Ben Hunt?
- Thread starter Not Paul Kent
- Start date
Where would he be playing?
He is a superb hooker, but will not play hooker in club land.
No a waste of cap space for us.
madmax
Bencher
Agree, although having all 3 on the field together would be quite interesting attack wise!
6 Brooks
7 DCE
9 Hunt
Once Was Brissie Kid
Reserve Grader
He's still unsigned wanting to be a #7. Accept a move to #9 and give Manly a call. The 2025 grand final is calling.
DUFFMAN
Bencher
Wasn’t he on around a million a season.
The way I understand it he needs to sign for close to that and saints won’t be putting anything towards his contract.
Nordburg
First Grader
He doesn’t have to sign for “close to that”.He only needs to sign at a reasonable price to placate the NRL.Just because one club pays overs for a player,doesn’t mean another club has to stupidly follow suit
Now that he has signed with the donkeys, we should get rid of this thread now ,Yay
It will be interesting to see how they fit him in
sheridanstand78
First Grader
Once a donkey always a donkey! How do the Drongos get away with paying only 550K a season when he was on 900K at the Dragons?
I seem to remember a few years back that we were not allowed to retain Gifty when the NRL would not allow us to reduce his wage.
Double standards yet again!
I seem to remember a few years back that we were not allowed to retain Gifty when the NRL would not allow us to reduce his wage.
Double standards yet again!
Stewbojevic
Bencher
The real question is, if the Broncos have to force a player out to fit him… who would we want?
I’d love Mozer, but probably a long shot.
I’d love Mozer, but probably a long shot.
The salary cap is a joke.
The nrl for its integrity and its transparency should keep and make available a forensic record of all such transactions, its application, its reasoning to the clubs at the very least as an ongoing record
To establish a baseline for future agreements, for consistency and because if it acts with integrity it should have nothing to hide. So clubs have a basis to challenge the abdo bunker
To establish a baseline for future agreements, for consistency and because if it acts with integrity it should have nothing to hide. So clubs have a basis to challenge the abdo bunker
manly al
First Grader
Pretty sure that the Manly offer to Gifty at the time was well below what he would have reasonably expected and virtually and no doubt sadly , just an indication or signal that his services were not really wanted so to speak , ongoing .
References to a job offer in the Bronco 's system after Hunt 's contract finishes there and inclusive in his present contract offer is surely a serious anomaly and distortion on the supposedly fair concept of the cap
Nordburg
First Grader
Given that the “job offer” upon retirement clause was made public,it’s either been cleared by the NRL,it’s BS or the NRL are yet to receive the offer.Because if there was anything dodgy about it,why would it go public?
Users who are viewing this thread
2025 Ladder
| Team | P | W | D | L | PD | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Raiders | 17 | 14 | 0 | 3 | 108 | 32 |
| 2 | Storm | 16 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 220 | 30 |
| 3 | Bulldogs | 16 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 96 | 30 |
| 4 | Warriors | 16 | 11 | 0 | 5 | 31 | 28 |
| 5 | Broncos | 17 | 10 | 0 | 7 | 80 | 26 |
| 6 | Panthers | 16 | 8 | 1 | 7 | 25 | 23 |
| 7 | Dolphins | 18 | 9 | 0 | 9 | 169 | 22 |
| 8 | Sea Eagles | 16 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 58 | 22 |
| 9 | Roosters | 16 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 21 | 22 |
| 10 | Sharks | 17 | 9 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 22 |
| 11 | Dragons | 16 | 6 | 0 | 10 | -56 | 18 |
| 12 | Cowboys | 18 | 6 | 1 | 11 | -163 | 17 |
| 13 | Knights | 17 | 6 | 0 | 11 | -85 | 16 |
| 14 | Tigers | 17 | 6 | 0 | 11 | -102 | 16 |
| 15 | Eels | 16 | 5 | 0 | 11 | -125 | 16 |
| 16 | Rabbitohs | 17 | 6 | 0 | 11 | -129 | 16 |
| 17 | Titans | 16 | 4 | 0 | 12 | -156 | 14 |
