I would play hard ball and not tip in more than $200k. I think Richo needs to get Benji and bateman in a room and get them to kiss and make up, surely the guy is not completely off the rails, he was the bloody captain of the team for goodness sake, a position Benji gave him. I have had many a verbal argument with various subordinates over the years, however I have never lost anyone to the point where I had to sack them. A good man manager should be able to get this sorted. Unless bateman wants to leave and if he does he will end up taking whatever is on offer.....call their bluff Richo!
They’ve got us right where they want us 🙁
I agree with you in that it gives u no advantages over other NRL clubs. Perhaps it might if your club is successful & stable thereby giving you a better chance of using it for a veteran. But in the recent u18s Union test between the Wallabies & NZ which the Wallabies won there were 3 or 4 kids in NRL systems who look highly promising league or union players. That allowance, if not used elsewhere in your cap could prove beneficial in terms of fighting off Union & retaining those kids at your club. As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
It would be awesome if there was a genuine benefit in the cap to having your own local juniors. Roosters would block it for sure 😂
The thing is the allowance isnt used here, there, elsewhere or anywhere. Its just part of the one big pot. Its not used on "juniors". "Development" or "veteran" players, its not "used" on anyone or anything, it just makes the pot bigger.
The thing is does do, is you end up with a player like Noffa believing they should be entitled to some of the allowance.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
But surely you would have to register a contract of a veteran or development player who is entering NRL to show you’re eligible. I don’t know if you also must give their bank details for the money to be transferred but I’d think it’s a reasonable request. If it was used for Makasini in 2026 and/or 2027 I’d think that’s a fair assumption to make.I agree with you in that it gives u no advantages over other NRL clubs. Perhaps it might if your club is successful & stable thereby giving you a better chance of using it for a veteran. But in the recent u18s Union test between the Wallabies & NZ which the Wallabies won there were 3 or 4 kids in NRL systems who look highly promising league or union players. That allowance, if not used elsewhere in your cap could prove beneficial in terms of fighting off Union & retaining those kids at your club. As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
It would be awesome if there was a genuine benefit in the cap to having your own local juniors. Roosters would block it for sure 😂
The thing is the allowance isnt used here, there, elsewhere or anywhere. Its just part of the one big pot. Its not used on "juniors". "Development" or "veteran" players, its not "used" on anyone or anything, it just makes the pot bigger.
I agree with Garry that the allowance doesn’t do what its original purpose was meant for. Perhaps it should be termed an NRL Loyalty Allowance & used for veterans & in special cases such as Makasini’s.
But surely you would have to register a contract of a veteran or development player who is entering NRL to show you’re eligible. I don’t know if you also must give their bank details for the money to be transferred but I’d think it’s a reasonable request. If it was used for Makasini in 2026 and/or 2027 I’d think that’s a fair assumption to make.I agree with you in that it gives u no advantages over other NRL clubs. Perhaps it might if your club is successful & stable thereby giving you a better chance of using it for a veteran. But in the recent u18s Union test between the Wallabies & NZ which the Wallabies won there were 3 or 4 kids in NRL systems who look highly promising league or union players. That allowance, if not used elsewhere in your cap could prove beneficial in terms of fighting off Union & retaining those kids at your club. As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
It would be awesome if there was a genuine benefit in the cap to having your own local juniors. Roosters would block it for sure 😂
The thing is the allowance isnt used here, there, elsewhere or anywhere. Its just part of the one big pot. Its not used on "juniors". "Development" or "veteran" players, its not "used" on anyone or anything, it just makes the pot bigger.
