Aussie Player Exodus

[TOCC]

Here's a thought, Toulon come to the ARU and offer them $10million to release Izzy(conditional on him wanting to actually join Toulon), does the ARU take the money?

 

[cyclopath]

Here's a thought, Toulon come to the ARU and offer them $10million to release Izzy(conditional on him wanting to actually join Toulon), does the ARU take the money?

Nup. They'd only lose it!

 

[ShtinaTina]

Nup. They'd only lose it!

Funny cause it's true

 

[TOCC]

So the ARU has set up a subcommittee to deal with possible sabbaticals.. Includes RUPA Rep, Jim Carmichael and a few others.

Subsequently, Will Genia will likely play in Japan in either the 2015/2016 or 2016/2017 seasons but remain available for the Reds in 2016...

A good outcome given the necessity of the situation I think..

 

[Train Without a Station]

I disagree. The outcome will be a bunch of crocked and burnt out players.

Wallaby players already start the Super Rugby season slowly after a 4 game tour in November, which is around 2 months after the RC. Some more naturally gifted players can do it. For example I see Folau as the type that probably needs to work on his mind harder than his body to be at his best, and it may affect him less. But others will struggle.

Could be the beginning of the end.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Oh and flies in the face of RUPA's fight for limits on games in a years and player welfare.

 

[Train Without a Station]

And this is where my problem lies with the line of thought of selecting players from overseas:

The pressure on the Australian Rugby Union to relax its policy of overlooking overseas-based players for Test selection is intensifying. As cashed-up European and Japanese clubs make irresistible offers to numerous leading Australian players, with the latest French targets being Israel Folau and Will Genia, the union is in serious danger of losing key players. Australia, which is not exactly overflowing with talent, could easily use numerous players currently performing well in Europe to bolster their stocks at a Rugby World Cup being staged in the northern hemisphere next year. It could also solve a major problem area. Top-rate tight-head props are as rare in Australian rugby as Bledisloe Cup series wins, as shown in the second half of the France Test in Brisbane when the usual Wallabies scrum dramas re-emerged. But there are alternatives.

http://www.espnscrum.com/australia/rugby/story/229399.html#1PccltjAH1QOA3Tg.99

Growden is pushing the agenda using an example of the lack of TH Prop depth. I don't think the example of Selasi Ma'afu is a reason to look at changing the rules. Other than James O'Conner I cannot think of a single overseas based player that would be selected based on form over a local anyway. Digby Ioane who many felt his best was behind him was maybe a second.

Oh and I love Hooper, but I would have Smith over him. But that was also a matter of Smith moving on from test rugby due to being over 30. We are better off with youth coming through if they have the talent in these instances. Besides, when have Australia ever struggled for depth at 7?

So what if we lose Genia? He is rightly the 3rd string halfback right now. This would have to be a factor in that decision.

Losing Folau would be a first choicer we don't want to lose. But is it worth throwing away your principles the first time one goes against you? Anyway, reading the SMH today, Izzy isn't going anywhere.

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

Unless someone can quote me the legislation or something more than heresay that says rugby players are entertainers in France and subject to 10% tax I am calling bullshit and people are either making things up it misreading the tax code.
My understanding is that up to 30% of a players salary can be classified as image rights and not subject to tax. Other than that the regular taxes apply which is over 500k you pay 49% and at least for this year, over 1m you pay 75% tho that is only a two year levy (the mad monk!)
I believe the 10% tax loophole was closed and was fairly dodgy to access in the first place.

 

[Braveheart81]

I agree SAH. There is no adventageous tax position for sportsmen playing in France anymore.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Managers are always going to use Europe or Japan for leverage anyway.

That's what anybody does in negotiations. Tries to get the party they want to meet the best price the other parties are offering.

The ARU tries to get Izzy for Jesse Mogg money and Folau tries to get the ARU to pay him Toulon money.

 

[liquor box]

And this is where my problem lies with the line of thought of selecting players from overseas:



http://www.espnscrum.com/australia/rugby/story/229399.html#1PccltjAH1QOA3Tg.99

Growden is pushing the agenda using an example of the lack of TH Prop depth. I don't think the example of Selasi Ma'afu is a reason to look at changing the rules. Other than James O'Conner I cannot think of a single overseas based player that would be selected based on form over a local anyway. Digby Ioane who many felt his best was behind him was maybe a second.

Oh and I love Hooper, but I would have Smith over him. But that was also a matter of Smith moving on from test rugby due to being over 30. We are better off with youth coming through if they have the talent in these instances. Besides, when have Australia ever struggled for depth at 7?

