For a while I've been saying that the system should follow a rule where if a team offers him 800k a season, that's the benchmark price. Anyone else making an offer to him would have to be within 5% of that price. A top tier team with loads of talent on their roster couldn't swoop in and offer 500k then top it up with under the table payments. Until some rule like this is in play it leaves the system open to cap cheating.
True Alan. That's how the Rorters have been rorting the cap for years.
I once wrote a letter to a knob at the NRL (Greg Brady or something like) that back when Fittler was still there. The impetus for my writing was some media article about how they would struggle to retain Fittler and Morley. Not only did they do that, but bought more and more top line players - just like magic.
I said to this Brady dude that on the basis of what other clubs would pay for the players at Rorters they were obviously over the cap. He wrote back to me all indignant and told me he did not like what I was saying told me that I didn't understand because players would play for such a successful club as the Rorters for a lot less than they would play for at other clubs. I accept that if we are talking maybe $40,000 to $50,000 difference but not the kind of difference you talked about in your post ie $300,000.
This Brady knob told me that is what happens.
I say that everyone knows it's bullshit and Rorters will show $500,000 on the official books then comes the under the table payments - Uncle Nick with the brown paper bags. That's how they have been doing it for years and the worst part is this asshole at the NRL actually seemed convinced it was all legitimate. Also remember for many years the NRL salary cap auditor was Ian Schubert. Thick as two planks but of course also an ex-Rorters player. He'd obviously never find anything wrong with the Rorter's books. I think he should have been disqualified from auditing them (if any such audit ever even happened) due to a conflict of interest.