Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Jedhead, post: 3255936, member: 9518"] In reply to our DD highlighting how some clubs do nothing to develop players and therefore nothing to grow the game and simply poach the best players as they reach the stage of being ready for NRL Graham Annesley said on Monday "Some of our clubs don’t have big junior areas, for example, so they have to rely on [U]buying[/U] players" . This is so disingenuous and you really have to wonder why not one single journo has taken him to task for such a myopic statement. By using the term 'buying' he is suggesting some clubs are not able to invest money in juniors as they are in areas that do not have young families. Instead these clubs 'buy' their players and are therefore (according to Annesley's logic) somehow putting money back into development. That is, by suggesting these clubs 'buy' a player it's as if they invest a lump sum at the end of the process when they 'buy' the ready made product. I have to ask, as I often wonder - who do clubs like the Storm and Roosters 'buy' their players from? Who do they pay the lump sum to when they 'buy' the player they are after? The answer is no one. They simply don't 'buy' anyone at all. They pay no purchase fee to anyone. All they do is wait until the player they want is ready for NRL and they then come in and offer them a salary. No money or compensation is given to the club who spent years and real cash developing the player. So when Annesley, or anyone else uses the term 'buying' it's a smokescreen for [B]poaching[/B]. There is absolutely no buying actually happening when they sign these players up. To be clear, the system developing these players are not compensated a single cent when teams like the Storm, and Roosters pinch a player who has been developed by another club for years. Now how do you think the money saved by these clubs who do not invest in our game is otherwise used then? Well these clubs do [I]buy[/I] something, and Billy Slater should have remembered this when he had a sly dig at the Broncos yesterday. These clubs secretly 'buy' the players they want to keep a new boat, or in some cases it might be real estate, like a boat shed because these clubs have no culture and have to resort to 'buying' loyalty. We all know about the dodgy games of golf where the club 'buys' a player's continued services by ensuring their real take home pay is well over the market asking price except a huge chunk of it is payed via a dodgy brown paper bag system. Their managers are also looked after by these clubs to ensure their players are never involved in a public auction as this would expose their hypocritical rorting of the salary cap. No, instead when one of their players come up for contract renewal it mysteriously goes deadly silent and no club makes a single offer. What is happening here is the player and manager have already been 'paid' their asking price albeit a good portion of that will never be declared and so the manager has no need to spruik his client to other clubs. Unless the development system is recognised and clubs are rewarded for their investments there is a danger of every club copying the Storm and Rooster's model in a race to the bottom. The end result will be fewer players of NRL standard meaning the spectacle and excitement will drop. Eventually the product will suffer and the fans will walk away. The game is already hemorrhaging badly because of Vlandy ball and the percieved Sydney-centric unfair advantages some clubs are given. Once a club begins to lose their juniors en masse with no compensation the very fabric of the game is destroyed. If these development areas are shut down, clubs like the Storm and Roosters will overnight lose their 'recruitment area' as without being able to cherry pick from these areas they will cease to exist as a force. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 219 (members: 0, guests: 219)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now