R360: Kick-Off Delayed Til 2028

[WorkingClassRugger]

I've always thought that a part of the reasoning behind these size of the offers apparently coming from R360 was always to cover players potential earning should they be prohibited from playing Test Rugby. I guess with this statement we are going to see if the money is enough to sway them.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I've always thought that a part of the reasoning behind these size of the offers apparently coming from R360 was always to cover players potential earning should they be prohibited from playing Test Rugby. I guess with this statement we are going to see if the money is enough to sway them.

They were eating their cake and trying to have it too by specifically avoiding the 6 nations

 

[PhilClinton]

I think a lot of the players decision making will come down to what money is guaranteed vs portions of salary only available if the player isn't injured or away on international duties (in the event of a clash).

From what I understand the R360 player contracts specifically mention they are free to play international rugby. As rightfully raised by others here, current contracts in Japan and Europe have the same caveats but players themselves are choosing not to participate to ensure they aren't at risk of losing their highly paid salary if they get injured or in some cases for the smaller nations, the match payments simply aren't the same as their normal club salary.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Just trying to squeeze the NRL for more money. He knows he and his manager know he's a marquee player that the NRL wouldn't want to lose.

He's about to receieve a very healthy extension from Brisbane that probably just jumped a few hundred thousand with this. They'll be shitty because they cap squeeze is going to be brutal for the Broncos when you look at the roster and they only got their first comp with the group.

Some players who love Test Rugby and pride in it will be forced if the offer is that good. Easy for us to sit here and talk about how much it means but to have genuine numbers put in front of you changes everything. It's completely family changing for players.

 

[Rob42]

This all seems a bit weak from the Unions

I don't think it's weak - it's the unions playing their trump card. At the very least, players will know what they're signing up to, at best (for the unions) it will force R360 to negotiate in relation to Test availability.

 

[PhilClinton]

I don't think it's weak - it's the unions playing their trump card. At the very least, players will know what they're signing up to, at best (for the unions) it will force R360 to negotiate in relation to Test availability.

What is there to renegotiate with the players?

The player contracts allow them to play in international games. It's the unions who are saying if they sign, they won't let them.

The unions are doing this to prevent their talent loss, not because the players are being made unavailable.

 

[Tomthumb]

I don't think it's weak - it's the unions playing their trump card. At the very least, players will know what they're signing up to, at best (for the unions) it will force R360 to negotiate in relation to Test availability.

It feels like a panic move and collusion to keep players wages low

 

[Omar Comin']

I don't think it's weak - it's the unions playing their trump card. At the very least, players will know what they're signing up to, at best (for the unions) it will force R360 to negotiate in relation to Test availability.

Most of those unions already exclude foreign based players. Even South Africa doesn't pick that many from outside its domestic teams. Plenty of top players still move in their peak.

But there was never going to be a huge exodus before the world cup anyway - most top players are already signed until then. But what happens if over 50% of the Springboks, All Blacks, England and Wallabies world cup squads sign on to R360 for 2028?

I suspect this will happen straight away in the womens game. If almost all of the top 100 female players in the world sign up, do the unions still ban them from test selection? They can, but then test rugby will clearly not be the pinnacle of the womens game. It'd be like tennis in the 1950's and 60's - Wimbledon still existed as a tournament but it was never won by the best players in the world because they played on the professional circuit and were banned from it.

 

[Rob42]

What is there to renegotiate with the players?

The player contracts allow them to play in international games. It's the unions who are saying if they sign, they won't let them.

The unions are doing this to prevent their talent loss, not because the players are being made unavailable.

The first season starts in Oct 2026. It's reasonable that the unions will be worried that R360 players will forgo the end of season tour to avoid losing match payments for the first 6-8 weeks of that season.

 

[liquor box]

He's about to receieve a very healthy extension from Brisbane that probably just jumped a few hundred thousand with this. They'll be shitty because they cap squeeze is going to be brutal for the Broncos when you look at the roster and they only got their first comp with the group.

Some players who love Test Rugby and pride in it will be forced if the offer is that good. Easy for us to sit here and talk about how much it means but to have genuine numbers put in front of you changes everything. It's completely family changing for players.

I often think about this, how many Wallabies caps does it take to be satisfied? Is it the number of caps or who you have played, maybe who you have beaten.

For me, I think a single cap proves you have got the pinnacle of Australian rugby, any more is just icing on the cake.

Rugby Players are only one tackle or knee injury away from losing their income stream. They should look after their future.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I also think players could have a genuine decision conundrum about it at any point of their careers but if a number was 1m more over say 3 years the decision can be taken out of your hands even if you'd rather take the other.

Imagine being in your mid 20s with a young family and all you want is to go to a WC but you are also offered money that is life changing for your kids future? People often sacrifice personal goals.

 

[PhilClinton]

The first season starts in Oct 2026. It's reasonable that the unions will be worried that R360 players will forgo the end of season tour to avoid losing match payments for the first 6-8 weeks of that season.

