Blog With Kent

Out of interest, were Matai and Stewart paid out their contract?
From my understanding yes, they were ....... but for the NRL it wouldn't have mattered anyway, they wouldn't let them retire medically and help out our salary cap anyway @Woodsie or some other expert on here will know better than me.
 
I know it is picky ... but to be clear .... They were paid as usual until their contracts expired ... not paid-out as in advance ....
From what I recall we did ask if we could medically retire them but our request was denied by fxckhead and so we had no choice but to pay them out and for that to effect our salary cap.
 
From my understanding yes, they were ....... but for the NRL it wouldn't have mattered anyway, they wouldn't let them retire medically and help out our salary cap anyway @Woodsie or some other expert on here will know better than me.

They may not have been req'd at training .... but they saw out their contracts ...

... and Ingliss has not been medically retired either .... he has just retired ..... there is no similarity to Matai or Snake whatsoever .....
 
From what I recall we did ask if we could medically retire them but our request was denied by fxckhead and so we had no choice but to pay them out and for that to effect our salary cap.

yes ... but I believe we simply paid them the usual payments ... as they were entitled to ...
 
They may not have been req'd at training .... but they saw out their contracts ...

... and Ingliss has not been medically retired either .... he has just retired ..... there is no similarity to Matai or Snake whatsoever .....
But didn't we try to retire them medically (like Inglis) to get them off our salary cap and wasn't that denied? Which is why we had no choice but to keep paying them? I remember being pissed off ..... but that's not unusual I guess.
 
They may not have been req'd at training .... but they saw out their contracts ...

... and Ingliss has not been medically retired either .... he has just retired ..... there is no similarity to Matai or Snake whatsoever .....

I sort of disagree with the last comment, yes he hasn’t been medically retired and has just retired.

However, unlike Snake and Skivvy when Souths went to the NRL to ask they said “ look sorry we can’t medically retire him as we copt a heap of **** after doing that for that ****tard Watmough but what we can do is give him an Ambassadorial role for $300k for the NRL, and we’ll set him up as an Ambassador for Indigenous football for another $300k and if you employ him as a Souths Ambassador for say $150k there’s his $750k a year”.

It’s those set of circumstances where the big difference lies.
 
ASK:
Winx started her run at 3pm and surely stopped running by game time at 5:30pm @:smirk:

I managed to watch both and commented on her homage to Chez's 200th game by wearing the 7 jersey :rofl:
winx2019queenelizabeth_660x380bradley.jpg
Winx walked another 5 laps of honour so people got their photos. Strang but I managed to see both events?
 
yes ... but I believe we simply paid them the usual payments ... as they were entitled to ...
Woodsie, you are arguing a point on which I agree with you. Snake and Matai’s situation is different, the more relevant comparison to make is Watmough’s medical retirement, which was rushed through to assist Parra deal with the fall out of their salary cap breaches.

But, the broader issue is whether Inglis’ contract should still be counted towards the Bunnies’ cap. For me, inglis’ decision to retire would have been made easier in the knowledge that his club and the NRL were going to look after him post retirement.

No doubt his desire to retire was genuine and he will suffer some financial detriment but what he’s going to get is effectively a TPA.

He also no doubt did not want to be a burden on the club. It’s such a grey area that is open to exploitation that the only way to properly and fairly deal with it is to have a pretty clear, unambiguous rule that is incapable of being ‘gamed’. I mean, from a salary cap perspective, you can’t have a situation where the result is different because one bloke is prepared to take a personal hit for the club (eg, Inglis) as opposed to others who cannot play due to injury or desire but who do not want to or are not in a position to take a personal hit for the club (eg, Snake and Matai who were perfectly entitled to (and right to) insist on being paid in accordance with their contracts). So, in my mind, there has to be cap consequences and not a free ride given to Souths.

I think it is better to have a rule that may operate harshly from time to time than a rule that is more easily exploited by some rather than others.

That’s a bit of a ramble, but I hope my perspective has been made clear enough.
 
I sort of disagree with the last comment, yes he hasn’t been medically retired and has just retired.

However, unlike Snake and Skivvy when Souths went to the NRL to ask they said “ look sorry we can’t medically retire him as we copt a heap of **** after doing that for that ****tard Watmough but what we can do is give him an Ambassadorial role for $300k for the NRL, and we’ll set him up as an Ambassador for Indigenous football for another $300k and if you employ him as a Souths Ambassador for say $150k there’s his $750k a year”.

It’s those set of circumstances where the big difference lies.

You may be 100% correct .... but that is only our speculation .... that would be major corruption if it could be proved ...
 

Wombie darling .... Ingliss has NOT been medically retired .... he simply retired ... both parties have just torn up the contract ... no more monies will be paid by Souff's to Ingliss for playing football ... end of story ...

Now there may well be a game afoot .... people may well be paying him monies far in excess of his market value to perform other duties .. however that is a different story

but there is no similarity to Snake and Matai whatsoever .....
 
Woodsie, you are arguing a point on which I agree with you. Snake and Matai’s situation is different, the more relevant comparison to make is Watmough’s medical retirement, which was rushed through to assist Parra deal with the fall out of their salary cap breaches.

But, the broader issue is whether Inglis’ contract should still be counted towards the Bunnies’ cap. For me, inglis’ decision to retire would have been made easier in the knowledge that his club and the NRL were going to look after him post retirement.

No doubt his desire to retire was genuine and he will suffer some financial detriment but what he’s going to get is effectively a TPA.

He also no doubt did not want to be a burden on the club. It’s such a grey area that is open to exploitation that the only way to properly and fairly deal with it is to have a pretty clear, unambiguous rule that is incapable of being ‘gamed’. I mean, from a salary cap perspective, you can’t have a situation where the result is different because one bloke is prepared to take a personal hit for the club (eg, Inglis) as opposed to others who cannot play due to injury or desire but who do not want to or are not in a position to take a personal hit for the club (eg, Snake and Matai who were perfectly entitled to (and right to) insist on being paid in accordance with their contracts). So, in my mind, there has to be cap consequences and not a free ride given to Souths.

I think it is better to have a rule that may operate harshly from time to time than a rule that is more easily exploited by some rather than others.

That’s a bit of a ramble, but I hope my perspective has been made clear enough.

For mine Ranga .... Ingliss is fully entitled to employment post football .... and as long as he is paid his market value ... there is no problem ...

However if it can be shown that employment was offered to him .. that he is either unqualified to perform .. or at a rate that is greatly inflated as either an inducement to retire or a reward for retiring .... then that is out an out rorting and heads must roll ...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

2025 Ladder

Team P W D L PD Pts
1 Raiders 22 18 0 4 172 42
2 Storm 22 17 0 5 258 40
3 Bulldogs 22 15 0 7 114 36
4 Warriors 22 14 0 8 26 34
5 Broncos 22 13 0 9 148 32
6 Sharks 22 13 0 9 67 32
7 Panthers 22 12 1 9 111 31
8 Roosters 22 11 0 11 72 28
9 Dolphins 22 10 0 12 81 26
10 Sea Eagles 22 10 0 12 4 26
11 Tigers 22 9 0 13 -113 24
12 Cowboys 23 9 1 13 -138 23
13 Dragons 22 8 0 14 -94 22
14 Eels 22 8 0 14 -136 22
15 Rabbitohs 23 9 0 14 -151 22
16 Knights 22 6 0 16 -220 18
17 Titans 22 5 0 17 -201 16
Back
Top Bottom