The Dolphins discussion

[1910]

He must have forgotten about all the development the Cowboys put into Kikau when they poached him

That’s not the same thing- Kikau went to the Cowboys from Rugby for two years 14/15 and signed with Panthers half way through 2015. He only played 20's for that two years.

Katoa has been at Glenmore Park since he was 6 and played Harold Mats and SG Ball for Penrith.

The Panthers boss just wants some sort of compensation for that 13 years of work.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

I don’t recall the Panthers boss saying anything when we continually lost all our up and comers over the years.

 

[theshed]

I don’t recall the Panthers boss saying anything when we continually lost all our up and comers over the years.

Probably the wrong attitude to have. Everyone laughs at each other’s misfortunes around losing players because of the understandable sense of “see how it feels!” But really we should be supporting him for saying this and demand better incentives for clubs to bring players into the game.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

Probably the wrong attitude to have. Everyone laughs at each other’s misfortunes around losing players because of the understandable sense of “see how it feels!” But really we should be supporting him for saying this and demand better incentives for clubs to bring players into the game.

Oh exactly but why wasn’t he and others vocal about it before this. Surely, they would have realised it’d affect them at some stage?

 

[Sproj]

A development fee for clubs that poach to pay as compensation would be a fantastic idea but would massively disadvantage the Roosters so it won’t happen.

 

[Wolfie]

That’s not the same thing- Kikau went to the Cowboys from Rugby for two years 14/15 and signed with Panthers half way through 2015. He only played 20's for that two years.

Katoa has been at Glenmore Park since he was 6 and played Harold Mats and SG Ball for Penrith.

The Panthers boss just wants some sort of compensation for that 13 years of work.

Just because its not exactly the same it doesnt mean its not hypocritical. They have still poched young players other clubs have put time and money into. Just because they have more time and money into Katoa over other players doesnt make it less hypocritical

Tbh, i cant see why they are getting so cranky about it. You know you cant just stockpile quality players, thats why you have a salary cap. Every out of contract player is fair game. Whats happening to Penrith for example is just a side effect of their success. They have developed a very good team, but now because of this and the ages of their squad, they are going to have certain positions where the pathway to a first team spot is blocked by another younger player who is doing very well. The only thing i think is fair for clubs who bring on young players is a salary cap reduction for players you produce. Even then, you are still going to lose players who see their pathways blocked.

 

[Wolfie]

A development fee for clubs that poach to pay as compensation would be a fantastic idea but would massively disadvantage the Roosters so it won’t happen.

I'm not sure how they would work this though even though i think its another good idea. If a player is out of contract, he technically isnt your player anymore. Thats why i think a cap reduction is a more beneficial option.

 

[Sproj]

I'm not sure how they would work this though even though i think its another good idea. If a player is out of contract, he technically isnt your player anymore. Thats why i think a cap reduction is a more beneficial option.

set the rules according to development years at the other club. If they are poached, the transfer fee is added to the victim’s salary cap. I have no idea the nitty gritty but I like it in theory.

 

[1910]

A development fee for clubs that poach to pay as compensation would be a fantastic idea but would massively disadvantage the Roosters so it won’t happen.

They used to have transfer fees, Broncos had to pay the Jets for example to get Alf. Problem now is it is so mixed up.

Kids get taken from NZ at 15 and go to the school on the Coast and then play for the Broncos- who gets some money there?

 

[Kimlo]

They used to have transfer fees, Broncos had to pay the Jets for example to get Alf. Problem now is it is so mixed up.

Kids get taken from NZ at 15 and go to the school on the Coast and then play for the Broncos- who gets some money there?

BHQ.

 

[theshed]

They used to have transfer fees, Broncos had to pay the Jets for example to get Alf. Problem now is it is so mixed up.

Kids get taken from NZ at 15 and go to the school on the Coast and then play for the Broncos- who gets some money there?

