Traditionalists, sharpen your pitchforks! Karens, get ready to demand the manager!
But let’s first take a moment to discuss the National Rugby League, player contracts and the current free-agency model players and their agents adhere to.
Let me say at the outset that this is not a magic fix-all solution. It’s certainly not perfect. And who knows if it’s been proposed before, considering we don’t know what propositions have been made behind the scenes in relation to replacing the free-agency model.
Let’s get the discussion started.
The current free-agency model is one of the key factors of discussion in the current Collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the NRL, which represents itself and the clubs, and the players, represented by the Rugby League Players Association.
The 1 November deadline is quickly approaching, and it is usually this time of year that talk around the free-agency model rises to the surface. The program overall seems clunky and messy and always raises bits of anger as star players sign contracts with opposing clubs despite having a whole year left on their current deals.
Following that comes the pressure of whether they’ll seek to get that player a year earlier.
We saw during the 2021 post-season photos of Penrith Panthers grand final hero Viliame Kikau pictured alongside Gus Gould and then Bulldogs coach Trent Barrett, albeit leaked, but an announcement was due.
Brandon Smith toured Australia via any and every club willing to put their hand up in the interest of adding him to their squad from 2023. The speculation was relentless, and it meant immense disregard for fans, who were being asked to renew memberships while one of the main players for the squad was very publicly heading to the exit doors.
But as rugby league fans know and understand, this is the system. It is the way that it has always happened, and there is no perfect solution to replace it. We understand these players have families. Their careers may be short due to the toughness of the game, and they need to put themselves first.
We understand that this way players have their futures sorted, but there is no harm in at least discussing other possible ways to enhance the entire contract process.
(Photo by Mark Evans/Getty Images)
The 1 November contract date
A quick recap for those who may not know about the 1 November date and the importance of it: from November 1 2022 any player whose current playing contract with their respective clubs ends at the end of the 2023 season can openly negotiate and sign a playing contract with another club starting in 2024.
Unfortunately, as happens often, once one of these players commits to a different club for the following season, media speculation and public pressure mounts on whether that player is going to see out their current playing contract.
To make this whole plan work, we would move the 1 November date to early-mid August on the year the player’s contract expires.
For example, Cameron Munster’s contract expires with the Melbourne Storm in 2023 – and yes, I know he now has a new contract, but just follow for now. Instead of being able to negotiate with clubs from November 2022, he would have to wait until August 2023.
This would give time for any amendments to the salary cap to be finalised by the NRL. It would provide current clubs the opportunity to negotiate or see how the player performs in the early part of the new season before deciding whether to make a new offer. Plus it would also provide an opportunity for a player to hit a purple patch and potentially drive up the asking price on their next offer.
Player draft
Rugby league fans, let me introduce you to the long-discussed NRL player draft. This is the new 1 November event that we all keep our eyes on.
Between August and 1 November all the players who have not been offered a new contract with their current club can negotiate with other clubs who may be interested in their services for the following season.
(Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
If a deal can be made, the new club, the agent and the player all sign on the dotted line, take the promotional handshake photo, do the jersey presentation and everyone goes their merry way.
Alternatively, if no deal can be reached, then the off-contract player may nominate for the NRL player draft.
Other inclusions in the NRL player draft could be Queensland Cup and New South Wales Cup players who are uncontracted to an NRL club directly who believe they could perform at the elite level of the game if given the opportunity.
South Sydney Rabbitohs star Latrell Mitchell recently expressed his disappointment that not many NRL scouts were at the Koori Rugby League knockout carnival. Imagine if some of the players who were on display throughout that tournament over the years were able to nominate.
Or think about the players deemed late bloomers to the game, after spending years plying their trade in state-based competitions. How many could’ve had even bigger careers if they had had the ability to nominate for something like a draft and were at least be looked at and considered by every club in the competition?
Trade requests
This isn’t to be confused with the current loan system. We have seen a rise in the importance of mental health in everyday life, and rightfully so. Sometimes we understand there are compassionate or emotional reasons someone may want out of a club.
