rugbyunion
Latest News:

The COML Message Board

The place for discussion, debate and nonsense about Bath Rugby.

Join our new Facebook Group today!

New visitors please read the house rules before posting

Test your prognostications at our Prediction League


Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
27 December, 2017 20:28
We'll, if you (as in anyone, not you specifically) want the WRU to pay, you'll have to find a contract that they've signed with PRL or BathRugby, otherwise, go whistle



A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=608
RAEBURN SHIELD




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 27/12/2017 20:29 by Which Tyler.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
27 December, 2017 20:47
Wot WT says.

 
BathMatt53
BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
27 December, 2017 21:29
Quote:
Which Tyler
We'll, if you (as in anyone, not you specifically) want the WRU to pay, you'll have to find a contract that they've signed with PRL or BathRugby, otherwise, go whistle

This.

My understanding is the world rugby have set Ďwindowsí. Prem rugby then said to the nations, fine you can have players for those windows but thatís your lot. They then said to the clubs, you need to toe our line. Bath either didnít care or didnít know or thought that it was about to change and, knowing that Wales are going outside the window signed TF on the basis that he could play for Wales whenever selected.

So, Wales arenít beholding to prem rugby and Bath would be in trouble TF if they didnít let him go. The only contract broken is Bath with the Prem. So itís Bath in the wrong and they pay the fine. I donít see how anyone else would be liable in any way.

(IMO)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 27/12/2017 21:45 by BathMatt53.

 
MESSAGES->author
joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
27 December, 2017 21:35
If its only going to be 60k per contract (and that seems to be the principle that's been established) then it's really no deterrant at all. However, this will presumably become less and less of an issue as the new Judy's Law comes into effect. If the WRU stick to it. If.



... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

 
MESSAGES->author
shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
27 December, 2017 22:17
The point I'm trying to make is the reaction to the Bath/Faletau fine is a symptom.

Everything that BM53 and WT are posting is correct, we are liable, it's a function of WR windows etc etc.

However, the amount of Rugby Union our players are asked to play together with the physical intensity and perhaps even the constantly changing Laws are just physically degrading our players. Add in the concussion aspect that threatens careers before they even begin. It's too much.

I don't think it's a real suggestion that they, (WRU) should actually make a payment more a feeling that contracts, premiership or club, shouldn't deny a player from playing for their country, or perhaps the converse that contracts should have to be in place to enable players to get international caps.
It just feels unjust, when age, fitness, injuries and form all have to be in place to win one in the first place!

The fine is what it is, but will it be in the AP contract in the future? Will the windows stay the same?


I would also like to point out that I personal decline the option to pay fine thanks WT!

 
sid the seagull
sid the seagull (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
28 December, 2017 01:30
We have TF heís our world class player we put up (pay) for it.
Itís not very complicated.

FLAP

 
bg
bg (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
28 December, 2017 02:40
Wasp supporter comes in peace

Why did Bath release him knowing that they would get a fine? In doing so, they also gave the upperhand to Exeter for the game he missed. Bath via Bruce have lots of money but even so.. that's quite an indulgence

 
BathMatt53
BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
28 December, 2017 08:04
Quote:
bg
Wasp supporter comes in peace
Why did Bath release him knowing that they would get a fine? In doing so, they also gave the upperhand to Exeter for the game he missed. Bath via Bruce have lots of money but even so.. that's quite an indulgence

Itís in TFs contract BG, Bath have no choice. Apparently they had thought when they signed him that the rules were going to be changed at some point. (Same situation as George North at Saints.)

 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
28 December, 2017 13:13
Quote:
bg
Wasp supporter comes in peace
Why did Bath release him knowing that they would get a fine? In doing so, they also gave the upperhand to Exeter for the game he missed. Bath via Bruce have lots of money but even so.. that's quite an indulgence
For the same reason Saints released North - contractual obligation.
Basically, both of those players took a pay-cut in order to have it written into their contract that they could attend any matches played by Wales (possibly for training and 6N fallow weekend release as well - but if they aren't playing, then there's considered to be no smoke and no fire).

What that pay cut might be is anyone's guess; it might be that without that clause they geniunely wouldn't have signed any contract; or it may be that had the contract given them an extra £60k over 3 years that would have been enough; or it might be that their price for the contract would have been an extra million over 3 years (rather unlikely, but more so than suggesting that there's no price).
The simple maths is that Saints were fined £60k for each contract GNorth signed with them with that release clause (I think it was 2 contracts; but could very well be wrong on that). Bath signed Faletau knowing the precedent that had been set; and that the precedent came with no warning attatched for future breaches by other clubs or for other players.
Essentially, the cost of Faletau's signature was his wage +£20k for 3 years. If it would have cost us more than £60k to get that clause removed then it wouldn't be (finacially) worth it; even at £60k, that's £60k we can spend on an academy graduate instead as the fine is counted outside of the cap - which is my biggest problem with it.

Basically, PRL have it written in their contract with the clubs that no player release outside of IRB9 is allowed; but have set the punishment so low as to be no deterrant at all. Bath and Quins then signed contracts with Faletau and Roberts knowing what would happen; PRL talked tough in the press, and Quins backed down (and I suspect it cost them more than £60k to get Roberts to back down) Bath called their bluff. PRL went with the precedent they'd already set.



A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=608
RAEBURN SHIELD

 
Mike the Taxi
Mike the Taxi (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
20 March, 2018 16:42
[www.bbc.co.uk] North 'Disciplined'Again

 
MESSAGES->author
shendy (IP Logged)

Re: Fine or worse?
20 March, 2018 19:31
Again?

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?