How do the Dragons fit Gasnier under the cap?
Roar Guru By Steve Kaless, 2 Jul 2010 Steve Kaless is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Mark Gasnier, NRL, Rugby League, St George Illawarra, State Of Origin
Related coverage
Mark Gasnier rallys up his team-mates. AAP Image/Action Photographics, Grant Trouville
So he’s back. Mark Gasnier makes his NRL return this week, although some of the gloss has been wiped of it by the match lineups being heavily depleted due to Origin.
Gasnier’s return is a boost to the game whose major problems this year have been on player retention. I’m not sure who would have rejoiced at his signature more – David Gallop or the Skull.
Gaz will undoubtedly add a few more bums on the seats and should also provide an extra boost for Fox’s Monday game (who must be overjoyed to have ended up with that fixture on the Monday night).
But if my role is to question things when others blindly follow, here’s my beef …
How does the deal work? I understand the whole back-end loading deal, where he gets a little bit now and a whole lot more later, and that the Dragons will be shipping out players to make it all work.
But there is something a bit wrong with a team coming first on a full cap, suddenly being able to fit in a former Australian centre.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy to see him back playing league, and Christ knows the Blues could do with him in the centres. But in a year in which the salary cap has been under such intense scrutiny, it just strikes me that things have been made to look right so the game can score a marketing coup.
Should Gasnier score the Grand Final winning try, how many other fans from other clubs or even the others clubs will not think that it was a bit of a con.
I don’t expect the success starved Dragons fans to give a toss, but I argue it’s a question worth asking.
Could the Storm be allowed to keep their big four if each of them opted to play for beans on different years and then got cashed up to the max on others?
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- Mark Gasnier, NRL, Rugby League, St George Illawarra, State Of Origin
July 2nd 2010 @ 2:28pm
Steveo said | July 2nd 2010 @ 2:28pm | Report comment
This whole situation reeks! If it wasn’t Mark Gasnier, it wouldn’t have been allowed. If Mark Gasnier doesn’t say “Its St George or nothing”, it wouldn’t be allowed. If it wasn’t a year where the league is facing scrutiny about losing all its guns, it wouldn’t be allowed. Surely this deal was only permitted because to NRL wanted to be able to say “look, another one has come crawling back”. The salary cap is in place to ensure that talent is spread throughout the competition, and to allow Gasnier to sign for the club that’s leading the competition, and is short odds to win the premiership, completely defeats the purpose and reduces the integrity of the cap.
I think the Melbourne Storm are a bunch of cheats and deserve none of the sympathy they tried to raise for themselves, but how can their players be told they can’t simply take a pay cut to keep the teamselves together, if the NRL is going to allow the Gasnier back end deal? If and when Gasnier proves to be the ‘X-Factor’ in St George winning the premiership, it should be considered almost as shallow a victory as the storm’s golden run.
All those people who think the salary cap should be scrapped (or raised by a lot) are seriously living under a rock. I don’t think it’ll be great for the game, if 75% of league fans know their team is never going to win a premiership – or for a lot of good players to be cooling their heals in reserve grade because they earn more playing for the shell harbour Dragons than the Cronulla Sharks.
And then what? It won’t just be the players who switch to AFL – its not like England, where 30,000 people still trudge to Elland Road in the cold and rain to see Leeds United play in the 3rd division. We aren’t that loyal. And then what? Without fan’s we lose TV deals, sponsorships, etc – the poorer clubs become extinct, and soon we have a 8 team National Rugby League competition. The NRL is great because a team can be rubbish one year, and win a premiership the next and that is only achievable with a salary cap. AFL has a salary cap too you know – its just that its much higher because the game is richer! Clean up the image of the game and rugby league might win back some of the market share it is currently relinquishing to AFL. Blindly raising the salary cap is not the answer!
July 2nd 2010 @ 4:08pm
Ken said | July 2nd 2010 @ 4:08pm | Report comment
The whole situation doesn’t reek, only the media campaign around it. This is a totally legit contract done in a common, although obviously very misunderstood, manner. It is not unusual and it doesn’t show any favours being done.
I’m with you though on thinking the cap is doing us more good than harm. yep it’s disappointing when a player moves on to other clubs or codes because of it but there needs to be some cost control implemented or some clubs will start to fold trying to keep up. There are other methods, like set pricing models using drafts, but these are just swapping one set of issues for another.
July 2nd 2010 @ 4:49pm
Mushi said | July 2nd 2010 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
Why wouldn’t it be “allowed” it is a perfectly contract structure legitimate.
