Kiwis adopt salary cap
2 Jun 2006
The New Zealand Rugby Union will implement a salary cap in domestic competition for the first time this season.
The union gained approval for the measure from a government business watchdog.
The cap, the limit of which has not been disclosed, will take effect immediately and will apply to the 14-team Air New Zealand Cup, involving New Zealand’s top provincial sides, which will be played from 28 July.
The Commerce Commission said the cap had been approved for an initial period of six years and would be subject to review after five. The New Zealand union will be responsible for its monitoring and enforcement.
The union argued a salary cap was needed to ensure an even spread of players to produce more competitive matches and higher television audiences for the new, fully professional competition.
The approval of the Commerce Commission was needed because a salary cap could be deemed an anticompetitive practice.
“We have maintained throughout the process that we had a convincing case for the salary cap and today’s decision confirms that the Commerce Commission agrees,” union deputy chief executive Steve Tew said.
37 Comments
2 Jun 2006, 12:09 pm
I thikn this is a brillaint idea and is something they should bring in in SA and in world foortball too.
2 Jun 2006, 12:13 pm
Yup Vin,
It is a must.
2 Jun 2006, 12:13 pm
If SA had a salary cap the players would spread out around the smaller provinces and finally we could get closer to strength versus steength in the currie cup. Cause we’re not going to get S v S any other way with the political wranglings going on.
2 Jun 2006, 12:14 pm
jis as ek cap sien lees ek ****
2 Jun 2006, 12:17 pm
Vinnie
But it will only open the door with other off-contract incentives. Free housing, paid school fees for kids, jobs for wives, etc.
2 Jun 2006, 12:17 pm
Great idea. Bound to promote competitiveness and a more equal spread of quality players!
2 Jun 2006, 12:20 pm
Hennie ‘ The tickets are cheap’ Le Roux would be frothing at the mouth – a cap is an excellent idea as players wouldn’t have a problem playing for a smaller province knowing they can only earn so much – but make the move to get a starting 15 place !
2 Jun 2006, 12:23 pm
It will Rudebud but it will mean rugby wont go the way of European football.
The top pro footballers are paid £150,000 a week.
95% of them would still play for that a year.
The same goes for rugby players – most of them would still play even if you cut their salaries.
I’m not advocating cutting them but place a cap on it before some Abromovich comes in and starts a club somewhere in the world and buys all the best players.
Its bound to happen at some point.
Also if there is a squad cap it would mean that a smaller union like border, or the Spears for that matter, could become competitive fairly quickly and it will mean that WP and the bulls wont buy every player they can get their hands on.
Agree that there will still be gifts in kind but this cannot be helped and the amount of money that can change hands here is negligible in comparison to salaries and can be policed.
2 Jun 2006, 12:29 pm
Vinnie
I hear you. Won’t have any problem with capped salaries. Will surely lead to better spread of players.
2 Jun 2006, 12:32 pm
Rudebud,
Whehter SA rugby has the organisational skills to police the “off-the-ball” payments is another story.
2 Jun 2006, 12:48 pm
yes and why don’t we sommer all vote for the SACP and find the next Stalin while we’re at it? the commies lost guys, these socialistic tendancies are not the way of the future.
2 Jun 2006, 12:50 pm
It would be great if all different leagues, had a different capping rate, i.e. Vodacom Cup, Curry Cup and Super 14 and finally springboks. It would mean that as the player progresses to the next level, he can expect to be paid better adding alot of incentive to the guys to play harder.
2 Jun 2006, 12:51 pm
Can’t see it working. The salary cap will only apply to the superstars like habana, matfield, schalk and de villiers. If you want a competitive team you need a whole team of guys that can compete. Bulls and PRovince have huge squads, buying up every second player from the urban areas that shows some potential. What would realy encourage competitiveness, is to limit the squad sizes – thereby not hogging 3 or 4 players in one position. Whether this is any more realistic than the proposed salary cap is another issue.
2 Jun 2006, 12:52 pm
It would also mean that Springboks get the bulk of their salary from SA Rugby, thereby giving SA Rugby more control over the springbok players(i.e. player management)
2 Jun 2006, 12:53 pm
Reality check
Lets say the salaray cap is NZ$2,000,000 per team.
