Roosters at it again

[Ranga]

With this $350k relief rule, does anyone know whether the player signed to replace the injured representative player can only be signed to a 12 week contract? I.e., surely the Roosters don't get the benefit of 31 squad members once Boyd comes back?

The NRL will definitely rubber stamp the Rooster's application, but I would have thought a policy consistent with cap relief for medical retirement would be the most sensible. If the player plays a rep game with a pre-existing injury - and Boyd had a pre-existing brain injury caused by multiple concussions - there should be no cap relief. If that means that clubs start withdrawing more players from rep games due to pre-existing injuries that may get worse, so be it.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

It just pisses me off no end that we had to pay Snake and Skivvy for a whole season with not a cracker back and these ****ers pull this ****!!

 

[Heckenberg]

With this $350k relief rule, does anyone know whether the player signed to replace the injured representative player can only be signed to a 12 week contract? I.e., surely the Roosters don't get the benefit of 31 squad members once Boyd comes back?

The NRL will definitely rubber stamp the Rooster's application, but I would have thought a policy consistent with cap relief for medical retirement would be the most sensible. If the player plays a rep game with a pre-existing injury - and Boyd had a pre-existing brain injury caused by multiple concussions - there should be no cap relief. If that means that clubs start withdrawing more players from rep games due to pre-existing injuries that may get worse, so be it.

They’ll probably just front load someone’s contract.

 

[rosco]

With this $350k relief rule, does anyone know whether the player signed to replace the injured representative player can only be signed to a 12 week contract? I.e., surely the Roosters don't get the benefit of 31 squad members once Boyd comes back?

The NRL will definitely rubber stamp the Rooster's application, but I would have thought a policy consistent with cap relief for medical retirement would be the most sensible. If the player plays a rep game with a pre-existing injury - and Boyd had a pre-existing brain injury caused by multiple concussions - there should be no cap relief. If that means that clubs start withdrawing more players from rep games due to pre-existing injuries that may get worse, so be it.

My understanding is that they can sign someone for the year. Not sure how it fits with the cap of 30 players.
So they can sign a player at the start of March for $350K for the 8 months left. This equates to a $525K player. Cordner can then come back fully rested for the business end of the season.
Agree that it was a pre existing injury but the NRL will rubber stamp it. They may even sign Izzy.

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

It just pisses me off no end that we had to pay Snake and Skivvy for a whole season with not a cracker back and these *ers pull this *!!

That's the NRL all over: it's not the rules that are the problem so much as their selective application. Which makes it hard to shake the belief that some teams are treated with more "fairness" than others.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

That's the NRL all over: it's not the rules that are the problem so much as their selective application. Which makes it hard to shake the belief that some teams are treated with more "fairness" than others.

Nailed it , “ selective “ adjudications on matters , Manly’s slight TPA issue “ $660k cap hit “ , other teams “ just a misunderstanding , play on”. Happens on field too .

 

[Tragic Eagle]

They get what they want!

 

[court83]

I can't see cordner playing again... in a 20 game season the bloke stumbled off the field heavily concussed in 1/4 of the games played.. thats huge... thats an obvious sign his brain can't handle the repeated impact of the game.. I can't believe the bloke was ever allowed to play in game 1 of least years origin..

On the plus side, the bloke got a free trip to Disneyland every other hit up so he prolly wasn't complaining.

 

[manlyfan76]

No
Roosters
Losses

 

[simon64]

This one is up there with Watmough's knee injury not being a pre-existing injury.

Seems every club besides Manly is entitled to dispensation. Bargearse anyone ?

 

[jbb/james]

The matai and snake cases were hard for us fans. I dont know for sure but it was reported a number of times that manly did not apply to dispensation . If retired for medical reasons manly would have had to front up another million to fill the cap. Im not sure penn wanted to do this so we went with the aldi version

Like i said i have no inside info but its been reported often. This is the joy of being privately owned. The NRL are dodgy but our club has its own agenda also

 

[manly al]

The matai and snake cases were hard for us fans. I dont know for sure but it was reported a number of times that manly did not apply to dispensation . If retired for medical reasons manly would have had to front up another million to fill the cap. Im not sure penn wanted to do this so we went with the aldi version

Like i said i have no inside info but its been reported often. This is the joy of being privately owned. The NRL are dodgy but our club has its own agenda also

Guess that is where it does become a bit of a dilemma with insurance compensation and having a valid case and so on and probably on the money so to speak , that a management decision and cost considerations was made to just reconcile the cost benefit of not applying for dispensation for Snake and Matai and the downside of not being able to replace them in the cap . Not sure if another private owner and majority shareholder and main bill payer would have adopted a different approach . Not ideal but commercial reality no doubt .

 

[jbb/james]

Guess that is where it does become a bit of a dilemma with insurance compensation and having a valid case and so on and probably on the money so to speak , that a management decision and cost considerations was made to just reconcile the cost benefit of not applying for dispensation for Snake and Matai and the downside of not being able to replace them in the cap . Not sure if another private owner and majority shareholder and main bill payer would have adopted a different approach . Not ideal but commercial reality no doubt .

Insurance companies are not in the business of bending over and taking a hit for the team, any team .

But a finacially viable club like the roosters and broncos obviously can accomodate these scenarios better than us. Its sucks but its hardly the NRLS doing, except with the draw allowing clubs better revenue streams etc

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

The matai and snake cases were hard for us fans. I dont know for sure but it was reported a number of times that manly did not apply to dispensation . If retired for medical reasons manly would have had to front up another million to fill the cap. Im not sure penn wanted to do this so we went with the aldi version

Like i said i have no inside info but its been reported often. This is the joy of being privately owned. The NRL are dodgy but our club has its own agenda also

Ancient history really, but my memory is that we actually did apply but they were deemed ineligible for medical retirement as their injuries pre-dated their most recent contracts. (Which was no great shock to anyone who watched them over the years.)

The scandal was that the Eels were allowed to medically retire Watmough who was in exactly the same boat.
Ditto a few others such as Gillette and Burgess. Of course the benefit of a medical retirement to your salary cap is massive. The NRL at the time really wanted the Eels to succeed (and always want Souths and the Broncos to succeed) but I'm pretty sure that was just coincidence.