It is just $300k added to our cap, makasini does not qualify for the allowance.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
I’m not biting Garry. The last word is yours.But surely you would have to register a contract of a veteran or development player who is entering NRL to show you’re eligible. I don’t know if you also must give their bank details for the money to be transferred but I’d think it’s a reasonable request. If it was used for Makasini in 2026 and/or 2027 I’d think that’s a fair assumption to make.I agree with you in that it gives u no advantages over other NRL clubs. Perhaps it might if your club is successful & stable thereby giving you a better chance of using it for a veteran. But in the recent u18s Union test between the Wallabies & NZ which the Wallabies won there were 3 or 4 kids in NRL systems who look highly promising league or union players. That allowance, if not used elsewhere in your cap could prove beneficial in terms of fighting off Union & retaining those kids at your club. As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
It would be awesome if there was a genuine benefit in the cap to having your own local juniors. Roosters would block it for sure 😂
The thing is the allowance isnt used here, there, elsewhere or anywhere. Its just part of the one big pot. Its not used on "juniors". "Development" or "veteran" players, its not "used" on anyone or anything, it just makes the pot bigger.
It is just $300k added to our cap, makasini does not qualify for the allowance.
I’m not biting Garry. The last word is yours.
I'm not trying to get you to bite, I don't think that you understand the allowance and was trying to explain it.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
Once again, and this is the final time I will state it, it allowed us to keep Makasini from going to Union and that was our biggest competition in this circumstance. I agree with you the allowance is for all clubs but how they are able to use it, or choose to use it, will differ but they all can use it. You disagree the allowance had any impact upon whether or not he signed with us or Union, I get it & I disagree.I’d argue in this circumstance it’s rewarded the Tigers in being able to keep Makasini and to allow them to plan 2027, and maybe 2026, without worrying how they are to use the allowance. They’ve used it so now they can budget for the rest of the roster a little better.As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.
If we get to 2027 and don't have any long term players that meet the criteria then we don't get the $300k, I can't imagine that happening though.
I don't think you are really understanding the point that I am making. I'm saying that the system is pointless, it does nothing to reward clubs or players for developing players or staying at a club long-term.
It doesn't allow us to spend anymore on players than any other club, every club still has the same amount as each other to spend.
A better system would be to have a sliding system that as a player spends more time at the club an increasing percentage of their salary is cap exempt.
That would allow clubs that develop their own players and players that show loyalty to be rewarded for that.
The only issue I have with the sliding system you suggest is it still favours successful clubs more than those who have a history of instability and a lack of success. Crichton & Luai would probably still be at the Panthers under that system. The Rorters would be able to spend more for good young players from other less successful clubs because they would not have to pay as much as they do now for guys like Tedesco, JWH, Radley etc. The Sharks wouldn’t be as worried about losing some of their gun players. Manly would be paying peanuts for a few of their highly paid players.
But it doesn't help us keep him. If the allowance didn't exist we would have $300k less to spend but so would all the other clubs so the situation would be exactly the same.
You don't think a development club like the Panthers should get some cap relief for the players they have brought through their system and developed?
What about Galvin, TDS and co, should we get some salary cap relief in 5-6 years because we developed them or should another club be able to come in and poach them?
no it didn’t. We already had the $300k added to the cap because of Klemmer, API, Galvin, TDS and probably 3 or 4 others I’ve missed. There wasn’t any more money or cap available for or because of Makasini
Once again, and this is the final time I will state it, it allowed us to keep Makasini from going to Union and that was our biggest competition in this circumstance. I agree with you the allowance is for all clubs but how they are able to use it, or choose to use it, will differ but they all can use it. You disagree the allowance had any impact upon whether or not he signed with us or Union, I get it & I disagree.I’d argue in this circumstance it’s rewarded the Tigers in being able to keep Makasini and to allow them to plan 2027, and maybe 2026, without worrying how they are to use the allowance. They’ve used it so now they can budget for the rest of the roster a little better.As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.
If we get to 2027 and don't have any long term players that meet the criteria then we don't get the $300k, I can't imagine that happening though.
I don't think you are really understanding the point that I am making. I'm saying that the system is pointless, it does nothing to reward clubs or players for developing players or staying at a club long-term.
It doesn't allow us to spend anymore on players than any other club, every club still has the same amount as each other to spend.
A better system would be to have a sliding system that as a player spends more time at the club an increasing percentage of their salary is cap exempt.
