

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

Just on Hunt, loved Mark Geyers RLW article this week giving it to him. Top work MG

 

[Garts]

I would be doing the exact same thing if I was Hunt.  If you get $x per rep game but a % is put away till he retires and he then misses out on it due to going to AFL I would be chasing it like he is.  Facts are he played the rep game and deserves the whole payment.  If the deal was structured that a rep payment is worth $x and everyone one is paid that money but ontop of that each player at their retirement from league (dependant on not going to a rival code) gets some form of bonus based on years service and rep games played then Hunt could get stuffed.  A deal structured somewhat like long service leave I guess.