Kill Bill - Williams a wanted man in every sense

Sonny Bill Williams - three words that are dirt in Australia right now. A SBW-less Canterbury Bulldogs were whipped 30-0 by St George-Illawarra Dragons in the NRL Monday night, while Williams was holed up in London en route to Toulon in France - his rugby union destination as a centre, by all accounts. Forty eight hours before, Bulldogs boss Todd Greenberg had waved to the New Zealand forward as their cars passed in Sydney. Greenberg had assumed Williams was on his way to training. He was actually on his way to the airport, without even an au revoir. Hell, fire and damnation having been reigning on his head ever since. Williams wants to be an All Black, but in Australia he has been blackballed after walking out on his Bulldogs contract.

However, instead of threatening players, maybe the NRL should be looking to better protect and look after their assets, because there's little doubt now that cashed-up French rugby union clubs are targeting big name NRL players after the recent announcement of Australia centre Mark Gasnier's move to Stade Francais. According to player manager Steve Gillis, he received half a dozen calls from players interested in overseas opportunities in the wake of Williams's extraordinary departure. "It's going to be a big problem," Gillis said. "They're looking for our very best players. They'll knock them off one by one. I think you'll find if there's four or five this year, there'll be 10 next year, probably 20 or 30 the next year.

"I've had some talks with them (French clubs), but it's not just France ... there's Ireland, England and  Italy. We're a tiny speck on the world stage. We play in Sydney and Queensland and we've got a team in Melbourne - there are 28 clubs in the world that you can make money playing league at. In union there are hundreds."

* See here for Anne Barrowclough's report from Sydney on the most hated man in Australia, and see here for Christopher Irvine's report on the Williams saga in Tuesday's Times.

Comments

[Steffy]

"RU is a team sport whose fabric is interwoven with an ingrained respect for self, team, supporter and community"

Union showed none of those qualities for 100 years while it went out of its way to shun and ostracise union players who signed for rugby clubs and did everything in its power to destroy rugby (including some very underhand methods which have been detailed elsewhere)

As for Sonny Bill his contract with the Bulldogs rugby club disallows him from playing any other code of football or for any other club without the permission of Canterbury Bulldogs. He signed that contract which shows his signature is worth nothing and the Toulon union club boss and his parasitic little team of expats and contract breakers sum up the values present in french union. Sonny Bill and that bunch of nomarks deserve each other. May they both fail in everything they attempt.

[Paul]

SBW's defection to French RU is nothing short of disgraceful. His mercenary actions are a sad indictment of the current money-grabbing mentality that has become all too pervasive in professional sport - particulalry Australian RL. Such lack of moral fibre, individualism and consideration for a club and sport that have nurtured SBW since his mid-teens is a poor reflection of an attitude that has become endemic in RL.

RU is a team sport whose fabric is interwoven with an ingrained respect for self, team, supporter and community. Are mercenaries such as SBW, Gasnier etc., the type that are needed or wanted in RU? I think not.

In order to remain a viable and vibrant sport RL must remain within its traditional geographic boundaries (i.e. two counties in NE and two states in Aus). Attempting to constantly expand the game has resulted in RL spreading its resources too thinly to the ultimate detriment of the game.Make no mistake about it, RL must focus on its traditional heartlands or else its players will continue to treat it with a lack of respect such as that shown by SBW.

[Glen Hudson]

