Rugby league clubs have always looked at ways of taking advantage of the rules.
Coaches are expert at it but it extends further than that with clubs willing to do anything – including bending the rules – to get ahead.
That is what we are seeing with medical retirements.
Nine months ago when Greg Inglis was allowed to retire from the game due to injury. This was something that was unfathomable for most at the time other than to those who knew him well and saw it coming.
Others in the game knew more would be to follow. Within the same year we have two of the greats of the game, Sam Burgess and Michael Gillett, waving good bye.
No-one is questioning that they are injured and that they have been given medical advice that they should not go on.
I guess the question is whether this is unexpected – and should their clubs have to foot the bill within the salary cap?
Anthony Watmough at the Parramatta Eels was likely the first case to test this area but that was when a club was attempting to medically retire him and the player himself was willing (in mind anyway) to keep playing.
In these recent cases, it is the club and player who are side by side, saying this is a new injury and it has ended the career and the player is unable to go on.
The silent part of the announcement? Please keep paying him and take his salary off our salary cap while we pursue a younger, more physically able replacement.
Don’t get me wrong in that these are great players and the clubs of course would love them to continue forever at their best but the fact of the fact is they are no longer able to do so.
“Look, have a rest. Put the feet up. You have been a great player and having nothing else to prove. We will ensure you keep getting paid the money in your contract and potentially add some ambassadorial work to that”.
Not so long ago players were considered lucky to get a contract past the age of 30. If they did it was normally one year at a time.
The query really is why have these players got to a stage where they are medically unable to keep playing yet have three or more years left on contract.
Is it unexpected on these clubs that these players are unable to fulfil the contract? Are the clubs irresponsible in giving such long-term deals to players with a long injury history in such a brutal sport?
If so, is someone other than the clubs responsible? The players certainly aren’t. Who could blame them in looking for the pen when a large multi-year deal is put on the table, but you can’t tell me that a get-out isn’t discussed by the clubs when getting into such arrangements.
There are stipulations in the medical insurance that payouts will only be paid when injuries are new and have occurred since the last contract was initiated.
Now obviously that is a murky area. Anyone who plays rugby league for ten years or more has a long history of injuries new and old, so putting a start point on anything is always complex.
I guess the question is how someone with a complex injury history is put on a long multi-season deal. Yes, players require some job certainty and players at the top of the game no doubt would require two to three-year contracts – particularly when a club is trying to attract them – but how are players nearing the end of their brutal careers put on a four, five or in Jason Taumalo’s case, ten-year deal, when injury could jump in at any time?
Chris.P.Bacon
Guest
I'm with you 100% mach4. I really feel for the bloke but we're not a charity. Fozz tries but his body is being held together by some rather tenuous tendons and fragile ligaments. He has played just a touch over 50% of available matches in his two years with the Dogs at a reported $1 mill+ per season. I haven't followed the medical retirement debate but surely this is a case where such a retirement would/should be considered.
mach4
Roar Rookie
After today maybe Keiran Foran has a decision to make, Bulldogs need to rebuild to strengthen their team so cannot afford to carry a well-paid player into a pre-season. Sorry for the player but it has to end some day.
Big Daddy
Guest
Couldn't agree more. All club's get their grant ($13 million) but not all clubs have the resources outside of that. But if you look at some of these large clubs whose leagues clubs might have large revenues but are struggling to make profits/losses. Look at some of the large clubs that have gone under. Balmain are a prime example. There are a lot of large clubs in the Newcastle/Illawarra/central coast that make huge profits that play in various competition and are penalised because they are rich and some club's that barely make a profit. It's very much the " tall poppy syndrome" . Penalise somebody because they are rich.
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
The club pays. Russell Crowe and James Packer can probably find $3 million without too much difficulty. That’s the particular problem with this (potential) rort - it is only the richest clubs that can really exploit it. And the whole point of the salary cap is to partially nullify the advantage of being a rich club.