Only half of the unions can even come up with that sort of money. So forget about salary caps for the likes of the Manawatu.
Other unions like Hawkes Bay have boasted they can match the big boys, but that is ****. Sure, direct pay may be matched, but what about hidden benefits.
I can think of several perks that couldn’t be policed.
We are not talking about Manchester United salaries here, so bending the rules to earn a few extra dollars from those unions that can afford it will be the norm.
2 Jun 2006, 13:02 pm
WHY WOULD CAPPED PLAYERS LIKE BAKKIES, MATFIELD, HABANA, DE VILLIERS, RUSSELL AND ALL THE REST SWITCH ALLEGIANCES? I DON’T SEE THE ARGUMENT AS A BAD ONE, I JUST THINK THAT THE PERCEPTION THAT THE TOP EARNERS WOULD PLAY AT THE CATS, SHARKS OR CHEETAHS IF THE WERE PAID MORE IS NONSENSE.
IT IS ARGUABLE AS TO WHETHER THERE ARE ENOUGH TOP CLASS CENTRE OR LOCK PAIRINGS TO GO AROUND OUR MAJOR UNIONS. IF YOU AGREE ON THAT, THEY WILL PRESUMABLY CHOOSE TO PLAY WHERE THEY ARE AT THE MOMENT. HABANA DID NOT LEAVE THE CATS FOR MONEY, NOR WOULD BIG JOE HAVE. THEREFORE THE OTHER FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE PLAYER’S DECISIONS ARE AT LEAST AS IMPORTANT AS SALARY.
THE CLINCHER FOR ME IS QUINTON DAVIDS JOINING THE CHEETAHS WHICH MUST BE QUITE SIMILAR TO A SMALLER VERSION OF THE BULLS. MAYBE HE WANTS TO PLAY FOR A TAM ON THE UP?
FINALLY, TWO THINGS. FIRSTLY, THE ‘FRINGE’ BENEFITS OF PLAYING AT A MAJOR UNION ARE NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DUPLICATE AT THE SMALLER PLACES AS ARE THE OTHER INTANGIBLE LIFESTYLE ISSUES. HOWEVER BORING PRETORIA MIGHT BE, IT BEATS THE HELL OUT OF PORT ELIZABETH. SECONDLY, HOWEVER DOFF THE MUPPITS THINK THE AVERAGE RUGBY PLAYER IS, THEY’D ALMOST CERTAINLY RATHER PLAY WITH THEIR EQUALS IN A WINNING TEAM RATHER THAN BE A BIG FISH IN AN UNCOMPETITIVE TEAM.
THE DRAFT IS A BETTER IDEA, BECAUSE IT LEAVES ALONE THE PROBLEM OF PICKING PLAYERS POCKETS IN THE NAME OF EQUALITY. LESSER UNIONS ARE JUST THAT, LESS ABLE TO ADMINISTER MONEY, PLAYERS, COACHING AND SO ON. NOT BECAUSE THEY NEED MONEY BUT BECAUSE THEY LACK THE VISION, PLANNING AND DRIVE TO IMPROVE. IF RASSIE MANAGED ON A BUDGET ABOUT A THIRD OF THE BULLS, THE COASTAL CLOTS CAN DO IT ONCE THEY GET THEIR ADMIN SORTED.
2 Jun 2006, 13:04 pm
sarky – lose the caps buddy
2 Jun 2006, 13:08 pm
sarky, that was the most irriatating post I have ever read. Purely because of the caps.
2 Jun 2006, 13:13 pm
Sorry IG!
Some you win Vinnie!
2 Jun 2006, 13:14 pm
Ig
CAPS for caps – too subtle? The cap story is entertaining but not one any of us would employ in our own lives.
2 Jun 2006, 13:59 pm
Does the cap match Tana’s bag?
2 Jun 2006, 14:04 pm
Sarky & Dawn,
Your talent is wasted here.
2 Jun 2006, 14:33 pm
Cane
Keep them out of bars (III) mate and it’ll all go away.