Many of the people commenting on here CLEARLY do not know the circumstances or issues. Quite simply, the major issue is not about a player trying to earn more money elsewhere (a number of other Australian RL internationals have moved to French Rugby in the last 12 months), but it is the fact he walked out on a legal contract he recently signed and without telling anyone. The club wanted to sign him for 3 years but HE insisted it be 5 years. He did not have the guts to tell anyone at his club, including any of his team mates, fans or sponsors who have helped him & looked after him since he was 16 y.o.
As some have pointed out, does this now mean that Ronaldo can simply walk out on his contract at Manchester Utd at any time for Real Madrid without any legal ramifications? Contract law is no longer valid?
Incidentally, the reported money he went for has now been revealed as less than half the original reports, so much for the massive riches.
He has also been incredibly injury prone over the last 5 years, playing - on average - less than 50% of his games in that period.
The guy has a long list of major alcohol & police related problems including getting caught having sex in a toilet with another woman - cheating on his girlfriend. A self confessed serious alcohol problem.
Is fleeing to France going to make life better? Maybe getting some help & taking responsibility for ones own actions instead of bleating about everyone persecuting him & 'living in a goldfish bowl existence'. Running away from your self caused problems is NOT the answer. He still has to live with himself & his personal problems.
To all the other guys from the NRL that have signed with French Rugby Clubs - good luck for your respective futures, we all enjoyed your skills, dedication & professionalism whilst you were here.
To Sonny Bill Williams, well, the way you have treated your team mates, friends & girlfriend, fans who adored you, sponsors who looked after you, your club etc etc, we're probably all better off without you. Your hypocrisy when bleating about Willie Mason's act of treachery & lack of loyalty when (legally) leaving the club recently, is just mind boggling.

[ken]

Wisenoble is quite right to say both codes are different; similar yet different. Different enough to have their own nuances yet clearly similar enough to have a large number of transferable skill sets. Most people who can play one, at amateur level, can play the other, though they will have their own preferences, proficiencies and suitablities. Of course a transition at professional level, where differences in performances are judged in finer detail, are more difficult.

However, I don't think it is a basic problem that RL folk don't appreciate the difference in global spread, simply because RL people very much DO appreciate this difference and the resultant opportunities that this brings to players. Also, the historical restrictions are not the only reason, but it's a major reason (I would say the main reason) for the games failure to spread as far as RU. Please bear in mind the game was BANNED in the Defence Forces until only circa 10 years. It was BANNED in some schools until a similarly recent time (even now, some forbid their students to play it) and Universities fare slightly better. Of course we have the RFU and all its global affiliated bodies who were banning players who'd played RL too.The main reason for the global spread of RU, and Cricket for that matter, was these three vehicles - armed forces, universities (ex-pats relocation to within the commonwealth and foreign students learning the games here before returning home) and schools; all providing a sporting grounding for the future soldiers/civil servants/administrators of the then empire. Simply, they took their sports with them. Its no coincidence that the prime global drivers have historically been, in Cricket and RU, ex-Commonwealth countries. This was an avenue deprived to RL and for what reason? Class prejudice under the pretext of shunning professionalism (at a time when tennis and cricket professionals were welcomed with open arms, let alone cycling and wrestling professionals). I'm afraid the rejections and divisions of 1895 ran deep within the establishment and it reflects poorly on those who have ever since defended its stance. As an aside, could RU (or cricket for that matter) be anywhere near as widespread globally if it had been thus restricted for 100 years? Not on your nelly! Nor could it have hoped to grow to its current position within 10 or 15 years if it had, so nor should RL be expected to do so. So to say the game of RL has had its chance to grow since RU went 'open' is a flawed statement.

So, no, its not a weak argument but a very valid and accurate historical point. It's a recent one as well - the fact that RU has gone 'open' only 12 years or so ago (a joke as we all know RU players have been getting paid long before RL was even on the scene) does not then mean that RL is now on an even footing and should be able to, virtually overnight, emulate RU's spread in a financial or geographical sense. People are more difficult to expose to new sports nowadays - we live in a world with so much more leisure/recreation choice and just because RU has gone professional does not automatically allow RL to tap into these people.

No, the historical restrictions are very much still alive now, at the very least in the form of legacy. The game was painted into very tight geographical areas and these will prove difficult to get out of. That's not to say it won't. In fact it is, albeit slowly. I believe RL is the fastest growing participation sport at a junior level in London, for example, and we have a small number of clubs springing up in Hertfordshire, near where I live. This wasn't possible previously as the oxygen of 'Old Boys networks' were deprived it in areas like this, not to mention the life-line of local players who were disgracefuly threatened with a life time ban for those who attempted the game just once, even as an amateur.