The Barry
Roar Guru
The NRL never said they were fit to play but that the injuries were evident before they signed their contracts therefore pre-existing and to be included in the cap It’s so murky. Everyone has known about Burgess’ shoulder and Inglis’ knee injuries for a long time It seems so arbitrary to say in some cases this injury predates the current contract and in some it doesn’t It would be really interesting to know what were the factors that led to the different outcomes
Papi Smurf
Roar Rookie
I'm not too sure about snake, HY. But Matai had a nerve/neck injury that was a chronic injury he was managing over the last years of his career. The grounds against Matai were that it was pre-existing. The same excuse must have been given for snake. I don't see what the problem is for a player to be adequately compensated for injuries sustained while playing the game. The whole reason for the salary cap is to make sure that clubs have access to the same talent but with the same limited budget. How are the Bunnies or the Broncos advantaged by losing a player of the experience if either Sam Burgess or Matt Gillett in order to sign a 19 year old like David Fifita with only 35 NRL games under his belt?
Rellum
Roar Guru
If they just built in long service and youth development salary cap deductions this wouldn't be an issue.
Succhi
Roar Rookie
From what I can understand (and I may be wrong) clubs still need to pay out the player’s contract. So in the case of Burgess, yes, it frees up the salary cap for Souths by approx $3m - but they still need to find the $3m to pay him - and not many clubs are profitable or have a lazy few million lying around (or is it the NRL or a third party who pays/contributes)?
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
Yeah, complete shemozzle. Champagne rugby league administration.
mushi
Roar Guru
Makes it less likely in my mind going forward.
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
It's a very interesting point Mushi. In my experience when we are dealing with the human condition , there is very rarely a yes , no answer. We recognise that by the way we apportion blame in negligence cases and by how we award compensation claims. We recognise that human interactions are very rarely a 1/0 event. Apportioning blame is fine as long as all parties realise the final result will never be all 'right.' But it's a much better scenario than the final result being totally wrong.
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
I’m pretty sure that an insurance company paid out the money for Watmough. Of course he had to sue the club to get that money, so that wasn’t exactly an elegant solution.
Andrew
Guest
Race horses that can no longer compete because of acute injuries get shot... League players get $4million... seems fair.
mushi
Roar Guru
And that's without getting smashed by large men for 80 minutes some 20 odd times a year.
mushi
Roar Guru
Do you honestly think Smith isn't playing with what most would consider an injury now? I'd be staggered if he hadn't had at least 10 conversations that had "you can keep playing but the consequence is x"
mushi
Roar Guru
This is why we can't have nice things
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
Smith would have to convince doctors he was injured enough not to be able to play on. There is literally a mini industry built around the provision of medical reports for injury compensation. Getting a medical report that supports your claim for personal injury is the easiest thing in the world.
Paul
Roar Guru
The other aspect of this issue which isn't talked about, is the impact of this whole situation on the players availability, prior to a career ending injury. It's been quite common over the decades for Clubs with less money to take on guys nearing the end of their careers. Sides like the Tigers, for example, can have Benjii Marshall, Josh Reynolds, etc in their side and get value out of these guys, knowing they might be a buggered shoulder away from retirement. They're not going to be paying huge dollars for these guys either. That situation changes with the current approach to injury retirements. Rather than a Burgess type player being available for 500k, injured shoulders and all, rich Clubs will offer north of a million bucks, which is way more than a guy with his age, medical history & playing style should be getting. This will scare away the competition, especially from battling sides like the Tigers, allowing Souths, in this case, to keep him on their books and gain salary cap relief if he succumbs to injury.
Hard Yards
Roar Rookie
Very tricky business. At risk of raising two players, because they stayed on the Manly cap for an entire season although neither set foot on the field and I’m a Manly tragic. Does anybody know what the rationale was for saying Brett Stewart ( knee) and Steve Mattai ( neck and shoulders officially - although you could probably add arms, hands, legs and feet as well) were actually both fit to play? Serious question , what’s done is done, I just never got to the bottom of it.
The Barry
Roar Guru
I agree with that I definitely think players should be looked after when they’re injured. Those acute, immediate career ending injuries are at the easy end of the spectrum in terms of managing this process It gets pretty murky pretty quickly after that I’m not even suggesting anyone is rorting the system just that these cases are showing how easily it can be