Australian Rugby / RA

[Ignoto]

Is that the magnitude of contract that Samu walked away from?!

If so he can get farrrrkkkkkkked

$3.6m vs $2.650m (800+900+950 for the first three years) to play in Japan vs Australia with the difference being more than a years salary he'd get from RA. It's a no brainer and I guarantee you'd do the exact same thing.

Rather than trying to compete with the money on offer in Japan and the EU, RA should be looking at alternatives on how to secure players. For example, what can they do for the players transition post rugby life. The money a player will earn won't be enough to live off for 50+ years, so they're going to need a job post retirement.

Rather than trying to maintain the status quo, RA should be adapting with the times or work out how to get the big bucks injected into our game.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Kerevi's Japan offer was only for three years but the point does remain. About the same amount of money, but for one year less

 

[Ignoto]

Kerevi's Japan offer was only for three years but the point does remain. About the same amount of money, but for one year less

Cheers, slightly tweaked the figures and used the first three years of the RA contract.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Yeah it looks like Samu turned down a pretty decent offer from RA. I don't blame him for taking the extra cash, but I don't think it would have been wise to mortgage the farm to keep him. There is only so much you can do.

 

[Derpus]

It's just a shame Izzy waited as long as he did to spit the dummy. If it was last year we could have easily redirected the necessary funds to Kerevi (although justifying it on Kerevi's form last year might have been a stretch).

 

[Tex]

Samu is lucky to have commanded such an offer from RA. Churlish to leave it on the table imo

 

[Ignoto]

I dunno Derpus, it's probably too short sighted. Imagine what even half of the $1m could do if spent at the 16 - 21 year old space. If you spend that money on developing 3 Kerevi's you won't be too phased if one decides to go to Japan/Europe.

Sure, that's more pain in the short term, but in 3-5 years you'll see the benefit.

 

[Derpus]

I dunno Derpus, it's probably too short sighted. Imagine what even half of the $1m could do if spent at the 16 - 21 year old space. If you spend that money on developing 3 Kerevi's you won't be too phased if one decides to go to Japan/Europe.

Sure, that's more pain in the short term, but in 3-5 years you'll see the benefit.

Yeah but the results are more varied. Turning promise into actual talent carries higher risk.

I agree that we need to spend more on grass roots but we also need to retain the talent once developed.

What good is it if we make 3 Kerevi's and they all leave at 24?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Yeah, if you have ambition of being the best team in the world (and surely we do) than we are going to have to pay our very top players what they are worth, otherwise we have no hope

 

[Adam84]

I dunno Derpus, it's probably too short sighted. Imagine what even half of the $1m could do if spent at the 16 - 21 year old space. If you spend that money on developing 3 Kerevi's you won't be too phased if one decides to go to Japan/Europe.

Sure, that's more pain in the short term, but in 3-5 years you'll see the benefit.

Yeah but Tv broadcasters aren’t paying for 16-21 year olds, nor are they willing to wait 3-5 years to see the benefit

 

[I like to watch]

Yeah, if you have ambition of being the best team in the world (and surely we do) than we are going to have to pay our very top players what they are worth, otherwise we have no hope

I think that ship has sailed.
Unless RA find another revenue stream, they won’t be able to compete with NH $$$.

 

[I like to watch]

Fuck you Israel Folau.........

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...-against-rugby-australia-20190620-p51zm0.html

 

[dillyboy]

Fuck you Israel Folau...

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...-against-rugby-australia-20190620-p51zm0.html

Yep, he's an A grade arsehat!!

I like the counter page: https://www.gofundme.com/f/the-teac...edium=social&utm_campaign=fb_dn_postdonate_ro

 

[wamberal]

Talking about money, I reckon we should be betting the house on some of the under 20s. I for one am not all that unhappy about Samu going, he was okay, but not a match winner at the top level (IMHO).

 

[Tex]

Talking about money, I reckon we should be betting the house on some of the under 20s. I for one am not all that unhappy about Samu going, he was okay, but not a match winner at the top level (IMHO).

Not yet at least, but the potential was clear

 

[Derpus]

Talking about money, I reckon we should be betting the house on some of the under 20s. I for one am not all that unhappy about Samu going, he was okay, but not a match winner at the top level (IMHO).

Mate he is only 25 and just had his best ever season. Only ever going to get better. It's a huge blow.

 

[Muzza]

why can't RA have transfer fees like soccer does? We train up the talent then they leave to go elsewhere(which is totally fine)
Why can't we go for transfer fees to the clubs that they are going to? It would put extra money in RA pockets to cover costs and some extra

 

[Braveheart81]

why can't RA have transfer fees like soccer does? We train up the talent then they leave to go elsewhere(which is totally fine)
Why can't we go for transfer fees to the clubs that they are going to? It would put extra money in RA pockets to cover costs and some extra

Transfer fees only apply when a player leaves whilst still contracted. It encourages teams to offload their star players whilst sill under contract if they don't think they'll be able to re-sign them.

If you look at European football, most of the transfer fees are shared between the top clubs. Lower level clubs end up selling their star player to make sure they can pay a bunch of inferior players.

If rugby introduced transfer fees it would encourage unions to sign players to longer contracts and then actively shop them to wealthy overseas clubs. I'm not convinced it would actually help.

 

[Strewthcobber]

why can't RA have transfer fees like soccer does? We train up the talent then they leave to go elsewhere(which is totally fine)
Why can't we go for transfer fees to the clubs that they are going to? It would put extra money in RA pockets to cover costs and some extra

RA can ask for a transfer fee if they are losing a contracted player. We aren't losing contracted players, they are essentially free agents

The alternative is contracting players for much longer terms, with the obvious issues that raises

 

[Rebels3]

RA can ask for a transfer fee if they are losing a contracted player. We aren't losing contracted players, they are essentially free agents

The alternative is contracting players for much longer terms, with the obvious issues that raises

I think the model will eventually go that way as clubs up North become richer.

The issue we have at the moment is we are caught in no mans land with lots of money up north but not enough to splash for transfers. Enough though to create a divide.

We’d be better off the clubs become stinking rich and generate enormous revenues from producing talent and attracting talent so players would rather play rugby than league (people forget the Nrl pays as good as the top rugby comps) or the clubs financially struggling up north so we can retain our own talent and maximize our own revenues. I think it’ll end up the former with the growth blowing out to new levels, which in 10yrs time will create another revenue stream of Aus been a major trader of players. New Zealand will become the football equivalent of Brazil, South Africa the Argentina and Australia perhaps the Dutch for supplying talent for other competitions.