The support which enables a code or club to organically grow often takes generations to take root. Look at the 50, 60, 70+ year olds involved as sponsors, administrators, committee members or general allicadoes/spectators - not to mention the even more important roles of nurturing parents/grand-parents, thus providing future exposure to the game. These are the lifeblood of the clubs who form the bedrock of all the other sports who weren't restricted as RL was, and I think it's reasonable to assume that if/when the game could draw on the same network, then it will flourish even further. It is happening now and if the schoolchildren now being introduced to the game in London, for example, have the opportunity to particpate in the sport all the way through to their later adult years then I believe we will indeed see the game spread globally and financially.

Just because people attack the sport that you support for quiet legitimate, historical reasons does not mean that it is an attack on current RU supporters for whom no blame can be apportioned. People can love their chosen sport of RU whilst still acknowedging that the previous treatment of RL by those in positions of authority in RU was unjustified and unreasonable, and that yes, it has unfairly restricted RL growth as a result. If a patriot can love their country but condemn its foreign policy, for example, and its impact on others further afield (or indeed closer to home) then why can't RU supporters ackowledge their games' authorites have a case to answer for their disgraceful previous behaviour? It doesn't mean they can't love their sport any less, not does it reflect on the current players/supporters - why should it? Similarly, German people today recognise their countries damning involvement in Fascism and the blight it brought to the world as a result - but that doesn't mean the current generation should be blamed for it nor that they shouldn't be patriots or love their country, does it?

At least recognise the wrongs of the past or else we will be destined to relive them continuously because take it from me, RL folk will not forget them.

[oikee]

I love this, everyone attacks rugby league was one comment i loved, its true !!! We have soccer over here saying its better than league, we have aussie rules trying to own the country, and then theres union, who after so long trying to compete are now trying to change the games rules to make it faster like league. Nobody is begruding sonny from going to union, good for him, we let players go all the time, Gasnier, one of the greatest names in rugby league is headed to union, we let him go, nobody has stoped him, rugby league helps so many young kids become stars and get good money, we dont begrudge them that, we incourage it, and just to show you it can go either way, we now have a guy called Campese playing league. He is the next super star for league, who knows, he might end up playing union one day. Hahaha. Just for the money, show me the money, hhahahaha

[wisenoble]

Comparing Union and League is like comparing chalk and cheese, whilst they are rugby the codes have their own nuances, strength and weaknesses and thank god they are different. There are many , such as me, who enjoy watching both codes and enjoy the nuances in both codes.

However, the basic problem that League should appreciate that in a worldwide context it can not come close to competing with Union. To continually claim that the reason for it's lack of popularity is the historical restrictions on the game is a weak argument. The code particularly over the last 15/20 years has had more than ample opportunity to grow. Over the same period Union, particularly since the dawn of professionalism in 1995, through better marketing has grown enormously and is now played in 115 countries. The greatest concern for League looking forward is the fear that it can not compete as the Union game becomes more popular, so more high profile players will move to Union because not only financially is it stronger, but it is better supported and offers the player a greater international exposure.

SBW has said he would like to play for the AB's, is that realistic as a Samoan? He has said he has lost interest in League, perhaps because the team is played for, was poorly coached and near the bottom of the NRL and as a "superstar" he was probably frustrated being in a team whose performances have been so poor.

As for contracts there have been instances where player/club contracts have been very heavily weighed in the club's favour and have been proven to be against basic human rights. In fact as Sepp Blatter stated some players are slaves to their contract. I don't know the terms of SBW's contract and whether he was properly advised at the time he signed. The NRL are obviously committed to enforcing the contract and I suspect the case may become a "cause celebre" with an unhappy pleyer having realised that outside the confines of Oz there are greater opportunities, wants out of contract that might be proven to be detrimental to his basic human rights.

