A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:08 pm  

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -u04i.html To me this seems a very well thought out idea, and its principle is something i have been in favour of for a long time, that is look at the squad make up, rather than pure monetary value to even the league and keep our best players

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -u04i.html To me this seems a very well thought out idea, and its principle is something i have been in favour of for a long time, that is look at the squad make up, rather than pure monetary value to even the league and keep our best players

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:11 pm  

Who dishes out the points for the ratings?

Edit: Just read the whole article and answered my own question.

Carry on

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:16 pm  

littlerich wrote:

Edit: Just read the whole article and answered my own question.

Normally helps

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:21 pm  

littlerich wrote:

Who dishes out the points for the ratings?

Edit: Just read the whole article and answered my own question.

Carry on

I would add though, the points values would need to be set at the start of the season and last for the whole of that season

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:29 pm  

Fledgling clubs would struggle wouldn't they? New clubs with fresh licenses would have no option but to sign players from other clubs. They'd rack up 100 points pretty quickly.

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:35 pm  

I thought it was a rational well thought out idea, that alone makes it a non starter in the UK. But seriously for the NRL it would work. There was another article in the same paper from Phil Gould stating that the salary cap as initialy mooted was to keep clubs solvent not even out the competition. We in the UK must decide do we want hold back clubs who can spend above the amounts of the cap? .My opinion at the moment likes the points idea as it would allow the better off clubs to attract & keep class players while letting smaller clubs like mine keep its home produced lads (if we manage to do it) the only cap needed is to ensure clubs cannot spend over their income or borrow money they cannot pay back. As with all new ideas I may well have got it wrong & there may be glaring problems but its worth considering.

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:40 pm  

littlerich wrote:

Fledgling clubs would struggle wouldn't they? New clubs with fresh licenses would have no option but to sign players from other clubs. They'd rack up 100 points pretty quickly.

yeah, i suppose we would look at dispensations for them, for instance giving them 130 points, reduced by 5 per year so that in 2 franchise periods they are level.

Also i would like to see it linked in with the quota, so that while a rep player would cost 6 points, a player from the NRL would cost 8 points, and a player from the NRL who didnt play in 60% of their teams games the previous year would cost 10 points

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:43 pm  

The points system could still be abused.

Lets say that the England coach had strong alegiances to a particular club, and if a player earns an international call up he gets a higher points rating.

We might then see, some players promoted early to disadvantage a rival club, or alternatively other players held back from international competition to help the favoured club.

The cap is needed for two reasons too encourage competition and to stop and salry race to bankrupty.

Footballs premiership is a fine example of the free market in operation. Portsmouth and Hull are as good as financially ruined. Meanwhile the premiership is bland competition where the winners are known before the season started. It has become a sport were the cheque bookrules, rather than good coaching and player development.

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:50 pm  

The Chair Maker wrote:

The points system could still be abused.

Lets say that the England coach had strong alegiances to a particular club, and if a player earns an international call up he gets a higher points rating.

We might then see, some players promoted early to disadvantage a rival club, or alternatively other players held back from international competition to help the favoured club.

The cap is needed for two reasons too encourage competition and to stop and salry race to bankrupty.

Footballs premiership is a fine example of the free market in operation. Portsmouth and Hull are as good as financially ruined. Meanwhile the premiership is bland competition where the winners are known before the season started. It has become a sport were the cheque bookrules, rather than good coaching and player development.

i think thats a fairly paranoid assumption.

And one that can also be abused under this system, most players have international recognition bonus' written into their contract, we dont see the same happening with SC now.

Also if you really were that scared about it put a cap on the amount of points a club can accumulate through England/GB recognition. If a club brought through 10 players of GB quality i would be happy to see them rewarded for doing so

Re: A better way? : Sat May 01, 2010 10:54 pm  

At first glance it seems reasonable but might it lead to a situation where players offered a representative position are "bribed" by their clubs not to take it? It could be damaging to the international game, maybe?