Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
Thanks, Admin.
It's a fucking stupid idea. Salary cap does not apply to Rebels? Certainly does not apply to NZ & RSA teams.
The salary cap is designed to spread the talent across all the teams in a competition. It is not designed to limit 4 teams in a 15 team competition.
If the ARU wants to keep a limit on the franchise spending, they can do this by requiring franchises to submit budgets to be approved by the ARU to qualify for any ARU grants.
If the Reds for example grow their revenues substantially, why can't they spend more on their players?
If it's true that because the Rebels are privatley owned they don't have to adhere to the slary cap, then it seems their plan to buy the entire Wallaby team is well under way! How's that spreading the wealth?
This is gonna sound harsh to a couple of teams, but in a purely marketing/revenue perspective the Rebels need to be as strong as QLD & NSW. It will be a few years until there local comps are able to produce players at a regular pace so having them able to field a strong side even if through recruitment like this is good.
As was said, there losing Delve who seems to have been a massive influence down there both on and off the field, so Higgers isn't going down there as an extravagance, he is a much needed and required player for them.
It sucks for QLD as he was really becoming one of there best consistently, but his departure opens up opportunity for others and that's good for Aus rugby.
AFAIK the ARU give the same amount of cash to each Aussie Super side for player payments. I think the difference is 3rd party money, which all sides are allowed to use, just the Rebels have more of it than most.
.
There has been a couple of articles written that have suggested it's the case, that there private ownership actually makes the ARU salary cap a restriction of trade and they dint have to abide by it but none of them that I can remember have actually said the rebels are going to do this.
I would suggest that the rebels and there management would be aware that spending millions more on players and alienating the other franchises would lead to a pretty frosty board room if they ever needed support for a vote.
I would've preferred to loose Genia than Higginbotham to be honest.
Anyway the Force & Rebels are going about this the wrong way. They are trying to patch stars together thinking it will get them into finals football. The Force failed when they tried to do this the first time round in 2005, and then they tried it again with Genia. The idea of the extra provinces is to espose the talent sitting in a log jam at Queensland and NSW, not poach top developed stars away from these two states.
The Brumbies got it spot on in 1996 when they came on board, and they are getting it right again with the shake up conducted by Jake White. Culture and hard work driven from the top down breeds success, not 1 or 2 star signings.
With the Reds winning the S15 last year it raised the profile of rugby across the whole country. Got more people interested and now numbers are up. If all teams are barely competitive how is that a good thing for the game?
How many of you non Reds supporters had them as your second team last year?
We need a Crusader like team in AUS to keep the media interest. Unfortunately rugby isn't the most popular sport in AUS but at least the Reds kept the lights on last year!
If a union can afford to pay their players what they're after they should be able to do it. That would also pull in more guys that may have gone to other codes and thereby grow the game..
That's the point Inkosi. These people are already rugby followers. I don't know if the Reds success would have pulled a lot of new interest outside of QLD.
If the Rebels and Force could be considered as play-off contenders most years with recognisable names taking the field, I think it would be much better than having a 'crusaders' that consistently wins or competes for the title. If that happens in a country like this where there is so much competition between the codes, rugby runs the risk of becoming 'that game they play in QLD'.
If your own local team has a shot of finals glory, it pulls interest no matter what sport you follow.
Do you have facts to support that? We also won the Tri-Nations, and it was a RWC year.
I am not arguing the Reds win was not great for Aussie rugby. But I must make the following points;
1. The Salary Cap system is not hugely different from what was in place before. It isn't like players were all on $300k and are now looking at $100k. The budget of $4.4 (for 2012) is not too far different from the budget's at S15 sides before.
2. There is an interesting notion at the core of what a few are arguing here. Basically that the Reds should be given carte blanche to pay their guys whatever they want, because AUSTRALIAN RUGBY NEEDS A CHAMPION. This ignores the reality that a) the Reds don't have that much cash to begin with (as shown in Skip's great analysis on the blog) and b) the Reds can keep all the players they want, it's just they have to take a slight pay cut.
So you guys can have your cake and eat it too, it's just that you have to take a slight pay cut. The Melbourne Storm guys did it. Will Genia did it.
