impressive english players?

[jimmymac]

is there anyone running around the pommy comp who you wouldn't mind seeing in the blue black & white? i myself wouldn't mind getting danny mcguire to play for us. he killed the kiwis just recently.what do you guys out there think?

 

[Sempa Fi Sharky]

Poms

They all get way toomuch money tocome here.

It would be a big call to leave your family and take a pay cut.

 

[Capital_Shark]

I like McGuire too. Don't mind Burrow or Leon Pryce either, but I'd play Pryce as a fullback if he is decent under the high ball, or centre, no way he'd go near a number 6 if I were coach. I love his running game, reminds me of Inglis.

There are more, but thats all I can think of at the moment.

Problem is NRL to ESL works because the pay is increased considerably but the skill and work required stays the same AT BEST. It doesn't work the other way though, cause the Poms are looking at a massive challenge to make NRL FG and the money in comparison is sh!t. Unless they really wanna test themselves in the toughest League, they'll stick with gloomy gray days, tea and a nation full of whinging farks.

 

[bort]

yer, and theyd have to actually face some decent competition. imagine regularly playing whole teams made up of aussie and kiwi players instead of just a handful of them starring for each team.

 

[Shiredad]

didn't we buy a halfback in the 70's or 80's from England?

 

[Sober]

didn't we buy a halfback in the 70's or 80's from England?

Tommy Bishop?

 

[Shiredad]

that's the one

 

[jimmymac]

sharks legend.

 

[bort]

indeed.
if one of those poms can be the next bishop sign them up

 

[Nobby The Sharkyboy]

I watched the Pommy Grand Final the other week and Scott Donald scored a great try, I never worked out why no NRL clubs wanted him when he left the Eagles a couple of years ago, we went for an aging no good winger in Darren Albert instead of him, our club lacks real pace and try scores, we could do worse than him.

 

[Lettuce_Sharks]

i think we'd all agree, that while the super league is a good competition, its not as good as the NRL. so with that in mind, if this is indeed the worlds premier rugby league competition, why arnt players getting paid as such? they earn alot more in the super league, for a competition which is not as good. you wont get english players down here until its more lucrative for them

 

[jimmymac]

what we have to do is challenge these players more to come and test themselves in the worlds toughest competition. stuart fielden almost came out here, but then decided to play for wigan. i guess the cash is too hard to say no to. we used to get quality pommy players out here, but since the super league took over, the cash amounts being paid are ludicrous. half the players considered first graders over there would struggle in premier league over here. i guess we will just have to keep flogging their national side until they realise that they need to send some of their best over here and work out how we play the game. no mcguire for us i guess.

 

[Great White]

I don't think they would be tough enough and hard enough to withstand the NRL week in and week out.

Why would you want to come here for less cash, not play as well, and cop a constant beating.

Only true competitors and people who are up to the challenge like Morley can do it, I think mental and physical toughness means more to play here then anything.

I am not sure if it next season or the one after that jimmymac, where they are bringing in rules where you can only have a certain number of international players (as in non pommy) in your squad, the idea is to promote more local juniors over there and gradually get their national side stronger and stronger.

Playing a couple of one off games against Australian sides is far different to playing in a 26 round physical comp.

 

[bort]

i think they are starting to phase the nonpoms out from next season on, i think the max you can have drops from like 12 to like 3 over 4 seasons or so

 

[Great White]

Yeah it was something like that, I saw a interview with Sean (the old souths coach) and he was saying it on NRL deluxe or whatever it was.

 

[Capital_Shark]

i think we'd all agree, that while the super league is a good competition, its not as good as the NRL. so with that in mind, if this is indeed the worlds premier rugby league competition, why arnt players getting paid as such? they earn alot more in the super league, for a competition which is not as good. you wont get english players down here until its more lucrative for them

After taking into account the exchange rates, their salary cap system is considerably different to the NRL's. I'm not really up on it, so maybe someone who is can correct me, but I think each team's cap is different. I wouldn't know what factors are taken into account when determining a team's cap. But if I get bored (likely) I'll try have a look into it.

 

[bort]

isnt it something like a percentage of how much money they make or something like that, like each club can spend up to 30% of how much they earned the year before on players. i swear something had a cap like that....

 

[Capital_Shark]

isnt it something like a percentage of how much money they make or something like that, like each club can spend up to 30% of how much they earned the year before on players. i swear something had a cap like that....

Yeah, that rings a bell. Hence why strong clubs get stronger and weak club get weaker. Winning = crowds/merchandise = money in = more cap space = better team.

EDIT: Found this.

Been wondering about the drift of players to Superleague? And maybe starting to believe that the only solution must be to again “raise the salary cap”? Hopefully the explanation below about how Superleague clubs actually pay their squads might help shine a light toward a more obvious cause than the salary cap for the continued player exodus…

The current Superleague salary cap allows clubs to spend player salaries up to no more than 50% of the club's “salary cap relevant income” and to an upper limit of £1.8 million (roughly AU$4.5 million). However, in Superleague it is acknowledged that only the richest clubs could have an income which allows that 50% limit to be at the maximum salary cap level, perhaps only the traditional “big four” being St Helens, Leeds, Bradford, Wigan?

