Nathan Sharpe

[The Mayor of Perth]

Having said all that, Sharpe was outed from the Wobs 2 years ago until he showed he could still cut the mustard. The fact that he has done so to such a high level (and the lack of quality second row personell coming behind) should be rewarded.

Hear hear! Can trace his good form back to Twickenham, 15 Nov 2008 when he and Baxter, Moore and co comprehensively stitched up Borthwick, Sheridan and co. He had an outstanding Super season last year. My only worry is that another after-match interview after the Force has snatched another draw or loss from the jaws of victory might do him in.

 

[daz]

But it doesn't make sense if you are trying to stop players from going for the Euros.

Where do French and Japanese players go for a twilight superannuation??

 

[Gnostic]

Fair is Fair Daz. I had to agree with you. Twice in one week FFS.

I don't think that many would leave if they had a base salary and incentives. With the proper structure they cold match and in some cases exceed their current pay.

 

[daz]

Fair is Fair Daz. I had to agree with you. Twice in one week FFS.

I don't think that many would leave if they had a base salary and incentives. With the proper structure they cold match and in some cases exceed their current pay.

Yeah, my nut-sack has shrivelled up too.

Human nature, with few exceptions, seems to be: Why work hard to gain something (staying with the ARU) that could be given freely elsewhere (France/Japan)?

Sure they could miss out on some silverware along the way, but drinking from a Bledisloe Cup doesn't pay the bills.....

Or am I being overly cynical?

 

[Gnostic]

Don't make me agree with you again.

My counter to your statement is simple, if they don't want to work to achieve the KPIs for the incentives and/or do not back themselves to be able to do why should they get a lazy pay day like a politician or a Judge?

 

[daz]

My counter to your statement is simple, if they don't want to work to achieve the KPIs for the incentives and/or do not back themselves to be able to do why should they get a lazy pay day like a politician or a Judge?

[refer question to JON] Please respond [/refer question to JON]

 

[waratahjesus]

agree with most of what has been said, his form over the last two years has been great and he has been loyal. on the other hand incentive based contracts are great. the article doesnt actually say what the incentives are so until we know that he wont earn the same or higher money if he manages to make several tests next year its all pretty speculative.

the cutbacks being talked about if everyone goes on incentives will be the people that dont make the squad dont make the extra money and the ARU doesnt have to pay them. therefore each player is responsable for his/her (quade) own form. as a nation i know being responsable for your own actions is not the way the masses want it, but its going to make for better, hungrier, more aggresive players.

 

[TOCC]

Phil Waugh earns a ARU top up but Nathan Sharpe wont......

hmmmmm, how is that for rewarding representational duties?

 

[Penguin]

Sharpe isn't as loyal as some of you are making him out to be. He jumped ship from the Reds in a heartbeat when the Force came along, when he was an integral part of the rebuilding of a team in transition, captain no less!
He'll still make the money as long as he's still good enough..... and the way he has matured as a player tells me he will be, at least until the Lions tour... it's the carrot at the end of a career lucky enough to coincide with one.

 

[TOCC]

agree with most of what has been said, his form over the last two years has been great and he has been loyal. on the other hand incentive based contracts are great. the article doesnt actually say what the incentives are so until we know that he wont earn the same or higher money if he manages to make several tests next year its all pretty speculative.

the cutbacks being talked about if everyone goes on incentives will be the people that dont make the squad dont make the extra money and the ARU doesnt have to pay them. therefore each player is responsable for his/her (quade) own form. as a nation i know being responsable for your own actions is not the way the masses want it, but its going to make for better, hungrier, more aggresive players.

Incentive based contracts aren't that great, from a players perspective they still have mortgages and families to look after, often a guaranteed income of lower value can be better then a incentive based contract with potential greater returns due to the security that the guaranteed contract offers.

My company went down a similar path a few years ago, some people were laughing all the way to the bank at first, then incidents outside there control impacted on our customers demand and investment returns, and suddenly everyone was making cutbacks, guys had homes they couldn't keep, cars they had to sell, the whole thing was pretty messy. It saved our company $millions though, ive gone freelance and most of the older guys with families have moved on to competing companies now.

 

[waratahjesus]

Agree tocc, but it's great for the ARU.

That said, it would be Robbie we should attack not JON. Doesn't Robbie have total backing and control? Meaning he must have said sharpe wasn't in his plans.

 

[fatprop]

Phil Waugh earns a ARU top up but Nathan Sharpe wont......

hmmmmm, how is that for rewarding representational duties?

I can't imagine Waugh getting another ARU contract, i thought he was just finishing off his current contract.......

The challenge with these articles is that we just don't know the criteria, how long did Sharpe want, how much etc etc

Sharpe clearly is not going to be there for the next RWC, so how long is fair?

 

[Shiggins]

Who's too say he won't be in good form for another 4 years? Look at Thorn.

As for leaving the reds he is still loyal too Australian rugby and thats the point.

The problem here is that it is embarrassing too sharpie. He is the best lock in aus and a very important part of the wallabies and he is being treated differently too other guys in the same situation. It's fucking embarrassing.!!


Go the force!!!!

 

[Scotty]

Same thing happened to Latham, who at the time, along with Mortlock was the best and most experienced back in the Wallabies. Latham was even younger than Sharpe though (and would have clearly made this world cup).

It is very insulting when you compare to the Flowers era of offering stupid money to the likes of Tuqiri, who clearly never gave as much to the game as these two players.

 

[Scarfman]

The thing that is weird is that if you had to rank Australia's forwards you would have Sharpie in the top 2-3.

But I'd bet that lower ranked players are getting top ups simply because they are younger. I'm not QUITE as paranoid as WJ but again this smells a bit of Robbie's youth fancying.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I can only imagine that the ARU have taken the view that Sharpie is nearing the end of his career and won't be around for a great deal longer. That would be the only circumstance under which I would consider not giving him a top up. His form over the last couple of seasons (since getting dropped) has certainly warranted more money.

 

[Ash]

I would also guess that it being the year after the world cup would have influenced the decision as well.

 

[Bruce Ross]

I would also guess that it being the year after the world cup would have influenced the decision as well.

I agree, Ash. But the best thing we could do to advance Australian rugby is to forget about the big quadrennial knockout tournament and even the 2013 Lions Tour and focus on trying to be competitive every time the Wallabies take the field.

Players have very limited careers and deserve the opportunity to represent their country while ever they are the best in their position, not to be passed over for someone who may be Test standard in eighteen months' time.

 

[Bullrush]

I agree, Ash. But the best thing we could do to advance Australian rugby is to forget about the big quadrennial knockout tournament and even the 2013 Lions Tour and focus on trying to be competitive every time the Wallabies take the field.

Players have very limited careers and deserve the opportunity to represent their country while ever they are the best in their position, not to be passed over for someone who may be Test standard in eighteen months' time.

I agree but the problem is knowing who will the best players in 18 months. Especially as they get older. While Sharpie may be one of the best locks in Oz right now, it's not hard to imagine that in 12 to 18 months someone else steps up.

Is it??

 

[Scarfman]

I just don't like the ageism, or general preference for youth.