[andrew]

Yawnion, boring to watch and boring to play

[ken]

And choosing to pick on a purely opinion based and subjective closing comment whilst ignoring the rest of the posting which, it must be said, is largely accurate and more importantly, to the point of the article, isn't equally pathetic and arrogant?

Have you stopped to think why some RL people have the opinions that they do of RU? When people are defending the deliberate breaching of a legal document, they are defending the indefensible purely because of petty dislikes and bias - there is no other reason than it gives an opportunity to criticise RL. Frankly that is pathetic and arrogant.

RL people are right to criticise the defence of SBW and the attendant attacks on RL, which pass as defence of SBW's illegal act - they possibly view those who defend him and attack RL at the same time in the same light as those who have attacked RL in the past, for no reason other than class prejudice, vitriol, petty jealousy and the like.

There can be no other reason for the dislike of the game shown by some quarters - if it purely is a preference for one sport over another, we wouldn't see the level of comment such as we have seen directed at RL.

By all means prefer another sport over RL. Dislike the sport of RL even. That is now your choice (a choice you were historically not trusted to make for yourself incidentally). But I would like to know what supports the vitriol shown by some here towards the game; I suspect it can't be supported at all. For those who question the defensiveness of RL supporters per se, may I respectfully suggest they conduct a little research into the history of the game, ask questions and be prepared to listen to the answers - they may well be surprised about what they learn. Equally, that may not influence them, but at least they will be informed....a basic principle of The Times, dare I say it.

There are plenty in RL who will mouth cliches and anecdote but there are lots, including myself who can give you historical evidence which shows the persecution of the game from other quarters. It's this experience and through this prism through which RL suporters view attacks on the game (note; when I say 'attacks' I'm not talking about the free movement of SBW from RL to French RU as an attack - I'm yet to read a RL suporter who is concerned by that - but the attacks aimed at those who are criticising his move.)

I can understand an AFL or Soccer or RU suporter preferring their game over RL, indeed I prefer my chosen game over theirs. But the the level of unwarranted, unearned and unjustified antagonism reserved for those towards RL is, I believe, unique. Unfortunately for them, I believe it says more about them as people than it does about our respective sports.

Incidentally I have played both RU and RL for most of my adult life, and Aussie Rules for all of my school days, though am now retired as a player. I like to think it gives me a fairly balanced and sensibe viewpoint of things. I wonder if others can say the same?

[Steffy]

"We chose RL because it is a superior game, both morally and physically."

Well said

[Steffy]

"We chose RL because it is a superior game, both morally and physically."

Well said

[Mykingdom]

"We chose RL because it is a superior game, both morally and physically."

Rugby League does itself no justice when it spouts this level of arrogance. Absolute rubbish, and frankly pathetic.

[Robbo]

What abot some of the imbeciles on here who actually think SBW is Australian. Ignorance is alive and well in England (and South Africa too it seems, who'da thunk it). And then there's the trolls who reckon RL players aren't up to union. Please. The wannabes side is full of Rl reserve graders who couldn't cut it in the NRL like Wycliff Palu and Rocky Elsom. Lote Tuqiri, Wendell Sailor and Timana Tahu alked into the Wannabes side havinh never even played the game. Then we have those who seem to think RL "poaching" of players (ie they offered to pay "amateur" players legitimately) was a terrible thing yet coercing a player to break his legal contract is only fair because he's being paid heaps more. It's comments like these that make you realise why you hate yawnyawn and all the tossers who support it. Luckily here in Australia RL got a fair go 100 years ago and people were able to make a free choice. We chose RL because it is a superior game, both morally and physically.

[martin ryan]

what most people are missimg is the fact that he is trying to break his contract. well hard luck son you signed knowbody else.

[Crusher Cleal]

Special talent?
Vastly inflated ego?
Believes they're worth far more money?

It's time Toulon gave Carol Vorderman a call.

