Saints to be punished for allowing North to play with Wales

[Peat]

I do not believe the competition is enhanced more by one player than it is by keeping competitive integrity.

Nor do I believe it is well served by potentially reopening a debate with the RFU.

Besides, the choice is not about just him. It is a choice about suddenly abandoning part of the EPS agreement for whatever players the clubs want. They now know the price. 60k. Arguably quite cheap. It should have been a points deduction. And while that does make signing George North rather difficult, its not like we can't attract talent when we have the money, so meh whatevs.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

I do not believe the competition is enhanced more by one player than it is by keeping competitive integrity.

I suppose that's where my opinion differs. The Premiership signing players like George North, Adam Jones and Richard Hibbard improves the competition in my view. From the outside looking in, fining clubs is a petty thing to do whether it's in the rules or not. I'm sure this incident will deter some clubs from signing Welsh players (seeing as they tend to play outside test windows) which will impact on the quality of the league. This short sighted, confrontational approach doesn't do PRL any favours.

 

[Maverick1987]

I suppose that's where my opinion differs. The Premiership signing players like George North, Adam Jones and Richard Hibbard improves the competition in my view. From the outside looking in, fining clubs is a petty thing to do whether it's in the rules or not. I'm sure this incident will deter some clubs from signing Welsh players (seeing as they tend to play outside test windows) which will impact on the quality of the league. This short sighted, confrontational approach doesn't do PRL any favours.

They will have to stop playing outside the window or field a second team . 2 choices .

Would Northampton have been so keen to release him if they were playing Leicester that week or was the decision made easy for them because they were playing Worcester ?

 

[Peat]

The next EPS negotiation period comes in two years. How much money do you think the RFU will give if they're not getting the same arrangement and the previous arrangement has been flouted? The likely answer is less. That must be utmost in PRL's minds. By the way - how do you get so concerned about the damage done to the international game by PRL's actions in having this regulation, while at the same time ignoring the damage that would be done to the international game by a league tearing up an agreement with its parent union halfway through its running period?

Other things to bear in mind -

- This damages PRL's ability to negotiate an agreement with the WRU as a whole, and indeed with other unions.
- Allowing unions and players to bargain with them individually, and play clubs off against each other, will probably lead to inflated wages at English clubs
- And finally, benignly accepting cheating is rarely a good long term look for a competition

We've done without signing frontline Welsh players forever as it is and given the superior wages available in France, were never going to be getting too many of them anyway. There is no way the PRL could have done anything else and the punishment should have been a great deal heavier. As it stands, a 60k slap on the wrist might sting, but it won't prevent clubs from signing the likes of Jones and North in future.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

It is in his contract to be released. I can assure you there is no two options about it, there is a third and that is they continue to play and the WRU pick up the tab. Which from what I gather is likely to happen.

 

[Maverick1987]

It is in his contract to be released. I can assure you there is no two options about it, there is a third and that is they continue to play and the WRU pick up the tab. Which from what I gather is likely to happen.

So you think the WRU will pay the fine ?

To Northampton £60k would be near enough to paying norths wages for 3 months

 

[ratsapprentice]

By the way - how do you get so concerned about the damage done to the international game by PRL's actions in having this regulation, while at the same time ignoring the damage that would be done to the international game by a league tearing up an agreement with its parent union halfway through its running period?

The inherent problem with having independent leagues is that this is possible at all.
And is exactly the sort of thing that could happen if they garner the resources (through lucrative TV deals) to outmuscle the Union.

 

[Maverick1987]

The inherent problem with having independent leagues is that this is possible at all.
And is exactly the sort of thing that could happen if they garner the resources (through lucrative TV deals) to outmuscle the Union.

Don't you think most clubs would struggle without the money from the RFU ? For the centrally contracted players ?

 

[Peat]

Don't you think most clubs would struggle without the money from the RFU ? For the centrally contracted players ?

They would today. Hence them honouring the EPS agreement.

The day they don't honour it is probably the day they believe they have enough money to ignore the RFU and do without its payments.

 

[ratsapprentice]

We have centrally contracted players!?!?

They would today. Hence them honouring the EPS agreement.

The day they don't honour it is probably the day they believe they have enough money to ignore the RFU and do without its payments.

Precisely.

The more the game grows the bigger the fish it attracts, big fish don't like being controlled by entities like unions and can afford not to be.

 

[Rhyer]

Hahahahahahaha. The premier league is an absolute joke! Seriously?!?! The club said it was okay. It's their money and their player so they can do whatever the **** they want. Why does it matter if George North isn't available for a game? Does it mean a club gets fined 60k per game for each player that is injured because it's damaging the competition? This has to be some sort of joke. When did rugby become politics? It's just a game.

 

[Maverick1987]

Hahahahahahaha. The premier league is an absolute joke! Seriously?!?! The club said it was okay. It's their money and their player so they can do whatever the **** they want. Why does it matter if George North isn't available for a game? Does it mean a club gets fined 60k per game for each player that is injured because it's damaging the competition? This has to be some sort of joke. When did rugby become politics? It's just a game.