I am not sure I'd call this step reasonable.

The unions have simply decided to use fear as a tool to try and threaten players with bans, rather than actually review what is going on.

And yes, what you mention may potentially be an outcome, but as far as the player contracts go, they are free to play in the games.

 

[Braveheart81]

I am not sure I'd call this step reasonable.

The unions have simply decided to use fear as a tool to try and threaten players with bans, rather than actually review what is going on.

How do you review what is going on? Details are scant yet players are supposedly on the verge of signing contracts.

I don't see what else national unions can or should do.

They should treat this as an unsanctioned rebel league because at this stage that's exactly what it is.

 

[PhilClinton]

Their statement says R360 haven't been collaborative or transparent.

But talking to the solicitors I know who are dealing with some of the contracts here in Australia, their response today is the unions haven't met with the players either or opened up meaningful dialogue around solutions. Everyone has been blindsided by this statement.

So potentially RA assessing the current state of their playing group and getting those managers/players together for conversations around the contracts before issuing a blanket ban statement would help.

I just don't see how this statement ends up reflecting well for the unions involved. They'll either stand strong and end up losing a fair chunk of talent at international level for at least 2-3 years and in Australia that would be very bad (particularly for the women's game as I can't see how our local funding will come close to R360). Or end up having to wind it back and then are coming from a position of weakness.

 

[barbarian]

But RA don't want this to happen, nobody does. There is absolutely no benefit to them in it going ahead. So surely now is the time to try and knock it on the head. Sitting back and being non-committal about it will only see more players sign on.

My understanding is that players are currently considering whether to sign full contracts. I think this is pretty relevant information for them to take in during that process and will hopefully cause many of them not to sign.

I don't want R360, I want it to die. Saudi blood money can get as far away from our sport as humanly possible.

 

[liquor box]

Their statement says R360 haven't been collaborative or transparent.

But talking to the solicitors I know who are dealing with some of the contracts here in Australia, their response today is the unions haven't met with the players either or opened up meaningful dialogue around solutions. Everyone has been blindsided by this statement.

So potentially RA assessing the current state of their playing group and getting those managers/players together for conversations around the contracts before issuing a blanket ban statement would help.

I just don't see how this statement ends up reflecting well for the unions involved. They'll either stand strong and end up losing a fair chunk of talent at international level for at least 2-3 years and in Australia that would be very bad (particularly for the women's game as I can't see how our local funding will come close to R360). Or end up having to wind it back and then are coming from a position of weakness.

I think they will have to let the women play for the Wallaroos, we won't have a team left, it will also impact our 7's program too.

There is barely enough talent as it is, but if you actually offer them decent money they will leave in a second.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Their statement says R360 haven't been collaborative or transparent.

But talking to the solicitors I know who are dealing with some of the contracts here in Australia, their response today is the unions haven't met with the players either or opened up meaningful dialogue around solutions. Everyone has been blindsided by this statement.

So potentially RA assessing the current state of their playing group and getting those managers/players together for conversations around the contracts before issuing a blanket ban statement would help.

I just don't see how this statement ends up reflecting well for the unions involved. They'll either stand strong and end up losing a fair chunk of talent at international level for at least 2-3 years and in Australia that would be very bad (particularly for the women's game as I can't see how our local funding will come close to R360). Or end up having to wind it back and then are coming from a position of weakness.

I thought anyone involved with the details around R360 has had to sign a non-disclosure agreement (including players?). If that's true how can the Unions have a meaningful conversation about it?

 

[PhilClinton]

I thought anyone involved with the details around R360 has had to sign a non-disclosure agreement (including players?). If that's true how can the Unions have a meaningful conversation about it?

The league itself isn't a mystery though.

My point is from what I understand, RA (unsure about other unions) haven't even attempted to address R360 with their key players in a meaningful way.

Even if a dozen players have signed NDAs, it doesn't stop RA from getting whom they deem to be their most important players into a room with or without their managers and provide their side of the narrative from a constructive point of view. They are their current employers. The players don't have to say anything.

The unions obviously feel like they know enough about the competition without talking to players, and I am sure there has been a contract slipped through the cracks at some point.

 

[barbarian]

Phil Waugh has talked to Mike Tindall, I believe. He said as much in an interview recently. So I don't think RA are uninformed about the competition.

I think R360's comments about players being free to play internationally is a bit disingenuous. What if a test clashes with a R360 round? What about a training camp? What happens to players if they are injured during a test and can't play R360? The 'you can have your cake and eat it too' just rings very hollow with me.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Phil Waugh has talked to Mike Tindall, I believe. He said as much in an interview recently. So I don't think RA are uninformed about the competition.

I think R360's comments about players being free to play internationally is a bit disingenuous. What if a test clashes with a R360 round? What about a training camp? What happens to players if they are injured during a test and can't play R360? The 'you can have your cake and eat it too' just rings very hollow with me.

That "being available for international rugby" surely means they will be available for 6 nations, and 3 tests in July and November, and absolutely nothing else.