Hmmmm that's an interesting point and a potential minefield. Gentleman's agreements are the playthings of lawyers but one would hope that the welfare of the player would be prioritised.For any player coming from another franchise, there's a gentleman's agreement where players are allowed to leave earlier (assume paid out) to start training with the other team. I'd be interested to find out which of the two sides would have to fork out for any surgery etc. for injuries sustained while contracted to the previous franchise but training with the new.
All of the rugby players would be contracted and registered with the ARU though wouldn't they? At the least you'd think all of the Super teams would all have the same insurance arrangements.Hmmmm that's an interesting point and a potential minefield. Gentleman's agreements are the playthings of lawyers but one would hope that the welfare of the player would be prioritised.
All of the rugby players would be contracted and registered with the ARU though wouldn't they? At the least you'd think all of the Super teams would all have the same insurance arrangements.
Cross coders and is players are more interesting..
Surely RUPA wouldn't let a player train with a club without some of insurance covering themI believe each franchise covers the out of pocket expenses of contracted players injured playing rugby. I'm 90% confident of that. So no, it's a big question (and potentially huge expense) that just hasn't come up yet.
Do you mean rehab costs to get them back on the field or living costs?I believe each franchise covers the out of pocket expenses of contracted players injured playing rugby. I'm 90% confident of that. So no, it's a big question (and potentially huge expense) that just hasn't come up yet.
Costs to get them back on the field.Do you mean rehab costs to get them back on the field or living costs?
Who's paying if someone breaks their neck and needs lifetime treatment?
Surely RUPA wouldn't let a player train with a club without some of insurance covering them
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It appears that you can take a player out of rugby league, but you can't take rugby league out of a player.
It appears that you can take a player out of rugby league, but you can't take rugby league out of a player.
According to one report up to 100 footballers are implicated in this investigation.
I would imagine that a number as huge as this might mean that all sorts of people are caught in a rather unpleasant situation.
Let's wait and see before we start making simplistic statements. Who knows where the blame will spread?
More like you can take the player out of the GC, blow capital of Australia, but you can't take the GC out of the player?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league...pair-may-be-bit-players-in-bigger-drugs-drama