• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Aussie Player Exodus

Members Section

John Thornett (49)
Lets do the sums now ppl, $65 for an f45 membership per week times that by 52 = $3380 AFTER TAX!!!!! so we'll say conservatively $5k per player over 30 players $150,000 hidden in the cap , old sneaky sneaky gilly/wahlberg
 

PhilClinton

Geoff Shaw (53)
Lets do the sums now ppl, $65 for an f45 membership per week times that by 52 = $3380 AFTER TAX!!!!! so we'll say conservatively $5k per player over 30 players $150,000 hidden in the cap , old sneaky sneaky gilly/wahlberg
In all seriousness I thought that kinda stuff was being paid for in the cost of living expenses?

My understanding was the top players were provided a salary (under the cap) but also somewhere to live, a leased car and other bits and pieces like I imagine a gym membership. Because the contracts were only 6 month deals this was part of the appeal because it meant guys weren’t having to sort out short term leases themselves.
 

Marce

John Thornett (49)
We lost him forever:
e243d8bb37c8d2f0f03adb4493105ed5.jpeg.jpg

Side note I saw Semi Radradra in the middle of melbourne yesterday on my way home from the fight
And did u say him to play for Waratahs just for fun? I think that he's elegible for Wallabies now with the new law. He played for Fiji 7s long time ago and he has many years living in OZ lol

Cheika wanted him before Koroibete, he was his first NRL wing desire but for elegibiles rules he picked Koroi

PS: Where is the photo of my mural?
 

Rugbynutter39

Michael Lynagh (62)
With the talk of Austin Gilgronis breaking the salary cap in the MLR I wonder if we'll see some Australian players looking to make their way back. Hugh Roach, Mack Mason and Ryan Lowrens are all at Austin but it wouldn't be to surprising if an infringement at Austin prompted more scrutiny elsewhere or just some departures from other clubs as a few Austin players become available.
I guess given mlr given these players some pro development are there any worth taking back to super rugby clubs is more the point
 

Members Section

John Thornett (49)
We lost him forever:
View attachment 13732

And did u say him to play for Waratahs just for fun? I think that he's elegible for Wallabies now with the new law. He played for Fiji 7s long time ago and he has many years living in OZ lol

Cheika wanted him before Koroibete, he was his first NRL wing desire but for elegibiles rules he picked Koroi

PS: Where is the photo of my mural?

Lol, nah didn't speak to him.

He played at the Olympics last yr. He wouldn't qualify for the wallabies for at least 5 yrs.
 

Jimmy_Crouch

Ken Catchpole (46)
Lol, nah didn't speak to him.

He played at the Olympics last yr. He wouldn't qualify for the wallabies for at least 5 yrs.
Players can only change allegiances (after representing one country) if they were born in the country they want to represent or have a parent or grandparent born there. The new law doesn't allow for residency.

So Radradra would need to have been born in Australia (which he wasn't) or have a parent or grandparent born in Australia (not sure but doubt) then stand down for 3 years since he last represented Fiji.
 

Members Section

John Thornett (49)
Players can only change allegiances (after representing one country) if they were born in the country they want to represent or have a parent or grandparent born there. The new law doesn't allow for residency.

So Radradra would need to have been born in Australia (which he wasn't) or have a parent or grandparent born in Australia (not sure but doubt) then stand down for 3 years since he last represented Fiji.

Ah yes true that, lets hope he finishes his career at the Drua
 

kiap

Steve Williams (59)
Looking even more likely now:
Yep. Looks like LA added to the pyre.

Been reading about the MLR implosion for a while but somehow missed its mentions here on GAGR - with WCR normally the main man. Probably should have looked harder.

Interesting story playing out. Not only the Australian angle, but overall.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I'm not sure Drew Mitchell is backing the right horse if what he says is correct.

It shows the problem of having an owner owning two teams in the same competition but if Gilchrist used that to threaten the league in this way because of sanctions against Austin then the rest of the league are right to kick LA out of the competition this season for making that threat.
 

Members Section

John Thornett (49)
I'm not sure Drew Mitchell is backing the right horse if what he says is correct.

It shows the problem of having an owner owning two teams in the same competition but if Gilchrist used that to threaten the league in this way because of sanctions against Austin then the rest of the league are right to kick LA out of the competition this season for making that threat.

He's clearly backing his best mate who has business interests with Gilchrist. How ever he is right about something being fishy if the league wont make comment on the reason
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
I still have issues with the principal of employers colluding to limit employee wages, sorry "salary caps"

Can you imagine the uproar is say the major accounting or law firms decided to collude to to limit employee wages - but it is fine for sportsmen to be limited "for the good of the industry"
 

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
I still have issues with the principal of employers colluding to limit employee wages, sorry "salary caps"

Can you imagine the uproar is say the major accounting or law firms decided to collude to to limit employee wages - but it is fine for sportsmen to be limited "for the good of the industry"
Dreaming if you think this doesn't happen.
 

kiap

Steve Williams (59)
I wouldn't put too much stock in Drew Mitchell's twitterings.

However, this ...
if Gilchrist used that to threaten the league in this way because of sanctions against Austin then the rest of the league are right to kick LA out of the competition
... doesn't add anything either. Being kicked out the door after a "threat" to leave is the same outcome. The real threat will be if/when parties start seeking redress through the courts.

Rugby won't be the winner.

While our game here in Aus has regressed, the flush button might be getting pressed again in the US.
 

Jimmy_Crouch

Ken Catchpole (46)
It shows the problem of having an owner owning two teams in the same competition but if Gilchrist used that to threaten the league in this way because of sanctions against Austin then the rest of the league are right to kick LA out of the competition this season for making that threat.

Gilchrist was awarded the LA licence prior to jumping in and helping Austin as they were about to fold. It was approved by the other owners and the league.

Really put themselves in this position.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Gilchrist was awarded the LA licence prior to jumping in and helping Austin as they were about to fold. It was approved by the other owners and the league.

Really put themselves in this position.

Absolutely. Now they're trying to close the proverbial gate after the horse has bolted.

... doesn't add anything either. Being kicked out the door after a "threat" to leave is the same outcome. The real threat will be if/when parties start seeking redress through the courts.

They had no choice but to do this. If they'd folded in the other direction it would have been worse. It's the same outcome but at least they've put their foot down and said they won't be extorted.
 
Top