It's hardly the big bad ARU forcing Higgers to take the cash. And it wasn't like he would be earning a pittance if he stayed at the Reds. Higgers is chasing the dollar here, which he is well within his rights to do. But the blame for this decision should be firmly with him.
Higginbotham has pretty much come out and said him staying in QLD is dependent on the ARU reaching a salary cap deal with the RUPA. Until the deal is reached the reds are working under the proviso that the salary cap is the same as this years, whereas the rebels are not subject to a salary cap as they are privately owned.
The reds have the money to keep him, the ARU is just fucking them around with the salary cap situation.
We need a Crusader like team in AUS to keep the media interest. Unfortunately rugby isn't the most popular sport in AUS but at least the Reds kept the lights on last year!
Geez, turn it up! One S15 title does not a Crusaders-like dynasty make.
And even if the Reds go on to become the greatest S15 team in the history of SANZAR rugby, if the other 4 Oz teams are scrubbing the bottom of the table it is just simply not good for Oz rugby.
Until the deal is reached the reds are working under the proviso that the salary cap is the same as this years, whereas the rebels are not subject to a salary cap as they are privately owned.
The reds have the money to keep him, the ARU is just fucking them around with the salary cap situation.
So if the Reds had the money to keep him, why isn't he signing with them?
I agree the negotiations are a clusterfuck, but Higgers decision still comes back to fundamental economics. It wasn't like the Reds weren't going to offer him a contract. If he really wanted to stay with the Reds he could have.
I would've preferred to loose Genia than Higginbotham to be honest.
Anyway the Force & Rebels are going about this the wrong way. They are trying to patch stars together thinking it will get them into finals football. The Force failed when they tried to do this the first time round in 2005, and then they tried it again with Genia. The idea of the extra provinces is to espose the talent sitting in a log jam at Queensland and NSW, not poach top developed stars away from these two states.
The Brumbies got it spot on in 1996 when they came on board, and they are getting it right again with the shake up conducted by Jake White. Culture and hard work driven from the top down breeds success, not 1 or 2 star signings.
Of course the Force and the Rebels are poaching stars. They do not have any home-grown at the moment and will not have for 10 years.
You cannot compare the ACT to WA or Vic; these teams sit in non-rugby areas and they had to build an F1 racing car in an area that was shaking along in go-carts. They also need a figurehead or two to get sponsors and fans on-board; think Sharpe and Giteau for the Force, and Cipriani, JOC (James O'Connor) and Beale for the Rebels. It's not about finals, it's about establishing a team and getting support.
Same for developing the up and coming QLD and NSW talent. Develop them where? The club rugby scene in Melbourne is immature and will set back young talent rather than develop them. The Rebels and the Force need ready made players now. Where do they get them? Have a guess.....
So if the Reds had the money to keep him, why isn't he signing with them?
I agree the negotiations are a clusterfuck, but Higgers decision still comes back to fundamental economics. It wasn't like the Reds weren't going to offer him a contract. If he really wanted to stay with the Reds he could have.
The reds have the money but if they offer higginbotham more than the current deal, they won't be able to fit him under the salary cap. This is the problem.
Keep in mind they have to keep space under the cap to re-sign cooper, tapuai, shipperly and hanson.
The reds have the money but if they offer higginbotham more than the current deal, they won't be able to fit him under the salary cap. This is the problem.
Keep in mind they have to keep space under the cap to re-sign cooper, tapuai, shipperly and hanson.
So offer him less. If he really wanted to stay he would. And why does he have to decide now? Surely he can hold off until RUPA's negotiation with the ARU has produced an outcome?
My point is this- in a world with no salary cap the Reds would still be struggling to hold onto their top players. Despite 2011 their finances still aren't in great shape. S
.
The fact that the Force tired to go for the star approach, and failed? or the fact that ACT went for the log jam players and succeeded, and look like they will again in the coming seasons? The ACT had very few home grown players in 1996, and a lot of there talent today is still not from the ACT.
The Rebels need to go after players like Quirk and younger Fainga'a who are stuck just outside the 22, not break the bank on Higginbotham. The Force need a good cold shower if they think signing a halfback will solve there lower table worries.
The Force need a good cold showerNIB facilities upgraded to include a hot water system if they think signing a decent halfback will solve there lower table worries.
