Springbok Contracts

Discussion in 'General Rugby Union' started by mdaclarke, Jan 29, 2019.

  1. mdaclarke

    mdaclarke Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Messages:
    282
    Country Flag:

    Wales

    Club or Nation:

    Wales

  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. TRF_heineken

    TRF_heineken RIP #J9

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    9,862
    Location:
    Polokwane, South Africa
    Country Flag:

    South Africa

    Club or Nation:

    South Africa

    I don't think Rassie is in any way involved in this matter. I think this is more the CEO and Financial advisors at SARU looking at alternative ways of compensation.

    It's a double-edged sword, and the issue is that no matter which way SARU is going with this, there'll be unhappiness.

    If they stick with the current contract system, they will end up losing a lot of money, and sometimes they even pay a player a yearly salary while that player is out injured and doesn't contribute at all to the Springboks, also preventing another player from getting that Springbok contract, as SARU has a limit on how many guys they can support.

    If they go for the pay-to-play system. They will only pay the players actually playing for the Springboks and who features in some shape or form in the match. Which will prevent SARU from excessively spending money.

    The question however is that there is no clear answer from SARU as to how the remuneration will work. Will the players be paid more money for playing? Will they be paid on how many minutes they play? Will they be paid if they are substitutes and only get on the pitch for the last 4 minutes?

    I personally think that the way the message got out, just caused a lot of confusion unnecessarily, and without a clear answer from SARU on the matter, there will be reluctance from the players to sign new deals.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page