With the introduction of the player draft clubs have a new element to use as a negotiation tool when considering a trade request. Transfer fee or draft picks offer clubs more at the table, especially when the mental health of a player is at stake.
Clubs, at their discretion, could discuss or include a transfer fee or draft picks in any talks surrounding a player’s trade request.
Draft picks not only being allocated but potentially being traded throughout the year would keep a fresh eye on the player draft.
Conclusion
Is this perfect? No.
Will any of it happen? Probably not.
But in all honesty, it’s a discussion, and it showcases why both parties – the NRL and the players association – remain content with the status quo with the way contracts are handled despite the ongoing CBA discussions.
Any changes will no doubt stir the hornets nest, but with Peter V’landys looking to add more entertainment to the game, including floating the idea of the grand final being more in the style of the Super Bowl, and the real possibility of an 18th franchise on the horizon when it comes to broadcast negotiations, he just may back himself to float this as an idea while he’s at it.
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
I don't argue that point, I'm perfectly aware of how the Panthers system works. I get it, they search long and far for their juniors, not just from the Penrith district, and I don't think any less of it as a result. As an Eels fan it pains me to see how our once vaunted juniors system has been allowed to wither on the vine since the days of Brian Smith. In the late 90's we had a seemingly endless production line of juniors, many of whom didn't come from the Parramatta district. We had Nathan & Ian Hindmarsh (Robertson), Nathan & Jason Cayless, Michael Vella, Luke Burt (Hunter), Eric Grothe Jnr, Andrew Ryan (Dubbo), David Vaeliki (Christchurch), Jamie Lyon (Wee Waa), Daniel Irvine, Pat Richards, Chad Robinson, Danny Sullivan & PJ Marsh all come through our system in the space of 5 years. I'm sure Isaiah Yeo considers himself a Penrith player, but does he consider himself a Penrith person or a Dubbo person ? Not that it really matters I suppose.
Panthers
Guest
When saying about not being local juniors at Penrith. You’re not thinking about the fact that they are all Penrith pathways players. ( other than Kikua that you named ). Lots of clubs have pathways programs, for not players who aren’t originally from the actual area of that club. They actually invest in these players & often in these different areas, to gain the pathways players . Who then still have to fight their way up through the grades , against those who’d you consider as locals. To make the first grade side. So in the end they’re almost as much locals , as the players from areas in & around Penrith. Or for whatever other club who does the same thing. Ask Yeo if he thinks he’s an actual Penrith player .
Westie
Guest
If I were clubs like Penrith, Cowboys. I’d be doing a lot more of the player loan type deals. Allow a loan of any top up & coming players to another club , for 2-3 seasons. They pay for the players further development , whilst paying their contract money for that time. Then the original club gets to decide if they take that player back . Or the player is then free to stay at the club they went to . Or move somewhere else ? Having such an option type contract , helps both clubs.
Ad-O
Guest
Having a summer transfer window won't kill the speculation. But every pro sport has speculation and back room deals. What other pro sports don't have is players playing for one team when they are contracted to play for another. It's a ridiculous state of affairs that calls into question the integrity of the competition. I don't care if players only have a few days to move, they do it in soccer and those guys have to move half way around the world to a country where they don't even speak the language. The worst an NRL player has to deal with is Melbourne, Auckland or Queensland. So cry me a river.
Ad-O
Guest
You are correct. Australian common law is based off British common law and a draft is illegal in the UK too. Its not so much about how your laws are derived but how they are interpreted by the courts and what precedent the courts set.
Ad-O
Guest
If you're article begins with advocating for a draft then its not worth reading. There's nothing modern about it and its completely unnecessary in a salary capped league.. Its used in America and nowhere else. It forces half the teams to tank for draft capital and is possibly illegal under Australian law. I'd certainly be suing the NRL if I was the top prospect and they sent me to the Tigers. That's how your career gets ruined before it even gets started.