Im not bias at all but I’m gonna say… the broncos

 

[1910]

Just because its not exactly the same it doesnt mean its not hypocritical. They have still poched young players other clubs have put time and money into. Just because they have more time and money into Katoa over other players doesnt make it less hypocritical

Tbh, i cant see why they are getting so cranky about it. You know you cant just stockpile quality players, thats why you have a salary cap. Every out of contract player is fair game. Whats happening to Penrith for example is just a side effect of their success. They have developed a very good team, but now because of this and the ages of their squad, they are going to have certain positions where the pathway to a first team spot is blocked by another younger player who is doing very well. The only thing i think is fair for clubs who bring on young players is a salary cap reduction for players you produce. Even then, you are still going to lose players who see their pathways blocked.

It's not relevant, he isn't complaining about a 20 year old who the Cowboys put two years of work into he is talking about players that start at six and are working through.

Financially you can't be compensated, all the money that would have been spent on him since he was six you're not going to arrive at a figure that compensates that- and you're not going to make a figure that would make the Dolphins say that's too much we won't get him.

It would only be a nominal fee- maybe 10% of his contract has to go to the club- that you have to pay and it really wouldn't come in to play too much I wouldn't think for a pure club's junior that has played through since he was a kid.

I am not against a transfer fee but I don't think it would stop much and great Penrith get $50,000.

Penrith could give that $50k to the player's junior club, the money would be well used there.

 

[Sproj]

They used to have transfer fees, Broncos had to pay the Jets for example to get Alf. Problem now is it is so mixed up.

Kids get taken from NZ at 15 and go to the school on the Coast and then play for the Broncos- who gets some money there?

Very good question and one I don’t have an answer for, I just like the idea in theory. I have no idea how it works in practice. I just think it would be good for there to be some compensation to clubs involved in development and maybe even put in a limit like 3 years or more at one club on a development program, something like that and build on it.

 

[1910]

Very good question and one I don’t have an answer for, I just like the idea in theory. I have no idea how it works in practice. I just think it would be good for there to be some compensation to clubs involved in development and maybe even put in a limit like 3 years or more at one club on a development program, something like that and build on it.

It used to work because people didn't move too much and it was pretty cut and dried. If you were buying a player from the QRL or Cairns his current club got money.

 

[Sproj]

It used to work because people didn't move too much and it was pretty cut and dried. If you were buying a player from the QRL or Cairns his current club got money.

Yeah times have changed too much to use an old system but I wouldn’t mind the idea being revisited, even just to see if it’s doable. I’m sure I was a Roosters fan, not that there are many of them, I’d feel a lot different to how I do as a Broncos fan.

 

[1910]

Yeah times have changed too much to use an old system but I wouldn’t mind the idea being revisited, even just to see if it’s doable. I’m sure I was a Roosters fan, not that there are many of them, I’d feel a lot different to how I do as a Broncos fan.

It's not going to to change much- so the Roosters have to give the Mustangs $50,000 for Va'a that's not going to stop them- Va'a isn't going to sit in Toowoomba and never leave.

It is great for the Mustangs and helps them produce the next Va'a that's the positive but it won't stop him leaving.

The Broncos would be forking out to a lot of Coast clubs.

If the goal of a transfer fee is the Mustangs get money- that's great if it's to stop NRL clubs taking kids- I think people will be disappointed.

 

[theshed]

It's not going to to change much- so the Roosters have to give the Mustangs $50,000 for Va'a that's not going to stop them- Va'a isn't going to sit in Toowoomba and never leave.

It is great for the Mustangs and helps them produce the next Va'a that's the positive but it won't stop him leaving.

The Broncos would be forking out to a lot of Coast clubs.

If the goal of a transfer fee is the Mustangs get money- that's great if it's to stop NRL clubs taking kids- I think people will be disappointed.

I think the point is that it’s to reduce NRL clubs taking young players from other NRL clubs. Instead encouraging them to scout and transition their own talent to the NRL team.

 

[Sproj]

I think the point is that it’s to reduce NRL clubs taking young players from other NRL clubs. Instead encouraging them to scout and transition their own talent to the NRL team.

That’s right and it may not work but it would nice to at least some sort of effort and acknowledgment put in for clubs that develop.