That would allow clubs that develop their own players and players that show loyalty to be rewarded for that.
The only issue I have with the sliding system you suggest is it still favours successful clubs more than those who have a history of instability and a lack of success. Crichton & Luai would probably still be at the Panthers under that system. The Rorters would be able to spend more for good young players from other less successful clubs because they would not have to pay as much as they do now for guys like Tedesco, JWH, Radley etc. The Sharks wouldn’t be as worried about losing some of their gun players. Manly would be paying peanuts for a few of their highly paid players.
But it doesn't help us keep him. If the allowance didn't exist we would have $300k less to spend but so would all the other clubs so the situation would be exactly the same.
You don't think a development club like the Panthers should get some cap relief for the players they have brought through their system and developed?
What about Galvin, TDS and co, should we get some salary cap relief in 5-6 years because we developed them or should another club be able to come in and poach them?
no it didn’t. We already had the $300k added to the cap because of Klemmer, API, Galvin, TDS and probably 3 or 4 others I’ve missed. There wasn’t any more money or cap available for or because of Makasini
Once again, and this is the final time I will state it, it allowed us to keep Makasini from going to Union and that was our biggest competition in this circumstance. I agree with you the allowance is for all clubs but how they are able to use it, or choose to use it, will differ but they all can use it. You disagree the allowance had any impact upon whether or not he signed with us or Union, I get it & I disagree.I’d argue in this circumstance it’s rewarded the Tigers in being able to keep Makasini and to allow them to plan 2027, and maybe 2026, without worrying how they are to use the allowance. They’ve used it so now they can budget for the rest of the roster a little better.As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.
If we get to 2027 and don't have any long term players that meet the criteria then we don't get the $300k, I can't imagine that happening though.
I don't think you are really understanding the point that I am making. I'm saying that the system is pointless, it does nothing to reward clubs or players for developing players or staying at a club long-term.
It doesn't allow us to spend anymore on players than any other club, every club still has the same amount as each other to spend.
A better system would be to have a sliding system that as a player spends more time at the club an increasing percentage of their salary is cap exempt.
That would allow clubs that develop their own players and players that show loyalty to be rewarded for that.
The only issue I have with the sliding system you suggest is it still favours successful clubs more than those who have a history of instability and a lack of success. Crichton & Luai would probably still be at the Panthers under that system. The Rorters would be able to spend more for good young players from other less successful clubs because they would not have to pay as much as they do now for guys like Tedesco, JWH, Radley etc. The Sharks wouldn’t be as worried about losing some of their gun players. Manly would be paying peanuts for a few of their highly paid players.
But it doesn't help us keep him. If the allowance didn't exist we would have $300k less to spend but so would all the other clubs so the situation would be exactly the same.
You don't think a development club like the Panthers should get some cap relief for the players they have brought through their system and developed?
What about Galvin, TDS and co, should we get some salary cap relief in 5-6 years because we developed them or should another club be able to come in and poach them?
no it didn’t. We already had the $300k added to the cap because of Klemmer, API, Galvin, TDS and probably 3 or 4 others I’ve missed. There wasn’t any more money or cap available for or because of Makasini
Galvin and TDs don't qualify for the allowance. They still have to be at the club for 8 years but their time starts from when they joined the club in junior contracts and not when they entered the NRL club.
That is my understanding anyway.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
Saints seem to have cooled on JAC. We should be getting him in to lay left wing on a 2 year deal
@tigertownsfs Disagree. JAC has done his dash at our club. Not a crocodile roll player IMO.
Saints seem to have cooled on JAC. We should be getting him in to lay left wing on a 2 year deal
First domino to fall this off season, will be interesting to see where he lands (I doubt here, my tip is Parra) and what trades that might spark.
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers!
@lorenzo spot on mate,think bateman could be a decent player for us next sea given a chance
@helmesy i,d lov JAC back with us didnt we once turned down a swap down with tommy talau and josh. crazy
