NRL General Discussion Thread - 2019

Fernando

NRL Player
1,374
832
Bris
Smith/Bellamy/Melbourne will be written off and then Smith will retire a premiership winning halfback (on top of everything else), put your house on it!
 

Alec

International Rep
16,160
7,372
I feel like Broncos wont get over the mental hurdle of losing to the Storm until Smith is gone. Even if he plays on at 90 years old, and they have a new rule for regular pad changes for him, we'll still be mentally shot against him.
 

Fernando

NRL Player
1,374
832
Bris
I feel like Broncos wont get over the mental hurdle of losing to the Storm until Smith is gone. Even if he plays on at 90 years old, and they have a new rule for regular pad changes for him, we'll still be mentally shot against him.
I agree, but I think we need Bellamy gone as well.
 

Morkel

International Captain
Staff
21,043
17,363
Talk about a walk through memory lane, check some of the names in here.
Holy ****, can't believe some are still playing. Mead, Ellis & Cuthbertson I thought would have retired years ago. Sammut is hopefully playing as long as he can to afford to remove that chest tattoo.
 

kooly87

QCup Player
695
912
Holy ****, can't believe some are still playing. Mead, Ellis & Cuthbertson I thought would have retired years ago. Sammut is hopefully playing as long as he can to afford to remove that chest tattoo.
Kind of lends to weight to the argument in regards to not having enough talent to fill another NRL side in an expanded competition. There is at least one whole NRL club worth of players running around just in Super League and Rugby Union.
 
Last edited:

Morkel

International Captain
Staff
21,043
17,363
Kind of lends to weight to the argument in regards to not having enough talent to fill another NRL side in an expanded competition. There is at least one whole NRL club worth of players running around just in Super League and Rugby Union.
But are they NRL quality? Some were, may not be the case now.
 

ivanhungryjak

NRL Captain
4,849
3,052
Suncorp Stadium
Extra-time losers could emerge with a competition point in 2020
Adrian ProszenkoNovember 22, 2019 — 8.48pm

FIND OUT MORE
Already subscribed? Log in
Teams that lose in extra time will gain a competition point under a bold proposal the NRL is considering implementing for the 2020 season.
The issue was one of several potential radical changes to the game discussed in a meeting of head coaches on Friday following recommendations from the competition committee. Only half of the 16 clipboard holders attended the think tank to discuss a range of proposals, including the use of an 18th man to cover head-injury assessments, potential tweaks to how and when scrums are packed, the presence of trainers during play and whether kicks should be contested in try-scoring situations.
Melbourne Storm players react to a golden-point loss to the Roosters this year.

Melbourne Storm players react to a golden-point loss to the Roosters this year.NRL Photos
However, the most fundamental change could be a restructure of how points are awarded when teams go into golden point. Presently, the winner takes both competition points, with the loser leaving empty handed despite the teams being deadlocked for the first 80 minutes.
Several alternatives were discussed, including a system that gives the winner of a match in regular time four competition points; three points for a win in extra time; two points each for both teams if they are still deadlocked after an additional 10 minutes; and one point for a loss in golden point.Had the system been implemented last season, Wests Tigers would have snuck into the finals ahead of Brisbane. The theory is that there should be some reward for teams that get to golden point, as they currently earn the same number of points – zero – as those who are flogged.The prospect of an NFL-style ‘right of reply’ rule in golden point, effectively making sure both teams had an opportunity with the football during a period often decided by field goals, received little support.

Several other potential initiatives were discussed, although the coaches expressed little appetite for them. There was a discussion about reducing the number of players each team fields down to 12, but those in attendance didn’t feel it would necessarily solve the issues of ruck speed and continuity.
Manly coach Des Hasler put forward a case for the attack and defence to be separated further than the current 10 metres. The two-time premiership-winning coach believes many of the game’s issues – including the constant wrestling that is a bugbear for fans – would be solved if the referees kept the defenders back about 12 or so metres.
Hasler has done his own research on the topic and told the group the measure would increase the amount of fatigue in the game without having to reduce the interchange.
It would be a huge change to a game that, as recently as Hasler’s own playing career, required the defence to retreat just five metres.
Related Article
Shaquai Mitchell on the charge against the Cowboys in under-20s in 2016.
While the coaches in attendance participated in robust discussions about how to improve the game, the fact that half were absent – albeit with reasonable excuses – is a concern to the governing body.

