By Liam FitzGibbon
August 23rd 2008 @ 3:01am
NRL will help but won’t break the rules for Inglis
The NRL has offered to help Melbourne explore ways to prevent Greg Inglis from switching to rugby union but it will not bend the rules to keep rugby league’s best player in the game.
More league
Sharks continue Roosters’ misery with shutout win
Lockyer ill but still comes up trumps
Eels have no more room for error, says Cayless
Tigers out to cure the hangover
Amid reports Inglis’s interest in a code switch is growing and French rugby union clubs are circling, the Storm have asked the NRL to help explore measures to keep Inglis in rugby league.
NRL boss David Gallop confirmed today he had held discussions with Storm chief executive Brian Waldron about ways to increase Inglis’s earnings but said the league was limited to introducing him to potential sponsors.
Gallop ruled out allowing any salary cap exemptions or offering direct financial assistance despite an alarming trend of the game’s elite players, including Sonny Bill Williams and Mark Gasnier, being enticed overseas by big-money offers.
“We’re happy to talk to them about potential relationships with our sponsors but we’ve made it clear there can’t be any exceptions to the salary cap rules,” Gallop said.
“We’re just introducing him to our sponsors, which is really the only measure we can do.”
Fears the Kangaroos and Queensland star could jump ship have intensified since he publicly talked about linking up with Anthony Mundine and Khoder Nasser — the management duo who masterminded Williams’ defection.
Reports today suggested Inglis has already spoken to his parents about a future move overseas and had received their blessing.
Inglis has two more years on his current deal but Melbourne would struggle to offer him around the $500,000 he is likely to demand when it expires.
It means Inglis’s earnings would need to be topped up by a third-party sponsorship deal, similar to that arranged for Gasnier with the Dragons.
“It’s something that we regularly do with elite players,” Gallop said of overseeing sponsorship arrangements.
“Sometimes there are sponsors willing to get on board with them but it’s very important that we don’t make an exception to the rules.
“We can’t start making exceptions for certain players.”
Gallop said the NRL would investigate other ways to encourage top-line talent to remain in Australia but ruled out a centralised contract system similar to that of the ARU or Cricket Australia because it did not work with a salary cap system.
He did, however, hint an increase in representative payments for Test and State of Origin players could be on cards for next season.
“There’s potentially an opportunity to do that next year but we need to look at the overall budget before we agree to that,” Gallop said.
Meanwhile South Sydney today declared their investigation into Sunday’s socket throwing incident closed despite being unable to identify the culprit.
Manly centre Steve Matai was the target of the small metal object as he was sent to the sin bin in the Sea Eagles’ shock loss at ANZ Stadium.
After a five-day investigation, which included interviews and extensive reviews of CCTV footage, Souths chief executive Shane Richardson said the club had been unable to identify the culprit and he called on any witnesses to provide information.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(26)
There are certain sentences a rugby writer believes he will never write and one them was (notice the past tense): 'Al Baxter monsters Andrew Sheridan...'
LeftArmSpinner said | August 23rd 2008 @ 7:02am | Report comment
Money is very important but not the only factor.
The best players want to challenge themselves by playing against the best players around the world. They also want to play around the world on the world’s biggest stages and in front of the world’s largest crowds.
There is more than one hole in the NRL bucket. Predictable game, poor stadia, lack of sustainable funding model, poor player behaviour, lack of corporate support, loss of the best players, a grinding season, a locally based game competing with global games all add up to a seriously flawed code.
JimC said | August 23rd 2008 @ 7:26pm | Report comment
So Sonny Bill wants to challenge himself by playing against Manny Edmonds and a bunch of Argentinians??
What are you talking about? The only comparable league to the NRL is the Guinness Premiership, not the French league. And the NRL is still the best rugby competition in either code.
He just spat the dummy. He’s not even eligible to play international rugby union so where do you get this global game piffle?
It’s all about money. As soon as the Bulldogs get some decent young players (and they will) their crowds will return.
If Inglis goes to France too, more fool him.
As for the NRL being predictable, did you predict Darren Lockyer’s extra time play last night? You won’t see anything that good in tonights Boks test. That’s one pretty safe prediction I can make!
You can keep predicting the demise of rugby league as people having been doing for 100 years. Repeating it won’t make it true though.
westy said | August 23rd 2008 @ 11:32pm | Report comment
Leftarmspinner…….. French First Division rugby may not be the best place for SBW to learn his trade in rugby. Realistically the sooner he gets to Britain or NZ super 14 team the better.
He is on idle out in the centres at the moment . Gower is doing well for his club . I have a first hand report that it is because he is defensively good tough and so fit! I have been able to watch a little more French rugby………there is some good attack…some good defence but it is intermittent or more accurately plenty of slow periods. George actually looks faster than when he was with the Wallabies if you get my drift.The sooner SBW gets in the real mix the better.
SBW is young enough and he has a good coach but this competition will not test him.I hope his 2 years goes quickly.
Steffy said | August 24th 2008 @ 3:42am | Report comment
LeftArmSpinner - what’s this grinding season you keep banging on about?