So offer him less. If he really wanted to stay he would. And why does he have to decide now? Surely he can hold off until RUPA's negotiation with the ARU has produced an outcome?
My point is this- in a world with no salary cap the Reds would still be struggling to hold onto their top players. Despite 2011 their finances still aren't in great shape. S
.
There are a number of reasons for him wanting to decide now, firstly because he is in good form at the moment which helps his negotiations, secondly because after this he has to negotiate with the aru, and if those negotiations fail he has to then negotiate overseas, which needs to be done before the start of the next european or japanese season.
I understand your point completely, but none of your reasoning's back it up. The reds finances are still not in great shape but on field success if paramount to them continuing to improve. And they believe signing higgers is paramount to on field success.
Scott Higginbotham ... 'It's not the most enjoyable time, especially when you just want to do your job.' Source: News Limited
Wallabies flanker Scott Higginbotham has voiced his frustration at Australian rugby's new contracting regime which has been complicated by the cloud over a proposed Super Rugby salary cap. While fellow Test back-rowe Wycliff Palu knocked back a lucrative Japanese offer to re-sign with the Australian Rugby Union, Higginbotham is annoyed by a process which is leaving more players in limbo.
Despite playing in a 15-team competition where 10 foreign teams aren't restricted by a salary cap, Australia's Super Rugby teams have been told they must adhere to the equalisation measure once a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is finalised. But negotiations between the ARU and the Rugby Union Players Association (RUPA) over the CBA have hit a major speedbump and the cap amount remains undetermined.
RUPA wants to see a cap of $4.8 million but if the two bodies don't agree on the ever-lingering CBA, the figure will stand at $4.1 million in 2013 and reduce to $3.9 million in 2014. However if the CBA, first ratified in 2004, rolls over, a cap technically can't be enforced, while it also won't apply to the privately-owned Melbourne Rebels.
In a bid to rein in its spending, the Australian Rugby Union has also decentralised its contracting system with less players given national top-up deals. Top-up offers are now made after players negotiate with the provinces first, whereas in the past it was the reverse where negotiations started at a national level and Super Rugby contracts were even across the board, apart from third-party deals.
Now top-line players are agreeing to offers from their province on the proviso they receive the top-up they expect from the ARU, prompting players to then look overseas or interstate when it's not forthcoming. That's the situation that Higginbotham, among others, has been left in following positive discussions with Queensland before starting negotiations with the ARU last month.
Although the in-form 25-year-old is now rated ahead of former Test skipper Rocky Elsom as Australia's best No.6, he's currently weighing up interest overseas and interstate. He admitted his frustration at the new system as he flew back into Brisbane following the Reds' 15-11 loss to the Crusaders.
"I'm definitely frustrated by it, what player's not?" he said.
"It (contract negotiations) is a tough thing to go through. It's not the most enjoyable time, especially when you just want to do your job.
"It's all pretty complicated and it's hard to sort stuff out when you don't have a guarantee with the ARU, but it's always tough."
While it was last week reported he'd agreed to a new two-year deal with Queensland, Higginbotham denied he'd agreed on anything.
"I obviously want to stay in Queensland," he said.
"But it's just a process of going back and forth with my manager and I'm trying to stay out of it as much as I can."
I'm disappointed to see Higgers go but you are often
going to loose players whether it is determined by a salary cap or a balance sheet. I believe the salary cap is too limited and that there are better systems out there. However, if you are going to have the salary cap as your system, it should apply to everyone in the competition. A level playing field for one and all. Could the 'saders keep McCaw, Carter, Franks, Franks, Read, Ellis, Fruean, Dagg, Guildford...with a salary cap of $4.1m? I bet the grocery bill for the Whitelock's is more than that.
Salary caps or not, the Rebels need a decent backrower to replace Devle and Higgers fits the bill, both in terms of watchabillity and having another international down there to help them establish a following and a better winning record.
The Reds have Schatz and Eddie Quirk (no relation to yours truely) and they are both fantastic backrow prospects, along with Gill and Robinson who are all young, the more game time that all of them can get, the better for Aussie rugby.
and as someone has already said, at least we can still watch Higgers in Gold, I'd mouch rather him in Melbourne for the money than in Toulon