So what if we lose Genia? He is rightly the 3rd string halfback right now. This would have to be a factor in that decision.

Losing Folau would be a first choicer we don't want to lose. But is it worth throwing away your principles the first time one goes against you? Anyway, reading the SMH today, Izzy isn't going anywhere.

Every sport in Australia comes to a point where the world is going to end because a star player is going overseas, and generally within about six months nobody really cares because there is a new star.

When George Smith left it was a disaster, until we realised that guys like Pocock, Gill and Hooper were pretty good replacements.

Players will always be replaced and we will remember their skills but look at the new kid and see something to be excited about.

I don't want Australian Rugby to lose any player, but I also realise that Rugby is a business and the professionals that play it deserve to make as big a living as possible.

 

[RugbyReg]

Every sport in Australia comes to a point where the world is going to end because a star player is going overseas, and generally within about six months nobody really cares because there is a new star.

not AFL (because it doesn't exist overseas) but more seriously, soccer doesn't because of the transfer fees!

 

[swingpass]

not AFL (because it doesn't exist overseas) but more seriously, soccer doesn't because of the transfer fees!

Oh FFS lets not start again about transfer fees !

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

Agreed. Read someone's response to my suggesting transfer fees earlier in this thread to end that one.

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

I agree SAH. There is no adventageous tax position for sportsmen playing in France anymore.

based on my calcs if toulon is offering issy say $3m, 900k of that is tax exempt as image rights, the remainder is subject to normal tax. plugging the current rates in leaves you with circa $1.7M after tax in france.

so for the ARU to match that, they need to basically pay him $3M as well (100k or so after tax difference).

are the ARU going to be able to pay him that much? no not on their own
options would be to provide a sabbatical, find a way to increase his third party sponsorship money (i'd think this could be done pretty easily as the guy is a fairly well known name across aus), or find a way for him to get 'image rights' such as a percentage of jerseys they sell with 15 and or folau on the back.

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

not to mention they get him to the sydney stars and that adds a few bucks in his pocket for promoting them and maybe playing 15 minutes of a game off the bench.

 

[Train Without a Station]

They don't need to "match" Toulon's alleged offer.

This isn't the comparison of two completely generic companies offering identical pros and cons.

If Izzy is like anybody else who is looking at employment opportunities, he will have a number in his head of what he considers the minimum amount he will take.

From there factors like additional money he could make from that position, location, people he will be playing with, potential satisfaction, the challenge, how he feels he will enjoy the environment will all be considered. Also other opportunities outside his playing contract will be a factor.

The playing contract will be greater there.
The potential opportunities outside that contract will be greater here.

The other factors are all considerations.

If he wants to go play in France, even if the ARU can meet or exceed the offer of Toulon, he'll likely go.

If he doesn't want to leave Australia, providing the ARU can offer a lucrative contract, Toulon likely won't be able to do much to snare him.

To describe the situation like players line up two offers and just pick the one which adds up the highest is incorrect and insulting to them.

 

[Pfitzy]

To describe the situation like players line up two offers and just pick the one which adds up the highest is incorrect and insulting to them.

Agreed - like any employee, they need to consider what is personally best for them. Studies have shown that the pay for a given employment, once its over a certain level, is not a primary motivator for any employee.

I took a 20% pay cut to move from a contracting job in the CBD to a salaried role 6km from home, and never regretted the money difference. The reduced travel and availability for my family overruled it in so many ways.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Much like you I took a pay cut of a very similar percentage to move to a role with a better environment, better work/life balance, equally less hours, greater job satisfaction, but importantly, potentially better long term earning potential.

Couldn't be happier with my decision. As said previously, I could also double my salary by looking at certain options, like a FIFO role. Doesn't personally interest me because my salary is at an adequate level for my personal needs and requirements. Anything I could get by doing so, I'd rather do without to stay where I am.

I'm sure many athletes think like this too.

 

[en_force_er]

Much like you I took a pay cut of a very similar percentage to move to a role with a better environment, better work/life balance, equally less hours, greater job satisfaction, but importantly, potentially better long term earning potential.

Couldn't be happier with my decision. As said previously, I could also double my salary by looking at certain options, like a FIFO role. Doesn't personally interest me because my salary is at an adequate level for my personal needs and requirements. Anything I could get by doing so, I'd rather do without to stay where I am.

I'm sure many athletes think like this too.

Whilst I don't disagree with you I will say you can play the long game, athletes can't.

Their window is small. They can settle down into a better work/life balance in their late 30s when they are sorting their way into the working world.