Benjamin said | August 24th 2008 @ 3:50am | Report comment
I agree with JimC. In terms of competition the GP is light years ahead of the Top 14. I also agree with Westy. The Top 14 is a mess at the moment, and because there are so many mismatches any player of average toughness, skill and fitness can survive. If SBW really wants to develop then he should spend a season or 2 in the GP and then transfer to S14.
Benjamin said | August 24th 2008 @ 3:51am | Report comment
Btw, I should point out that I disagree with JimC in that I believe the GP is more competative and unpredictable than the NRL, IMO.
Spiro Zavos said | August 24th 2008 @ 10:15pm | Report comment
Here’s a fearless prediction, unless the NRL changes its attitude to star players and adjusts the salary cap to accomodate them, players like Greg Inglis will be bought by rugby union. And it won’t be French teams, either. If Lote Tuqiri can be given $1 million a year by the ARU how much can they be expected to pay out for Inglis? That much and some more, I guess. Robbie Deans is getting the forwards to be more competitive. With players like Timana Tahu and Inglis etc the Wallabies could be red-hot by the 2011 RWC.
The Answer said | August 24th 2008 @ 10:56pm | Report comment
I agree Spiro, and with no one even with even close to the talent of league’s best coming through the rugby ranks it is certainly comething that is likely to continue for the forseeable future.
It is clear the Wallabies need to pay over the odds for Leaguies but while they still have the credit line they may as well continue.
Benjamin said | August 24th 2008 @ 11:19pm | Report comment
I think, realistically speaking, that out of all the league converts in both Australia and Europe, it is fair to say that only Robinson and Tuqiri have been outstanding converts. The rest have been very poor or middling, certainly no better than a lot of the union talent on display. The fact remains that it is very difficult to make the cross. Australia would be far better served investing in youth talent. To spend huge sums on untested league players is crass short-termism.
westy said | August 24th 2008 @ 11:35pm | Report comment
Benjamin………..wish you were here running Australian rugby.
Benjamin said | August 24th 2008 @ 11:50pm | Report comment
Westy, I wish I was in Australia running Australian rugby. If you ever heard a rumour that London is cold, dank and dirty… it’s all true.
westy said | August 24th 2008 @ 11:54pm | Report comment
The paradox of Australian rugby codes is that rugby is relatively healthy at the top end of town whilst hiding some deep seated problems in junior development whilst league is struggling at the top end yet clearly dominates the junior /youth development…………..there is more cooperation in Great Britain between the codes just in their joint programmes/competitions in state schools then exists anywhere in Australia.
Bluntly the waste of resourcesin Australia by these codes in development between U/6 to u/12 is ridiculous . Sadly if there had been no breakaway introducing small kids to rugby would have best been achieved actually using league rules and mini and mod games………….but that is not now possible.Shoosh ………we copied their safer approach in our tag rugby etc.. Lost chances …………needless waste of resources.
If we combined league and union primary school competitions we could run a NATIONAL primary school championship the other codes would battle to match. Lost opportunities..
westy said | August 25th 2008 @ 12:26am | Report comment
Benjamin……………hope the weather improves . I have always felt uncomfortable in comparing a much simpler game league with a more complex game rugby. At their best each has so much to offer . League in its simplicity can sometimes generate wonderful man on man defence and attack with lovely draw and pass.Rugby at its core is a battle for possession with multiple phases in attack and defence with channels across the entire field. Both have some commonality in basic skills which explains my previous post re:junior skill introduction.
As such any league convert has much more to learn than a rugby convert to league . It is not their lack of brains or skill just the fact elite rugby defences have reached and even passed league, four more players and multiple channells to cope with. It will always be difficult for them. However some rugby players improve by having a year or so in professional league .Rugby in Australia must aim to get league players not at 27 but 17to 20.
An astute league coach here Warren Ryan summed it up best with the Melbourne team. Their captain Cameron Smith is an outstanding and skilful league hooker but he would never make it in rugby……….but Inglis/Folau and Slater would have a chance. I keep trying to tell Spiro to keep an eye not only on Inglis but the more consistent Slater.
My only concern is that professional rugby is declining as a game for all sizes and the trend in league is not good either.
Benjamin said | August 25th 2008 @ 2:16am | Report comment
Westy, league certainly has developed this production line of similar-sized players and I was rather worried that union was going the same way. Over the past 4 years there has been an obsession within international coaching to find this identikit, utility back rower - Moody, Hogg, Taylor,Burger, Worsley, So’oialo, Bonnaire etc. However it seems that the ELVs are rekindling the need for a technical no.7. As far as I’m concerned this is an excellent, timely boost.
If you are 6 foot, 17 stone, fit and not totally useless then there would be a chance for you to be a league prop - perhaps not to particularly high level, but take Fozzard and D. Sculthorpe as an example. If you have ability as a union prop but cannot scrummage, then you will not be selected. That Moore has consistently been selected ahead of TPN on the basis of his techincal prowess suggests that union will for a long time be decided by actual ability in the technical areas ahead of physicality. I think this problem of identical-sized athletes is more of an Australian and SA issue simply because the wet weather in other countries; NZ, France, England, Ireland etc, accomodates specific types and builds of players.