That's why u have lost 3 out of 4 in the Heineken cup take things seriously man

 

[racer0bv]

I agree that Saints broke the rule, but imo PRL should have fined them AND they should have removed the rule.
I think that this rule is against the spirit of the sport and it hurts PRL much more than releasing the club players for their international duty. It should be the club's choice to release the players.

 

[SuperEagle]

Am I the only one that sees this as a win for all parties? This is one of the few conflicts that has been resolved by everyone getting what they wanted.

1. George North got to represent his nation in one of the biggest matches of his career so far.

2. The PRL got paid; and at the same time sent a message saying "we are not going to turn a blind eye to this"

3. Northampton Saints are seen to "back their man" which inspires a certain degree of loyalty in one of the best players in the league

4. The WRU got to put out their strongest possible team in a big money-spinning match in which "the strongest Welsh team in a generation" would overcome their SH hoodoo and beat "the weakest Aussie team in a generation" in Cardiff. **ahem**

I actually see no losers here.

 

[smartcooky]

I actually see no losers here.

I do.

The loser is rugby. It shows that PRL are grabbing a little bit more power. A little more control over the clubs, a fraction more control over players, a tiny bit of extra influence over the unions. It might be win-win in the short term but in the long term, if it is allowed to continue, it will destroy the international game.

Right now, if I was a foreign player in the Premiership, I would be telling my player agent to tell the club that I want any clauses that limit the Club's ability to release me for ANY international match to be removed, and if they weren't willing, I would be looking for another Club when my contract is up. If I was being approached to join a club, I would make it clear to my player agent that a contract containing such a clause would not be signed.


The player's contract is with the CLUB. If the CLUB chooses to release them for ANY duty, be it playing for their country visiting the local spinal unit for a goodwill visit it is THEIR business.

For anyone who would trust PRL with the future of the international game, this should be a little glimpse into their real agenda, and anyone who still trusts them to respect the international game is living in La La land. AFAIC, PRL can fack off!

The sooner McCasherty and his arsehole mates are all lined up against the wall and shot, the better off the whole game will be.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I don't understand why people are acting like this is a new thing, and some are trying to tie it to the heineken cup situation.
This has been in place since before the 07 world cup. All of the clubs agreed to it.
Saints knew they were doing wrong, that's why they were more than happy to pay the fine: they'd been expecting to all season.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

I don't understand why people are acting like this is a new thing, and some are trying to tie it to the heineken cup situation.

Both this and the Euro Rugby row are part of PRL trying to exert more influence. The ERC/RCC issue chips away at Union control and thisdirectly involves international selection which is administered by Unions. I don't see how people don't think these two things are in some way linked.

 

[Peat]

Right now, if I was a foreign player in the Premiership, I would be telling my player agent to tell the club that I want any clauses that limit the Club's ability to release me for ANY international match to be removed, and if they weren't willing, I would be looking for another Club when my contract is up. If I was being approached to join a club, I would make it clear to my player agent that a contract containing such a clause would not be signed.

Cool story bro.

We will miss your hypothetical player and console ourselves with the great many players with credible hopes of international involvement for other countries who decide its not that big a deal. That's a lot of them over the time this has been active. There will continue to be more, starting with Richard Hibbard, who hasn't got such a clause in his contract. Your anger and indignation quite clearly do not reflect the feelings of the average professional rugby player.

The player's contract is with the CLUB. If the CLUB chooses to release them for ANY duty, be it playing for their country visiting the local spinal unit for a goodwill visit it is THEIR business.

Except it is not solely their business as they have agreed with another body to limitations on when they may release their players.

I don't see any point in arguing this. People have made up their minds that this is some grievous insult to international rugby, that PRL woke up this morning and decided "How best to **** over the international game more?" And I find that neither true nor credible, and frankly somewhat insulting. I am no great fan of PRL but I find the idea that that they be forbidden collective bargaining, or that they be condemned for enforcing their own rules, ludicrous. But, as the battlelines have been formed, I don't think I'll bother particularly. This does form part of the EPS agreement as best I understand it. They have offered other unions, including the WRU, the chance to form their own such agreement. This has been going on for six years. These are facts, I'm not sure why people aren't addressing them.

But hey. Tell you what. Lets forget all about this and just go for a big Poker night together. Big stakes. Big drinking - the first guy out pays for the booze. It'll be great. No need to bring your money, we can always collect it later. LETS DO THIS.

P.s. I have an agreement with my girlfriend that I can't pay out poker debts, I hope that's ok.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I agree with Peat.

It's a ****ty rule, and in my mind clearly demonstrates the PRL's function i.e. to promote the growth of their own product, not Rugby as a whole.
But those are their rules, and you can't expect a private enterprise to have empathy for something for which they gain naught.
Northampton will have known about this before signing North's contract, and if they didn't then it's their fault.

 

[smartcooky]

If PRL shoehorn their clubs into having clauses in their contacts that prevent the clubs from releasing their own employees (the players) as they see fit, than that smells like a "restraint of trade" to me, which would make the contracts illegal!