NRL General Discussion Thread

[Kooly87]

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.

 

[Wolfie]

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.

I'm not so sure its a fight either party was ever going to win.

 

[broncos4life]

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.

Will Gillett’s injury heal to the point he can play again after 2 years? That’s great news.

 

[Super Freak]

Will Gillett’s injury heal to the point he can play again after 2 years? That’s great news.

Have you read the medical retirement criteria?

 

[broncos4life]

Have you read the medical retirement criteria?

No I haven’t, I assumed ‘medically retired’ means that for medical reasons you can’t ever play again.

 

[Super Freak]

No I haven’t, I assumed ‘medically retired’ means that for medical reasons you can’t ever play again.

The Player, at the time of termination, was diagnosed as medically unfit to currently continue to train and play elite level contact sport and was medically unable to ever return to play elite level contact sport due to the current level of disability or the significant risk of further disabling injury as a result of playing elite level contact sport;

Doctors have told Burgess if he plays on there is significant risk of permanent disability and needed to retire.

Even if he does the rehab, I'm pretty sure it was never a guarantee that he would be able to play at an elite level again.

 

[Foordy]

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.

i don't think so ...

it's not like Burgess is still playing and they have decide to pay his salary over 10 years instead of 3.

i don't see it being any real difference to Gillett. we retired him medically and as such are paying out the remainder of his contract.

Souths have also retired Burgess medically, but instead of paying him out and getting nothing out of it, they will give him an administration role to get a return on their money. they get the advantage of being able to spread out his salary over 10 years instead of 3. he gets the advantage of a long term job after footy.

 

[Dash]

Have they retired him medically though? As in, his contract is officially off the cap.

Seeing as his injury recovery time is less than his existing contract, they shouldn't be allowed to. The NRL will though of course.

 

[Foordy]

Have they retired him medically though? As in, his contract is officially off the cap.

Seeing as his injury recovery time is less than his existing contract, they shouldn't be allowed to. The NRL will though of course.

he is retired ... that much has confirmed.

the nrl haven't determined whether he meets the requirements of a medical retirement yet.

if he does, then this deal means nothing

if he doesn't then his salary will be carried on the cap, so this deal means nothing ... if Souths have to carry his salary on the cap, then it doesn't really matter what deal they work out with Sam to get his money. Sam is well within his rights to tell Souths that he'll take his cash over 10 years in exchange for training him as a sports administrator (and guaranteeing him a job) ...

 

[Dash]

he is retired ... that much has confirmed.

the nrl haven't determined whether he meets the requirements of a medical retirement yet.

if he does, then this deal means nothing

if he doesn't then his salary will be carried on the cap, so this deal means nothing ... if Souths have to carry his salary on the cap, then it doesn't really matter what deal they work out with Sam to get his money. Sam is well within his rights to tell Souths that he'll take his cash over 10 years in exchange for training him as a sports administrator (and guaranteeing him a job) ...

Either of those things is fine.

What I'm expecting to happen though is his medical retirement will be denied, but Souths will be able to divide his salary up (cap-wise) into 10 easy payments, instead of having their salary cap wrecked for the next 3 seasons.

 

[Foordy]

Either of those things is fine.

What I'm expecting to happen though is his medical retirement will be denied, but Souths will be able to divide his salary up (cap-wise) into 10 easy payments, instead of having their salary cap wrecked for the next 3 seasons.

i think your mind is the only place that sort of thing has been speculated ...

 

[Unbreakable]

 

[tommy]

That last one is ridiculous. Just have to let them score?

 

[Battler]

They only need to enforce the current rules. The only thing stopping the game from flowing like it did in the 90's/ 2000's is Melbourne 'pioneered' wrestling and the Roosters' tactic of giving away deliberate penalties. Get rid of the fucking 20m 7 tackle reset as well which was only introduced because of Slater.

See a pattern here with a certain club ruining the game?

 

[mitch222]

So tall wingers are going to be in massive demand now with attacking players not being able to be tackled in the air now.

 

[Kimlo]

That last one is ridiculous. Just have to let them score?

If they position themselves to land hands first, it's either a try or a penalty. Genius rule.

 

[mitch222]

If they position themselves to land hands first, it's either a try or a penalty. Genius rule.

Nah its a try or penalty try

 

[BroncsFan]

Absolutely ridiculous rule about tackling in the air.... there is already a rule about for putting an attacking player into a dangerous position then it's a penalty.

What the **** is the defender meant to do now.

I thought they brought in the 7 tackle set to stop teams from kicking all the time for tries.

Seriously who the **** thought this was a rule that needed changing... to me the penalty try system needs an overhaul to stop teams blatantly giving away penalties on their try line... but nah let's stop defending teams from being able to defend even though absolutely no one had an issue with this rule.

There's already chaos about slight touches on fullbacks leading to penalties now it's going to happen up the other end where a cross field kick could be 50/50 as to whether you get a repeat set (not to mention the lottery that is blockers on kicks)