- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
For years the salary cap has been seen as the main way to equalise talent between the clubs in the NRL. But now, 25 years after it was first introduced, is there any point in continuing the charade?
The concept that making all the clubs keep their payments to players under a certain level will spread the playing talent and therefore equalise the teams is fine in theory.
However, the cap has had a rocky history at best. The New South Wales rugby league introduced the cap in 1990 and it was just a year later that the Canberra Raiders were found to have breached the cap by more than 25 per cent.
In 2002 the all conquering Bulldogs were found to have breached the cap and were docked all of their points for the season. In 2006 The Warriors were stripped of four competition points and fined $430,000 for a $1 million cap breach.
The biggie came in 2010 when the Storm were stripped of two premierships, three minor premierships, docked all points for that season, fined $500,000 and ordered to return $1.1 million in prize money.
These examples are just the big ones. There have been multitudes of minor infractions all the way along. Further, these are just the ones that have been detected. Allegations of salary cap cheating constantly swirl around.
However, player defections to rugby union set a cat among the pigeons. Mark Gasnier and Sonny Bill Williams went to French rugby in 2008. While Gasnier was out of contract with the Dragons, Sonny Bill Williams turned all NRL contracts to confetti when he walked out on his deal with the Bulldogs. In reality there was little that could be done to stop him.
To try to stop the drain of top players leaving the NRL to chase the filthy lucre, the marquee player allowance was brought in. When that didn’t prove enough they brought in “third party agreements” which allowed players to receive any amount of payment from third parties who wished to sponsor them – as long as the club didn’t organise it, the sponsors weren’t associated with the club and there was no use of club logos, jerseys or emblems.
Lastly, the NRL has a discretionary fund in its back pocket that they can break out if they see a need. They got it out to try and stop Jarryd Hayne leaving but it seems they didn’t have enough in there.
Roarer Scott Woodward’s excellent recent article points out how some clubs are benefiting from these arrangements while others are languishing.
The thing that really brought home to me just how messed up all of this is was when the investigation into irregularities at the Broncos was dropped. It appears that pursuing the matters involving Andrew Gee, the Broncos Leagues Club and an amount of $300,000 was all too hard. The NRL general manager of integrity, Nick Weeks, said they had found no evidence of a salary cap breach.
“The investigation was impeded because it was not possible to obtain information from the Broncos Leagues Club and others from the Broncos who have left the game,” he said.
Basically, Gee wouldn’t talk and, as he had left the club, he couldn’t be made to and no one else would talk either. So the NRL dropped the matter. Weeks did, however, make a threat that was about as worrying as being attacked with soggy celery.
“Given the evidence currently before us, there are former officials from both clubs who are unlikely to be registered to be involved in the NRL in the future,” he said.
The upshot of this is that the NRL really has no power to investigate clubs at all. How can you possibly expect to have the rules you set followed if you have no real power to enforce them? In this reality you’ve really got to question the point of continuing the salary cap charade.
Let’s have a look at the reasons the NRL says we need a salary cap, outlined on their official website.
“1. It assists in “spreading the playing talent” so that a few better resourced clubs cannot simply out-bid other clubs for all of the best players. If a few clubs are able to spend unlimited funds it will reduce the attraction of games to fans, sponsors and media partners due to an uneven competition. Allowing clubs to spend an unlimited amount on players would drive some clubs out of the competition as they would struggle to match the prices wealthy clubs could afford to pay.
2. It ensures clubs are not put into a position where they are forced to spend more money than they can afford, in terms of player payments, just to be competitive.”
In regards to their first point, I’ll let you decide how well the playing talent is presently getting spread. And what are third party agreements if not unlimited funds? These agreements solidly favour the big sides that reside in easy reach of big business.
Newcastle, the Cowboys, Sharks and Raiders don’t fall into this category. While the Raiders have the money within their club to possibly be in the bidding against the third party agreements offered to players, as the money comes from within their club they can’t do it.
Their second point looks at the situation from the wrong angle completely. The salary cap amount may now not be enough to assemble and maintain a roster that is competitive when up against sides with massive third party agreements at their disposal as well. If you aren’t competitive on the field then your crowds will drop, then your sponsorship will erode and before you know it you are playing in a country comp in front of 100 fans, sponsored by the local IGA.
The NRL’s FAQ sheet makes this stellar point:
“The reality is the majority of clubs spend the Salary Cap but not all are successful on the field. Someone has to come last and someone has to win, regardless of what they spend. Some clubs will attract players on the basis of what the club can offer a player’s career rather than just money. Other clubs may need to spend more money to attract the same level of player.”
That is more than a little reminiscent of George Orwell’s Animal Farm quote “Some animals are more equal than others”.
Here’s a tip for you NRL HQ, players want to be shown the money and they want to win. Every player has their price and every player craves success. If a club can offer both then that unfashionable club with no money, little-to-no success and off-field dramas is going to have little chance at all at luring them.
Make the club somewhere cold like Canberra or miles away from anywhere like Townsville and they’ll really be up against it. And if by some miracle those struggling clubs do develop a star player well you just have to use a third party agreement to buy him.
We live in a capitalist system that has proven time and again that money wins out over all else. The obvious answer is to scrap the salary cap altogether and let the market forces decide exactly what the future shape of the NRL will be.
Let’s stop getting in the way of the Broncos buying players anyway they see fit. Let’s stop preventing Penrith or Canberra from using their leagues club funds to support their teams anyway they like. Let’s stop preventing rich fans from spending as much of their money as they want to try and get their clubs to glory.
There is little point in the NRL on one hand trying to engineer any sort of level playing field when on their other hand they have other rules in place. Rules that do anything but create equality.
Sure, a fair few clubs will go under and leave their diehard fans distraught. However, in the end we will get a competition that is sustainable. Keeping the salary cap will consign those doomed clubs to a slow and agonising death rather than a quick one. The NRL has long since stopped being a suburban club competition and we should do away with any pretence that it still is in any way, shape or form.
Let’s just get rid of the salary cap for good if for no other reason than that I am sick of arguing for a lost cause and I bet lots of you are too.