Contracts need to be fulfilled or pay a price

Novdoggie

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
3,371
Reaction score
4,546
Why doesn't the NRL and Clubs introduce a clause that if a player wants to break a contract that is not on mutual terms then he must pay the club a get out clause, a percentage of his contract? If it is mutual then no need for it.

In this case with Matterson I think 25% he would have to pay the Tiger's which amounts to approx $90K if it is true that he is on $350,000. I would go as far as saying for every year left on his contract. Now a quarter of a players salary each year is a fair bit of money but there has to be a deterrent. It would make them stick out their contracts.

On the flip side, the same if the club wants to break players contracts the player should also be compensated with again I think no less than 25% per year which would come off their salary cap. If the money isn't there then simply they can't get rid of the player. Again a deterrent for the club to do so.

It's all about stability and to stop this uncertainty with players and clubs moving around playing musical chairs which the fans are sick of.

As for player managers who I think are part of the problem. If their player wants to break a contract there should be a 'break out clause' paid by the manager to the NRL. I'd say 2.5% of the players salary. In this case approx $9k one off fee which goes into a fund for Junior Rugby League. Again, another deterrent for player managers to shop their players around mid contract.

At the moment there are no deterrents for players, clubs and player managers to stop any of this from continually happening. As a fan it is a part of our game we need to get rid of.
 

Freakzilla

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Premium Member
SC H2H Champion
Tipping Champion
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
24,659
Reaction score
18,961
Because the clubs are doing the same thing.

Just make it like the AFL and have a trade/transfer period after the season. Also introduce a rookie draft so if a team wants a player under contract they can trade their draft picks.
 

TABOO

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 13, 2018
Messages
2,740
Reaction score
3,921
this is a good suggestion.
It seems that it is much easier when a player wants to leave a club because they feel they are playing better than their salary but when a club wants to move a player on in the opposite circumstances, all of a sudden there is a contract to uphold.
Just make it a level playing field for all parties and stop the merry go round.
Trade windows/draft systems could be a fix.
 

Novdoggie

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
3,371
Reaction score
4,546
How does the draft system work? Does it mean a player can get picked up by a club and he has no choice but to go?
this is a good suggestion.
It seems that it is much easier when a player wants to leave a club because they feel they are playing better than their salary but when a club wants to move a player on in the opposite circumstances, all of a sudden there is a contract to uphold.
Just make it a level playing field for all parties and stop the merry go round.
Trade windows/draft systems could be a fix.
 

coach

Kennel Legend
Joined
Sep 22, 2013
Messages
11,447
Reaction score
6,504
Clubs do the exact same thing hence why nobody wants to step up
 

Scoooby

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Gilded
Joined
Mar 6, 2018
Messages
16,322
Reaction score
15,444
It is what it is, people will always walk mid contract etc no matter what profession.. but the suggestion seems Fair to me.
 

bowleggedwog

wogdog
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
3,367
Reaction score
3,467
How does the draft system work? Does it mean a player can get picked up by a club and he has no choice but to go?
There used to be a draft, Terry Hill got picked up by wests or easts I can't remember but he took it to court and won. Drafts found to be restriction of trade. The fact that afl have a drafts means players end up where they want to go so the draft remains. Clubs work with players to keep every one happy for the good of the game.
 
Last edited:

flamebouyant

Kennel Legend
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
10,012
Reaction score
14,734
Why doesn't the NRL and Clubs introduce a clause that if a player wants to break a contract that is not on mutual terms then he must pay the club a get out clause, a percentage of his contract? If it is mutual then no need for it.

In this case with Matterson I think 25% he would have to pay the Tiger's which amounts to approx $90K if it is true that he is on $350,000. I would go as far as saying for every year left on his contract. Now a quarter of a players salary each year is a fair bit of money but there has to be a deterrent. It would make them stick out their contracts.

On the flip side, the same if the club wants to break players contracts the player should also be compensated with again I think no less than 25% per year which would come off their salary cap. If the money isn't there then simply they can't get rid of the player. Again a deterrent for the club to do so.

It's all about stability and to stop this uncertainty with players and clubs moving around playing musical chairs which the fans are sick of.

As for player managers who I think are part of the problem. If their player wants to break a contract there should be a 'break out clause' paid by the manager to the NRL. I'd say 2.5% of the players salary. In this case approx $9k one off fee which goes into a fund for Junior Rugby League. Again, another deterrent for player managers to shop their players around mid contract.

At the moment there are no deterrents for players, clubs and player managers to stop any of this from continually happening. As a fan it is a part of our game we need to get rid of.
I agree. Mostly. The only part I dont is when a team moves a player on. As it stands now they are already being penalised, as they more often then not wind u paying a portion of the players salary to play elsewhere. Unless of course the next club wants to pay more then their current salary. But this is rarely the case when a club wants to move a player on. And in my opinion, a club should be able to do so if said player is not playing to their ability, or not contributing to the team etc.
 

TABOO

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 13, 2018
Messages
2,740
Reaction score
3,921
Clubs do the exact same thing hence why nobody wants to step up
I dont think so, it seems much harder for the club to walk away than the player.
Think Broncos wouldn't punt Darius if they could?
Think dogs wouldnt have entertained the thought of doing it to Foran when he was injured all last year?
Titans with Ash Taylor/Tyrone Peachey/Bryce Cartwright?
 

_G-Dog_

Kennel Legend
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
13,298
Reaction score
7,726
OP Makes sense.. but what if the shoe is on the other foot and the club wants to move on an under contract player..
 

Novdoggie

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
3,371
Reaction score
4,546
OP Makes sense.. but what if the shoe is on the other foot and the club wants to move on an under contract player..
On the flip side, the same if the club wants to break players contracts the player should also be compensated with again I think no less than 25% per year which would come off their salary cap. If the money isn't there then simply they can't get rid of the player. Again a deterrent for the club to do so.
 
Top