TPAs and NRL

[Woodsie]

My understanding is that the NRL are not saying, and are not able.to restrict anyone from accepting any payment from anyone .... they simply make an adjudication on whether that payment should be included in the salary cap of the club he plays for .....

 

[Nike]

My understanding is that the NRL are not saying, and are not able.to restrict anyone from accepting any payment from anyone .... they simply make an adjudication on whether that payment should be included in the salary cap of the club he plays for .....

As I understand it that is by determining the extent on which it can be proven the club had an involvement in procuring or organising the deal, kind of how we made a breach? If I've been paying attention (and I haven't) that kind of thing is VERY hard to prove without whistle-blowers or a creative retroactive redefining of the criteria, as historically shown.

 

[Captain Moondog]

As I understand it that is by determining the extent on which it can be proven the club had an involvement in procuring or organising the deal, kind of how we made a breach? If I've been paying attention (and I haven't) that kind of thing is VERY hard to prove without whistle-blowers or a creative retroactive redefining of the criteria, as historically shown.

NRL rulings are fluid and open to interpretation. They are constantly in a state of flux, what is true today has no bearing on what happens tomorrow.

 

[Bearfax]

We need to hand out more whistles to the disenchanted players, to ensure some of these more affluent entities are made to explain some excessive out of tune compositions

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

We need to hand out more whistles to the disenchanted players, to ensure some of these more affluent entities are made to explain some excessive out of tune compositions

We need a high profile Rooster to crack the ****s and blow their empire up with the biggest whistle ever!!!

 

[EagleFlys]

We need a high profile Rooster to crack the ****s and blow their empire up with the biggest whistle ever!!!

You don't need anyone really.

If the NRL know the TPA amount is 200k, and they know the cap is 9.x mil, and they have the registered contracts of every player, and those contracts are => agreed market value, then the math with explain it?

My understanding of the contracts are that ;

1) they must be at a minimum the NRL value the player (TPA excluded). The Gifty issue springs to mind.
2) they must contain the total remuneration paid to the player under the cap + the separate TPA. This is what we were punished for "guaranteeing" the TPA.

As I see it the only issues are

1) Is the NRL complicit in allowing for undervalued Rorters roster valuations in order to firstly enable Uncle Nick to mathematically be cap compliant ?
2) Is the NRL blind to non disclosed additional payments (19th hole bets etc) to make up the difference between the cap value for the Rorters and the MV other teams would have to pay for those players?

To me the NRL firstly must be complicit (point 1) and then incompetent (point 2).

Of course players will take unders to play for Uncle Nick, and to be in premiership windows yearly. The NRL values maybe also be considered per contract, but not necessarily reviewed on upgrades for market values. For example Latrell Mitchell in 2016 on 90K cap value (which was reasonable) may not be revised until a "new contract" is registered.

Perhaps extensions are excluded from NRL agreed value revisions?

At the risk of repeating myself now I will stop here, and perhaps some others can shed some light.