Australian Rugby / RA

[Bullrush]

Yes, absolutely RA is obliged to pay them unless all parties agree to terminate the contract.

You previously said "If the player is playing club rugby by their own decision, I wouldn't let them out of their contract to go anywhere else."

In that situation, why wouldn't RA agree to release them so they could stop paying their contract? It isn't like they're getting any value out of them.

Ah right....

This is what I would be telling players before they make their choice. If you refuse to play Super Rugby, we won't release you from the contract with the reimbursement of wages paid. See how that affects their market value as they shop themselves around while refusing to work.

 

[Rebel man]

Ah right....

This is what I would be telling players before they make their choice. If you refuse to play Super Rugby, we won't release you from the contract with the reimbursement of wages paid. See how that affects their market value as they shop themselves around while refusing to work.

They have to pay their wages next year then the contract is up and legally they can’t stand in their way

 

[Rebel man]

Also if the players are looking to go overseas, of course they will dig their heals in nominate the one club that can’t accommodate them and threaten to play club footy.

Of course RA want them at the Tahs or failing that the Force to improve the competitiveness of those sides. Yet they would rather release them then pay them not to play super rugby

 

[SouthernX]

What a clusterfuck centralisation will be if RA is running the program. I think urgent meeting needs be had with player agents, player unions to discuss future or RA contracts.

always thought a trade system like you see in the nba or nfl would need a trade clause kicker… say you sign a 3 year deal with qld reds but if on year 3 RA wants to move you over to Perth or ACT then a 20% pay rise must kick in for the inconvenience of relocating

 

[Bullrush]

They have to pay their wages next year then the contract is up and legally they can’t stand in their way

Yeah sure...once the contract is over, it's over.

But again....a lot of those guys can't afford to not be playing top level rugby and getting the best deal overseas....

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Jeepers what a mess this is.

 

[Adam84]

It is common knowledge.
Jordan DeGoey famously went to Cali in his off season to get fit then made the news for a bar fight on New Year’s Eve.

A whole group of Essendon players went on a self funded training camp in the US over their off season and now look likely to break a finals drought almost on par with our Bledisloe cup drought.

But keep telling yourself their only other option is F45

There are 2000 or so male AFL/NRL/Super Rugby players not including women, so maybe 3000 professional athletes in those codes overall. The above does support that the claim majority are engaging private coaches in the off-season or flying to the US for camps or training with personal coaches,

Anyway, until there's actual evidence to the contrary I'll leave this discussion there.

 

[Strewthcobber]

What a clusterfuck centralisation will be if RA is running the program. I think urgent meeting needs be had with player agents, player unions to discuss future or RA contracts.

always thought a trade system like you see in the nba or nfl would need a trade clause kicker… say you sign a 3 year deal with qld reds but if on year 3 RA wants to move you over to Perth or ACT then a 20% pay rise must kick in for the inconvenience of relocating

The CBA forbids any arrangement that allows a Super Rugby team or RA to transfer, draft or require a Player to play in a State or Territory of Australia other than the one in which they have a contract without the players consent.

 

[Bullrush]

Also if the players are looking to go overseas, of course they will dig their heals in nominate the one club that can’t accommodate them and threaten to play club footy.

Of course RA want them at the Tahs or failing that the Force to improve the competitiveness of those sides. Yet they would rather release them then pay them not to play super rugby

Again, if they have offers now and don't want to be considered for the Wallabies, let them go.

If they are hoping to refuse to work AND get an early release when an offer comes in, no way. Not without reimbursement of wages paid. See what the market is for a player who, by their own choice, hasn't played top footy for a year and last played for a club where they lost twice as much as they won for the last 3 years.

 

[Rebel man]

Again, if they have offers now and don't want to be considered for the Wallabies, let them go.

If they are hoping to refuse to work AND get an early release when an offer comes in, no way. Not without reimbursement of wages paid. See what the market is for a player who, by their own choice, hasn't played top footy for a year and last played for a club where they lost twice as much as they won for the last 3 years.

You can’t hold them after next year

 

[Bullrush]

You can’t hold them after next year

Which is why I haven't said anything like that.

 

[Rebel man]

Which is why I haven't said anything like that.

If they stay and play club footy next year their contract will expire and they will be free to leave

 

[Bullrush]

If they stay and play club footy next year their contract will expire and they will be free to leave

Sure - again, let them see what a year off playing top level rugby by choice does for their market value. It will have to be overseas though because I would never offer them an Australian gig again.

It might work out well for some...