 

Foordy

International Rep
Staff
18,227
9,623
Shane Flanagan has been appointed an assistant coach at the Dragons for next season ...

cleared to return by the NRL, but reportedly will not be eligible to be a head coach until 2022
 

Dash

NRL Captain
3,059
2,252
Brisbane
What a rort. You can't sign a player to a 3 year, $3.6m contract then decide to pay it over 10 years. If they get a cent of salary cap relief the NRL are a joke. Well, even more of a joke.
 

BroncsFan

NRL Player
2,754
2,510
Seems like a back up plan for souths if they don't get any salary cap relief... Sam walks away from his current deal without a payout and gets a salary from the club to make up for it.

The issue for Souths would be having to potentially wear that $360k under their cap for the next 10 years... which would be the case as that is what's happenning with GI.

If there is any substance to this story then potentially the NRL are refusing the medical retirement, which seems far enough to me because he's basically just injured for 2 years.

If the NRL actually follow through with it, it would actually be more of a deterrent to clubs looking to medically retire inflated contracts, because if it doesn't work out you could be wearing that salary for awhile.

Outcomes could be Souths wearing $360k for 10 years until the existing contract value is paid or the $360k salary is assumed to be a payout from his contract and Souths having to wear ~$640k per year (ie. $1m - $360k) under the cap for the next 3 years (ie. when Sam's contract would've expired).

Either way it would be a pretty hefty hit to take because the medical retirement wasn't granted
 

Super Freak

International Captain
Staff
25,725
13,126
Brisbane
If we're going to get cap relief for Gillett then Souths should get cap relief for Burgess, as well.

Gillett suffered a shoulder injury prior to signing his last contract which required a shoulder reconstruction. Shoulder reconstructions can cause degenerative conditions which can make people more susceptible to suffering the type of injury he suffered. The clubs are required to prove that the damage that caused retirement happened in a different part of the shoulder. It sounds like both clubs are able to do that so they should get cap relief and choose to do whatever they want with the money as long as the player gets every cent.
 

BroncsFan

NRL Player
2,754
2,510
If we're going to get cap relief for Gillett then Souths should get cap relief for Burgess, as well.

Gillett suffered a shoulder injury prior to signing his last contract which required a shoulder reconstruction. Shoulder reconstructions can cause degenerative conditions which can make people more susceptible to suffering the type of injury he suffered. The clubs are required to prove that the damage that caused retirement happened in a different part of the shoulder. It sounds like both clubs are able to do that so they should get cap relief and choose to do whatever they want with the money as long as the player gets every cent.
The difference to me is Sam just needs to rehab his shoulder for 2 years and he'll be sweet to play on. That hasn't been mentioned in Gillett's case

In other words Sam is injured for 2 years whereas Gillett has received doctor's advice to stop playing football.

It's like if anyone did their ACL and would spend the final year of their contract rehabbing it before going into retirement. You couldn't just medically retire them because they're injured for the swansong of their contract.
 

Dash

NRL Captain
3,059
2,252
Brisbane
Seems like a back up plan for souths if they don't get any salary cap relief... Sam walks away from his current deal without a payout and gets a salary from the club to make up for it.

The issue for Souths would be having to potentially wear that $360k under their cap for the next 10 years... which would be the case as that is what's happenning with GI.

If there is any substance to this story then potentially the NRL are refusing the medical retirement, which seems far enough to me because he's basically just injured for 2 years.

If the NRL actually follow through with it, it would actually be more of a deterrent to clubs looking to medically retire inflated contracts, because if it doesn't work out you could be wearing that salary for awhile.

Outcomes could be Souths wearing $360k for 10 years until the existing contract value is paid or the $360k salary is assumed to be a payout from his contract and Souths having to wear ~$640k per year (ie. $1m - $360k) under the cap for the next 3 years (ie. when Sam's contract would've expired).

Either way it would be a pretty hefty hit to take because the medical retirement wasn't granted
I'd say spreading the cost over 10 years is absolutely NOT a deterrent. $360k is the difference between a low-to-mid-range player and a base contract at worst. Take into account the cap increasing every year and by year 6 or 7 it's barely an inconvenience.
 

kooly87

QCup Player
695
912
I'd say spreading the cost over 10 years is absolutely NOT a deterrent. $360k is the difference between a low-to-mid-range player and a base contract at worst. Take into account the cap increasing every year and by year 6 or 7 it's barely an inconvenience.
Yeah that's what a lot of people are missing. By the back half of the deal that $360k wont count for much.
 
Last edited:

kooly87

QCup Player
695
912
Not really NRL but Israel Folau and RU have reached a confidential settlement. No details as yet about whether he can play anywhere, costs, etc.
It's gross to think he's getting paid out anything at all, but honestly you can see why Rugby Australia didn't want to take up the fight.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create free account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Login or Register

Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Register now

Twitter

Top