July 4th 2010 @ 7:48pm
Gilbank said | July 4th 2010 @ 7:48pm | Report comment
30 000 go to see Leeds United play in the 3rd division? Only when they win – or if they aren’t watching the Rhinos (which is the team they follow when their rubbish football team goes down the dunny).
July 4th 2010 @ 7:58pm
apaway said | July 4th 2010 @ 7:58pm | Report comment
Gilbank, you’re deluded. Leeds United are far and away the number 1 sports team in Leeds, whether they are playing crap or not. And they are now in the Championship, which is the 2nd Division.
July 5th 2010 @ 8:35am
Bill Baxter said | July 5th 2010 @ 8:35am | Report comment
Who cares about Leeds United, we’re talking Rugby League!!
July 6th 2010 @ 10:08am
steveo said | July 6th 2010 @ 10:08am | Report comment
If the Dragons are allowed to do the Gasnier deal then the Storm should be allowed to do the following.
Cooper Cronk – 2 year deal – 50K in the first year 1M in the second
Billy Slater – 3 year deak – 50K in the first two years 1.5M in the third
Cameron Smith – 4 year deal – 50K in the first three years 2M in the fourth
Greg Inglis – 5 year deal – 50K in the first four years 2.5M in the fifth (after which time the cap will be higher and there will be far more concessions)
Does anyone out there think thats fair? If so, we can all look forward to a St George vs Melbourne grand final in 2011…
July 2nd 2010 @ 10:55pm
Dean - Surry Hills said | July 2nd 2010 @ 10:55pm | Report comment
Q. “How did the Dragons fit Gasnier under the cap’?
A. Very carefully.
July 3rd 2010 @ 10:52am
Jeff said | July 3rd 2010 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Hey Dan.
Inglis, Slater, Smith, Cronk are all Storm thorugh and through
Inglis, Slater, Smith, Cronk are all assests to RL
Furthermore, Inglis, Slater, Smith, Cronk are all assests to RL in Melbourne/Victoria
NRL should be doing all they can to keep these players in RL and in Melbourne to grow the game
What a true statement. ask any supporter man, woman, child or otherwise!!
July 3rd 2010 @ 8:24pm
Ken said | July 3rd 2010 @ 8:24pm | Report comment
The problem is they are only ‘Storm through and through’ because the Storm cheated. Some of those players would almost certainly have moved on years ago otherwise.
The idea that we should allow have allowed the Storm different rules to promote the game through Victoria is irrelevant, because we didn’t – and they broke the rules. Whether this should have been allowed, openly, from the start is debatable, you would effectively be mortgaging the integrity of the elite competition in an effort to grow the game… is this the right way to go? I’m not so sure
July 3rd 2010 @ 9:34pm
Col the Pom said | July 3rd 2010 @ 9:34pm | Report comment
Hi Ken. AFL followed that very mode of operation and they did it successfully!. Interstate clubs have had their success but things are evening out again.
If Perth are given the nod to start in the comp, they will need a helping hand. it’s the only way to grow the game and get the TV dollars flowing. by all means let these teams fold or don’t let them in to your league and AFL/Soccer will become even stronger.
As for the fab four moving on earlier, this is pure conjecture, probably fuelled by comments in the Daily Telegraph and we all know how reliable their information is.
July 5th 2010 @ 2:25pm
Mushi said | July 5th 2010 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
Melbourne though had been around for about a decade and had legitimately won a premiership before they decided to award themselves cap concessions for being an expansion club
July 3rd 2010 @ 10:17pm
Hansie said | July 3rd 2010 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
Did anyone else see the irony of Gasnier being signed up in the middle of Women in League week?
July 7th 2010 @ 6:55pm
Brownie said | July 7th 2010 @ 6:55pm | Report comment
The cap should never have been introduced. Over time, the game would have evened itself out, through ebbs and flows of sponsorship money and genuine young talent adding promise to the sides, hence more bums on seats, as well as any number of external pressures driving the amount of interest and subsequent money surrounding different sides. It would also have given way to the successful introduction of more new sides with the help of corporate and personal investment as well as support from the NRL.
On another note, look at the English Premiere League soccer – no salary cap, LUDICROUS payments to players, and yes, admittedly there are a certain few teams who are always going to be toward the top and more than likely take the premiership, but i don’t see any problems with attendance, pride or passion.
Rugby league gets more broken every time we try to fix it. Is it too late to try and reverse this problem?