 

[Adam84]

Honestly, the only player who's value might hold reasonably well with a year off, and who can actually afford their own personal coaching, S&C staff to deliver an equivalent level of service as to what he would get in the Wallabies/Super Rugby is Tupou.

 

[Wilson]

Sure - again, let them see what a year off playing top level rugby by choice does for their market value. It will have to be overseas though because I would never offer them an Australian gig again.

It might work out well for some...

I'm not sure I've fully followed your argument, but is it that RA should deny any release for these players choosing to play club and force them to see out their contracts before heading overseas?

Because if so I'm almost certain that's not possible. The players contracts are in a bit of a no man's land with the Rebels gone and they can currently leave pretty much whenever they want (there might be a small notice period). If they agree to go to another super rugby team they sign a new contract (or a contract variation) that then seems them locked in in the normal way requiring a release. That's why it's potentially in the interest of the players looking to head overseas not to just head to their only option, at least not right now at the beginning of the super rugby off season.

Even if RA do potentially have the power to block these players from taking a release, it's very likely RUPA would kick up a massive stink about it and/or the players would take them to court. It's a largely a no win play on RA's part and any savvy agent would call their bluff.

 

[Bullrush]

I'm not sure I've fully followed your argument, but is it that RA should deny any release for these players choosing to play club and force them to see out their contracts before heading overseas?

Because if so I'm almost certain that's not possible. The players contracts are in a bit of a no man's land with the Rebels gone and they can currently leave pretty much whenever they want (there might be a small notice period). If they agree to go to another super rugby team they sign a new contract (or a contract variation) that then seems them locked in in the normal way requiring a release. That's why it's potentially in the interest of the players looking to head overseas not to just head to their only option, at least not right now at the beginning of the super rugby off season.

Even if RA do potentially have the power to block these players from taking a release, it's very likely RUPA would kick up a massive stink about it and/or the players would take them to court. It's a largely a no win play on RA's part and any savvy agent would call their bluff.

So a player doesn't have to honor the contract - they can play whenever they like - but RA does and are bound to keep paying them?

If their contract is with the Rebels and not RA, then why is RA on the hook for the payments?

Even if RA can't stop them from being released, it should be clear that it is the last contract they will get in Australia. Again, that may suit some players....but as I said before, no player is bigger than the jersey - definitely not the majority of the guys on that list.

 

[Mick The Munch]

Another unmitigated disaster - the fact this wasn’t seen up before the decision to shut down the Rebels is ridiculous - 11 players - potentially $2m in salaries playing in the hospital cup

 

[Highlander35]

I honestly think we weren't too far from a few hundred thousand getting paid to play Dewar Shield, you should count your blessings if it was all in the Hospital Cup.

 

[Wilson]

So a player doesn't have to honor the contract - they can play whenever they like - but RA does and are bound to keep paying them?

If their contract is with the Rebels and not RA, then why is RA on the hook for the payments?

Even if RA can't stop them from being released, it should be clear that it is the last contract they will get in Australia. Again, that may suit some players....but as I said before, no player is bigger than the jersey - definitely not the majority of the guys on that list.

The contract is tripartite with the player, the rebels and RA and technically it has already been breached as it is to play super rugby in Melbourne. Part of that (or maybe part of the CBA separately, I'm not sure of the structure) is that RA has agreed to honour all contracts in the event of a team being removed from super rugby, and that they can't direct players to a specific team, or any team at all. These players seeing out their time in club rugby is honouring the contract they, and RA, signed.

I would be amazed if RA took the never to return stance - it would be cutting off their nose to spite their face and totally out of line with their handling of Izack Rodda's departure from the Reds and return to the Force, which is another situation of a player not agreeing to a variation. Similarly what would be the difference between these players and Uelese and Kemeny who have already departed?

Also, I'm not so sure that sort of blackballing is entirely legal and RA might get themselves into more trouble voicing that stance.

 

[Wilson]

Another unmitigated disaster - the fact this wasn’t seen up before the decision to shut down the Rebels is ridiculous - 11 players - potentially $2m in salaries playing in the hospital cup

They would've been well aware of the potential. There is a lot of noise being made right now because of the rejection of the tahs (or at least the article about it) but the issue is far from resolved, and doesn't really need to be resolved until October/November in most cases. For players that want to play for a specific super side RA will likely cave (to some degree), but many of those players stances will also likely soften and change as this all plays at. In most cases compromises will probably be reached, even if that means a few go overseas.

Taking the Force axing (which was arguably more acrimonious) as a guide only one player saw out their contract in clubland, and that was Robbie Coleman who took it as a retirement season.