2 Jun 2006, 14:37 pm
Ref post 8.
‘and it will mean WP won’t buy every player they get their hands on’ Whoever is doing the buying work in WP is certainly **** at spotting a good player. Everyone purchased so far get to the Cape and is suddenly not that good anymore. Hasn’t help the WP/Stormers at all.
2 Jun 2006, 14:54 pm
Salary caps are kak. Won’t do anything except for people finding innovative idease to circumvent the caps, i.e. Giteau. To get strength vs strength on a draft system is the only way to go. IT WORKS. Look at US NFL system. Anyone one of at least 20 of the 32 teams can win the superbowl in any given year. And you are never sure every Sunday who will be the winner on that day.
2 Jun 2006, 15:27 pm
But will they then still be able to afford handbags?
2 Jun 2006, 15:39 pm
Okay, now lets compare two different sports, one in america which is nothing like rugby, and one in south africa.
Why dont we just compare rugby to golf?
Or polo – thats also a team sport.
How do the salaries work in hurling? Or gaelic football?
2 Jun 2006, 16:03 pm
Groovy, does this mean we won’t have to pay 300 bucks to watch a game of rugby
2 Jun 2006, 16:51 pm
post 27. some people are frustratingly dumb. the draft system allows the weaker teams to get the first pick of the top talent.
2 Jun 2006, 17:24 pm
The NFL has both a draft and a salary cap, which does equal the playing field. They also have an enforced salary increase for players on long term contracts, which ensures that teams cut players when they run out of cap space. This further increases the player turnover. Take, for example, Willie Mcginest. Top player who won 3 Superbowl rings with the patriots, but was forced to move when he topped out with the salary cap at the Pats.
A system like this will be great for our case, much as I hate admitting anything American is good. Take Bakkies, for instance. He’ll start off playing for the Bulls for 5-8 seasons, at which point the Bulls will run out of salary cap space. The Bulls can only afford x amount of money to stay in the cap, but Bakkies wants y. The Griquas have some extra dough lying around, and Bakkies heard that the Kimberley girls are easy, so he decides to move.
The net result of all this is that the Bulls don’t have to pay Bakkies as much anymore and they can invest in two cheaper, younger players (enhancing our player base), Bakkies gets easy Kimberley girls and money, and Griquas gain a wealth of experience. Good for SA rugby? Hell yeah.
And, you might ask, how would the smaller unions get that amount of cash? The American football teams are part owned by the NFL, and pay the NFL a part of their revenue. The NFL then gives an equal share of the money back to each of the teams for salary cap purposes. This means that small teams can cover their bases initially until they are good enough to attract large crowds into their stadiums.
2 Jun 2006, 17:42 pm
Salary Cap in NZ
Just another way of saying they cannot afford to pay the players anything more.
2 Jun 2006, 18:05 pm
There we go gaweth… herman knows his **** and doesnt just pipe up with “some okes are just so ******* thick”…
2 Jun 2006, 19:02 pm
Thanks Herman. That is well explained.
I just find it weird that no one in SA Rugby has yet discover a simple system like this and implemented it. Everyone on All Out Rugby and Boots and All are always critizing the structures and the feeder systems, especially Hennie Le Roux, but I am yet to hear a single constructive idea coming from him.
3 Jun 2006, 06:06 am
amerikaner, rugby union is the only major sport in Oz that doesn’t have a salary cap and league managers are flaunting the ARU to bump up their clients price.
3 Jun 2006, 06:08 am
vinnie their are no salaries in gaelic football and hurling. totally amateur
3 Jun 2006, 06:34 am
I think a salary cap will be a good idea. It seems to be working alright in rugby league in australia. Was interesting to see how league worked when they try to keep league players from going to union. They can only pay them a certain amount, then they get a 3rd party to top up the players salary, thats the only way they can compete with union in aus. The same would probably happen in SA if they get a salary cap.
3 Jun 2006, 17:40 pm
the salary cap is rorted to the tilt in rugby league but the league are exposing clubs except for the roosters who have high profile backing (politis and packers). the warriors got docked 4 competition points at the start of the season
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.