Ad-O
Guest
Transfer window, yes. Draft, hell no. Its unnecessary in a comp with a salary cap and a restraint of trade on the players.
criag
Roar Rookie
The article and the comments are a lot to get my poor head around. I have always been against a draft for the reasons you end up with young players playing for teams not of their choosing, sometimes involving basically kids having to move interstate away from their lives and families and clubs losing that local kid aspect. Their lives can sometimes go off track too. This happens in the AFL and it is far from a perfect system. At least if a player doesn’t get to play for their senior club, they have power whether to accept or reject offers. Of course, young players come from country areas to try their luck, but again, that is their choice. It may work for US sports, but the players have mostly all been through college systems where they have already been away from home, and their pick in the draft (if they’re sensible and don’t get unlucky) usually sets them up for life. The financial rewards are in a different stratosphere compared to the average rugby league player – the MINIMUM salary in the NFL and NBA is over $1 million AUD, so players are more willing to compromise on which team they would like to play for, etc.
mushi
Roar Guru
Sure theyre exactly if "exactly "is like the new literally. In the US the NBA Entities own only a group of teams (with requirements that a single individual control each entity) in a specfic exempt professional competition only. They've lost challenges to that competition exemption position but the cost was immaterial (think Trump v nfl) Versus Entities (many community owned) that hold a minority stake in the game from u/7s upwards It would be hard to draw up a more different ownership structure. But hey, feel free to copy and paste on another site and pretend it was you
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
My apologies, it was rude
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
Yes the draft has been defeated in the courts as a restraint of trade, but that's not statutory. It's precedent, but it's not final. If the clubs, via their representative the ARL Commission, and the players, via their representative the NRLPA, negotiate a CBA in good faith that includes various provisions such as a rookie draft and a rookie salary scale, the ability to trade players against their will, restricted free agency etc, and mutually agree to such an agreement, then the only parties that can challenge such provisions are the signatories to said agreement, ie the clubs or the players association. External parties, such as an 18 year old prospect who has never signed an NRL contract, are not signatories to said agreement, therefore they have no authority to challenge it. To challenge it they would have to become a union member, and the only way to do that is to sign an NRL contract, and the only way to do that is to submit to the NRL draft process.
Red Rob
Roar Rookie
Why would you say that Brett?
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
It is exactly the same. Tell me how its different.
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
English common law is the same in the Australia as it is in the US. Two or more parties negotiate an agreement, and then abide by said agreement. There is no statutory law that applies here. You keep talking about differences in law, so what differences are you talking about ? And why don't those differences apply to the AFL ?
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
No they don't, but if they don't want to abide by the leagues CBA, then they can play park footy. No one is forcing them to play in the NRL. But if they want to play NRL footy and get paid accordingly, then submit to the CBA rules. It's not complicated.
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
Again, it's all about how you frame it. See my response to Greg on this subject.
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
Yes. The restriction applies to young players who have to prove themselves. How many players have been given huge contracts based solely on potential over the years and haven't come close to living up to their value. Ash Taylor, Kalyn Ponga, David Fifita, are three that just pop of the page. Even a guy like Dylan Brown, the Warriors offered him a 5 year $3m deal BEFORE he'd played an NRL game. So the Eels who had invested in DB since they found him as a 15 year old in NZ were put in a position where they had to match that sort of deal or risk losing him. They should never have been put in that position. The Cowboys should never have been put in the position to have to let Ponga leave. Furthermore, restricting rookie salaries leaves more cap room for veteran middle of the road club men, players who will never be rep level but form the bulk of the games playing population. As a result the overall playing depth will improve. If a young player proves that he is a legit star, then he'll get paid. There is no downside.
mushi
Roar Guru
You're taking US law as Aussie again(and admiting your grandiose 10,000 words wasbs plagarism) the players union agreed last time and the league got fisted. Unless you've got a genuine pathway outside of screaming COMMON LAW (which is on the player's favour) just shut up
mushi
Roar Guru
See they don't have to find another profession. Despite what you think there isn't a Brett Allen Said clause
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
I have openly said I've borrowed liberally from the NBA, no apologies. I've also said it would need to be crafted for the NRL's specific needs. this is a framework to start negotiations, not an end point.