[adrian]

To Lee - come on then who have you played for at League and Union.....

I've played both - represented England Uni's & played for Hemel Stags in the BARLA Premiership (which is still some way from top flight league!) I can assure you League is vastly superior at the shared skills...passing, attacking lines...tackling BUT Union has a wider set of skills (lineouts, scrummaging etc.

Hence SBW i actually think will not be a great success at Union because he can pass etc but where does he play....not in the forwards cos he isn't skilled in rucking mauling etc & not in the centres ebecasue he won't be quick enough.....

Also to the clown who talks about Union players being such a success re Quinnell, Scott Gibbs et al - actually these guys never made it to the GB team and at best were on the bench (Connolly & newlove were first choice centre for example)- if you actually use your benchmark for looking at League to Union then pretty much all have been successful since they played at International level.....also there have been quite a few League players converted to Union that are not that well known.....Mils Mulaina, Tana Umaga....Jerry Collins....

Go and be a muppet elsewhere

[Ken]

Karl Lincoln is just plain wrong when he comments about sour grapes;

The NRL wasnt even in existence in the 80's, nor for much of the 90's. There hasn't acutally been a lot of poaching of Union players either as he suggests. There were few of suitable talent in Australia to make the step - you may have to look at Ray Price, Michael O'Connor et al back in the late 70's, early 80's. Not many by any stretch and there were none at all in the years before RU went 'open'. This is nothing to do with needing to harden up or to act like pros or sulking as he suggests; in fact they are suing him - and were doing so before Karls suggestion.

The NRL will continue to churn out quality players and I suspect this episode will focus the authorities attention on their Salary Cap; it appears to be acting as an anchor on growth and stability now rather than the moderating influence it was designed for, and for which it undoubtedly has been. I think it needs a little tweak rather than abandonment.

Incidentally Wisenoble is possiby unaware that a NRL club tends not to 'sell' a player, as they do in soccer so his belief that this would work the other way around is misfounded. The fact is; a 5 year contract is a legally binding document, it was 5 years at HIS behest and he willing signed it. He is obliged to honour it or buy himself out of it.

He is also right about the number of players who've switched from RU to RL, but thats only looking at it from a UK perspective. There have been other RL converts other than Robinson with a reasonable success rate but he fails to realise that there have been over a 100 years of RU converts, and only 10 or so of RL. Frankly, there are much less RL players to convert so the numbers are not surprising. Not to mention that for every successful convert over the last 100 years or so, there have been a much larger number of failures. This is of course true of both codes, in both directions and in both hemispheres. It's the main reason why cross code movements, in my opinion, will continue (as well they should, at long last!) but not at a particularly fast rate.

By the way, the overwhelming majority of successful RU converts to RL in the UK were Welsh, perhaps it is they who are more readily suited to the faster paced and higher skilled game with the greater collisions, not the fact they played RU? RL certainly gave them the greater platform to demonstrate their newly acquired skill sets, even though in ALL of the cases you mentioned, they required a year or two to increase thier fitness levels and skill standards - none of them were overnight successes and needed time to acquire the means through which they could demonstrate their innate ability.

In closing I would just say that the only support of SBW in this saga, that I have seen, has come from those who have chosen to use it have a swipe at RL, or Australia(ns), or Sydney, or the Bulldogs which is incredibly childish and fatuous. Given the viewpoints of some of the people who are making these points, its not surprising, but I still find it disappointing in this day and age.
Can anyone really suggest that it is ok to break a legally binding contract in this manner? What if it were another player or from another sport? I'm sure their tune would change if it were to involve a player/club/sport which they had an interest in. SBW should be taken to the cleaners and I suspect most of the money he thinks he is now making by going to France will now find its way into the pockets of the Bulldogs and, unfortunately, lawyers. A hard lesson to learn, it's a pity he needed to learn it at all. If his agent is found to have colluded in having his contract broken he should also be de-registered and have action taken against him.

Or, are contracts now a thing of the past?