For the remaining clubs the salary cap and it’s 50% of income limit is there more to protect and maintain their continued existence and solvency, as it must be remembered that there is not the same Leagues Club culture in the UK as there has been for Australian rugby league teams, and hence not the same opportunity for clubs to rely on grants from the turnover in their branded licensed premises.

Rugby league in the UK is also minority sport when compared to the likes of football/soccer and doesn’t command anywhere near the income from broadcasting rights etc as the NRL can still manage within Australia’s increasingly crowded sports market. For example, radio coverage of Super League games is still centred on the local public BBC stations with occasional deals with other broadcasters where available, such as in London. Sky still holds the exclusive UK TV rights and has only just began to broadcast more than two games a week, by covering occasional games in the National League divisions below Super League.

The point being that very few Superleague clubs turn a profit in their own right and it can be assumed that less than half of the teams operate at the maximum £1.8 million limit of the salary cap anyway. Having said that, clubs still feel pressure to squeeze everything possible out of their salary cap allowance and some have increasingly been found (only in retrospect, under the current Super League auditing system) to be spending above their 50% limit and penalised competition points and fined accordingly.

The fact that recently announced breaches by two of the big four clubs for the 2006 season - Bradford and still to be investigated breach by Wigan - were in relation to the 50% limit alone, itself proves that even these two established clubs must not be spending up to or over the maximum £1.8 million limit. (Think about it, if they were eligible for the maximum and went over their 50% limit they would be penalised for breaching the £1.8 million as well.) So even though the maximum salary cap is set, in Superleague almost all clubs aren’t able to spending up to that set amount.

So if only one or two Super League clubs can afford to spend their maximum salary cap of roughly AU$4.5 million, this means the vast majority are operating at around - or even BELOW - the equivalent to NRL salary cap of AU$4 million… So don’t read too much into arguments you hear about there being more money in the UK game generally, and about this alone being the reason for the player drain in recent years.

But exactly how do the Super League clubs come up with the seemingly ridiculous offers to Aussie and New Zealand players that seem too good to refuse?

In addition to the Superleague salary cap there is also the 20/20 Rule, which states that clubs cannot have more than 20 players on their books being paid more than £20,000 (roughly AU$50,000). So in an initial squad of 25, at least 5 of those players will be earning less than that amount. A quick bit of maths shows that if each of the top 20 players earned only that £20,000, then a big club such as St Helens with maximum salary cap income could still have a spare 1 million (roughly AU$2.5 million) to top up offers to attract or keep star players in their squad!

Even a smaller poorer club - with say half the maximum income and a reduced salary cap - could still have a spare £500,000 (roughly AU$1.25 million) above the basic level payments for the rest of their squad to throw at a few marquee-style contract offers, should they choose to do so. I happen to know the salary of a native player that plays for one of the smaller, poorer clubs in Superleague. He is in his early twenties, has played over fifteen games this season and scored his fair share of tries. Despite this he is one of those earning significantly less than that £20,000 basic payment this year.

So this player is being used by his club outside of that 20/20 rule, and I suspect that quite a few of the players in the top twenty of that club will be being paid the very minimum as well. Salaries for most jobs in the UK tend to come out a bit higher in comparison with Australia and New Zealand after the exchange rates, and this matches the generally higher costs of living. A £20,000 rugby league salary can be an OK amount to get by on if you are supporting yourself in the north (many people earn less), but it is by no means an excessive basic payment for being a professional sports person - especially if you have some mouths to feed at home.

But contract amounts like these for reasonably prominent top grade players is how Superleague clubs make their salary cap money – which we’ve seen is no more in comparison to that which exists in the NRL – stretch throughout their 25 man squads. With money left over to make these large individual offers to Australian and New Zealand players that exceed what they would be able to command at home. For the clubs it becomes an investment, where a big name international rep player can not only share their skills but also increase gate takings and merchandising, thus helping the club to have more income against which the 50% salary cap is calculated, resulting in a higher cap to spend in competition with their opponents.

 

[Lettuce_Sharks]

perhaps, rather than constantly raging war against eachother, the NRL and super league should be trying to work together. lets face it, these two leagues are the only credible ones in the world, so instead of fighting for player signatures, and having people complain about player exoduses and what not, they should work together to form some sort of trade or loan system, or something which would allow player co-operation within the leagues. this would give english and australian players, particualry younger guys, the chance to hone their skills in another league, whilst still being contracted to their home clubs.

not sure exactly how this could work, but its a plan. its jsut seems more benificial, especially for international player growth, to have english guys coming down here, and some of our younger guys, drifting in and our of 1st grade, to get a taste of what its liek up there

 

[bort]

if that was to work itd probable revolve around like sister clubs ie rabbits & leeds doing player loans, even still the question remains why would a pom wanna come here and get his ass kicked and why would an english club wanna send their established players away to play our fringe players?