Regarding league players, you’re right - union must target younger players - Barnes, and like England did with Chris Ashton. Older players are too much of a risk unless they have had previous union experience like Cross. It takes years of experience, particularly in childhood, to succeed in union, not necessarily because it’s a more skilful game but because of the rules and the complicated ruck issues etc. There would be no point in splashing out on a 25 year old league player unless he could play a specific position. Look at the problems with Andy Farrell, and also with SBW. He may change positions next year. Utility league players will always struggle in union, and I’m convinced that SBW will also struggle. I’m sure that there would be better ways to spend any excess cash.
Steffy said | August 25th 2008 @ 5:05am | Report comment
“just the fact elite rugby defences have reached and even passed league”
When did that happen? Rugby coaches taught union how to defend (and still do) - when Phil Larder left rugby to join the england union set up he was rather dismayed to find that defence wasn’t even mentioned in their coaching manuals.
“…………..there is more cooperation in Great Britain between the codes just in their joint programmes/competitions in state schools then exists anywhere in Australia”
Eh?
Benjamin said | August 25th 2008 @ 5:21am | Report comment
Phil Larder undertook England union duties in 1997. I can’t see how that is relevant to rugby union in 2008. Also if rugby league defences are that much better than union defences it would logically follow that the majority of league back converts would find it easy to excel against union defences. Hasn’t really been the case has it?
Steffy said | August 25th 2008 @ 5:46am | Report comment
“Hasn’t really been the case has it?”
Hasn’t it?
Benjamin said | August 25th 2008 @ 5:50am | Report comment
Well, no it clearly hasn’t been the case. The only unqualified successes have been Robinson and Tuqiri. If you’d care to list league converts who excelled in union and found the defences easy to unock I’d be very interested.
Steffy said | August 25th 2008 @ 6:08am | Report comment
Most of them have been rather succesful.
Benjamin said | August 25th 2008 @ 6:13am | Report comment
Well Steffy, that would depend on who you mean by ‘them’?
Seeing as you’re unwilling to develop offer a list I’m going to have to disagree and say that actually, given the publicity and money the majority of league converts have been average and then below average.
The Answer said | August 25th 2008 @ 6:33am | Report comment
Benjamin, Given London has had some cracking days of late, your lines about the weather are as stereotypical and inaccurate as your views on league and union.
Benjamin said | August 25th 2008 @ 6:39am | Report comment
You mean today? Yesterday was average and the day before was crap.
Would you like to define my stereotyping?
True Tah said | August 25th 2008 @ 8:17am | Report comment
Steffy,
who was successful?
I’ll concede that, in addition to Tuqiri and Robinson, Rogers was pretty good on some occassions.
Sailor was dreadful in his positional play in rugby, he was a big fast bloke, and that was enough to make him the premier winger in the world of league, unfortunately it is unsufficient in union.
Westy, agree that Slater would have been a gun fullback, Im not sure what his boot was like, but I think he would have been able to cut it.
Inglis has said that he is not interested in playing rugby at all, so I think its highly unlikely he would ever go to France/Uk/Super rugby.
Benjamin said | August 25th 2008 @ 8:30am | Report comment
Tah, I thought Rogers was very good for NSW but was very, very hit and miss for the Wallabies. He was a good provincial player but no more. I don’t think is is a coincidence that the two biggest success stories are some of the lesser skilled players to have emerged from league; Robinson and Tuqiri are freakishly good athletes but are no rugby technicians.
Hoy said | August 25th 2008 @ 9:06am | Report comment
As a loyal QLDer, and conspiracy buff, I find it interesting that the NRL seemingly bend over backwards to save the NSW darlings like Gasnier (as much as they could) and Johns by being heavily involved in finding sponsors to increase pay packets, yet with QLD players, they either let them go (Sailor, Lote, Rogers) or in this case, can only just introduce them to sponsors “which is really the only measure we can do”.
Johns was supposedly thinking about going to Union (thank God for Brett Robinson who said that Johns was far too injury prone), so the NRL pulled out all stops with exemptions, contracts, Channel 9 contracts etc. to keep him in the game. Fair enough he was the best in the game or whatever at the time, but at the moment, so is Inglis.
Only a (semi) lighthearted dig at the NRL.
The Link said | August 25th 2008 @ 10:07am | Report comment
LAS, I know your comment was from a couple of days ago, but geez if League’s in that much trouble, then Rugby, as the 4th most popular football code in this country, must be terminal. Rugby is number one in nothing, not in global reach (Football) nor domestic popularity (NSW/QLD League, AFL all other states). Really, you contribute nothing constructive to League threads with your comments.
Inglis may do the switch, but it will be of no use to Australian Rugby if its to a French / NH team.
Inglis aside, the most interesting League story of the weekend was the potential trial of 11 a side games in the Toyota Cup, along with new rules regarding ‘defusing’ kicks in the in goal getting a 20 metre restart. Will monitor these with interest.