[Steffy]

"Over the years with the exception of Jason Robinson I am struggling to see who has made a real impact on the union stage. Perhaps the need to grasp a multidimensional game is difficult and beyond their capabilities."

Many rugby players have stepped down to union and had an impact on the union stage. The last 2 trys scored in a union world cup final were by ex rugby players.

Unions issue is that, for some unexplained reason, the ex rugby players are thrown in at the deep end immediately and often get international call ups in their first season in the obfuscated code.

The union players who stepped up to rugby were, in most cases, allowed to learn the game before playing for their club first team. Also bare in mind that the ex union players who stepped up to rugby were often full time professionals whereas their team mates and the teams they were playing against were semi professional with full time jobs outside rugby. Those ex union players could devote a lot of time to building the fitness required to play rugby and adapting to the much more demanding code where emergent thinking, lightning fast reflexes and individual/team decision making decides the outcome of a game rather the whim of a ref as is the case in union.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

I haven't got a problem in principle with SBW leaving League for Union - which of course is quite the opposite of the RFU/IRB's 100 year official policy of ostracising players who changed codes. However, I do have a problem with players walking out on 5 year contracts they signed willingly, let alone doing it in such a snide, cowardly way. If the boot was on the other foot and the Bulldogs had decided they no longer wanted SBW anymore, say if he was injured, would he think it reasonable for them to renege on a 5 year contract? Fixed term contract deals in sport are a two-way deal, and it is not in players (all sports players) general interest for them to have no real meaning.

However, on the flip side there are issues for the game to consider in this. There is no question that the detail of the NRL salary cap is behind this. Far be it an issue of highlighting the relative poverty of League, in fact the income of the NRL clubs from TV deals and attendances far and away surpasses that of the French league. But the NRL wage cap is clearly too low - eg many clubs can spend nowhere near 50% of their income on players. A cap is useful to stop clubs bankrupting themselves, but linking it to income does that better than an artificially flat amount. Evening-out the overall competition (the reason for a flat cap) is a laudable aim, but does ignore the market forces argument that you should incentivise clubs to grow their income in order to enable them to improve their squad. Clubs growing their income (through bigger market penetration) is also in the wider interests of the sport. Certainly having a flat cap at such a low level means it almost becomes an effective wage restraint as per the old maximum wage in football in the UK. The fact that the UK Super League clubs (with far lower revenues, and public profile) than Australia can afford to poach NRL players with better offers, even within their own salary cap, should make it blindingly obvious that the NRL cap is way out of skew with the value of the competition.

The sooner Gallop et al focus on this, and less on shouting and screaming, the faster the sport can move forwards. Linked to this whole topic too is the fact that the NRL TV deal is in itself artificially cheap (even though better than the French RU one) vs its comparators, for example Aussie Rules. I'm sure this is in no way related to the fact that News International owns both the pay-TV company and 50% of the NRL. Again, News Ltd not paying real market rates for the game will become a long-term false economy if it depresses the sport's (and hence their core TV product's) strategic positioning and thus future value.

So, in summary, there are lots of things to learn from this. But SBW is still irresponsible and unprofessional.

[CumberlandsAshes]

"Why is there also such a problem between league, AFL and union?" asks Sean. Aside from all the history between them... Australia is peculiar in that we have four professional football codes (Soccer as well) all vying for the public's dollar... this has caused inevitable conflict between the codes as all are competing for the fastest-growing and largest areas of Australia. The largest and fastest-growing areas (which are Sydney and S.E. Queensland) are Rugby league heartlands. As a result the other codes inevitably come into conflict with, and "attack" Rugby league in their attempts to gain footholds in these areas. The AFL has been particularly vigurous in its "war on league" so is reserved for the most ire of RL fans (and also because it's just a ridiculous excuse for a sport).

[wire]

Lee - who did you play League for at a decent level? Just out of interest, y'know...

[wisenoble]

I don't understand why union clubs should consider converts from RL. Over the years with the exception of Jason Robinson I am struggling to see who has made a real impact on the union stage. Perhaps the need to grasp a multidimensional game is difficult and beyond their capabilities. Cast your mind back to the Bevan, Quinnell, Risman,Davies, Gibbs, Offiah, Watkins, Billy Griffiths et al who were attracted by the silver shilling and made a real impact on the RL stage following their switch from union. Their skills on the multidimensional stage were easily transferred to the one dimensional game.Perhaps SBW is the exception and time will tell.

I also don't understand why the NRL are making such a fuss when it appears they have plenty of other players to fill his shoes; surely an unhappy player is no good to anyone.

As for the contract, Sepp Blatter of FIFA recently said that some contracts treated players as slaves and perhaps SBW was poorly advised on the terms and conditions when entering into a five year contract. There is also the freedom of trade and movement, a fundamental principle which his club would uphold if they wanted to trade him on as a chattel.

[Karl Lincoln]

I know that it sounds like sour grapes but i still remember when the NRL was busy taking any union player with any talent all through the 80's and 90's without a care in the world as to how it effected the other code. What goes around comes around so harden up.

If the NRL have an issue with breech of contract sue the guy don't sulk like a bunch of spoiled children, I thought they were meant to be pros, act like it.

I would be more worried about the possible law suit over restriction of trade and the salary cap, this little baby could bring the complete pack of cards down around everyones heads.

[lee churchman]

SBW is thick. you sign a 5 year contract then you what out. you dummy why did you sign it in the first place, thicko.

[Ken]

I do laugh at how for over 100 years the RU bodies banned players for playing RL, now they want to sign them up left right & centre! I wonder why?

Good luck to him, hope he enjoys it. Life will move on as it is already. Its not really an issue and certainly not the big deal his agent is making it out to be. The French RU club owners may be cashed up and not restricted by a salary cap, but even they are subject to a slowing economy, exchange rates (watch that over the next 12 months!), disquiet among local supporters and, ultimately, results. Presumably they are not idiots either - most RL players going to RU (now that they're allowed to) dont achieve that much, nor the other way around for that matter.

For all the successes, you could point out another 2 or 3 failures. Its the same in both hemispheres and for both codes. The owners may have cash to burn (which, really, they dont) but for them results are paramount. Why spend an absolute fortune on what is, at best, a gamble on an unproven player in RU? The answer is - they wont. At least not very often. And certainly not to the tune of 20 or 30 players a year, every year. Good way to bankrupt a game and a club methinks!

Think of it another way - how many positions in RU are suited to RL players? Wingers? Outside Centre? Fullback, at a push? Inside centre for the occasional convert? None other than that surely. Dont forget RU clubs in France, and in other countries, have their own juniors and a range of proven RU players around the world to choose from - the very opposite of the same argument Mr Gillis uses to prophesy doom! Why buy an uproven risky player from such a small pool when you buy throughout the world? Answer is - they wont, not to the levels suggest by Mr Gillis.

[oikee]

Sean, its not that he wants to go to union, believe me there are more sonny's waiting in the wings over here, its just that the n.r.l needs to make sure the contract issue is sorted out, i think you will find that league will now do what soccer does, and start selling players to union. We have at least 50 players who are as good as sonny, to put your mind around this, they are running last in our comp, and also take the fact that we have 2 feeder comps for each state. Soon we will be targeting aussie rules players, they can jump good. Not long now, and once we make more money out of the frogs, we can do as we please. No other sport in oz can knock the olympics off the back page. We have 16 half-backs in each team, all good enough for 1st grade, we have the young under 20.s who are coming through, all of them could play for australia and not look out of place. We have our juniors coming through in melbourne and now perth, once these players come up to the next level, we can start supporting all union to every country, at least the quality of their game will go up. We even have a half back who is on curfew from drinking too much, yet he was replaced on the week-end by another production line cattle kid. Who did the job just as good, i might add.