menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... -cash-call

menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... -cash-call

Can Lenegan really not put it up to high transfer fee and hope that whether Saracens buy him or not it will increase the value of Rugby League players? Or does it not work like that because RFL and RFU are seperate bodies? If we say £3million for Joel instead of £250,000 would it not put off Union clubs in future? We need to be ambitious I think. Something needs to be done about players sponsoring products too, it shouldn't be on the cap, so what if the lesser players and clubs don't get sponsorship which is as lucrative, it would make both the players and clubs to aim higher in league instead off having to bugger off to Union.

Like you, I would love to think that the impending departure of Joel (who I would be asking £400,000 for regardless of whether it's fair or not - no way would Saracens get him on the cheap regardless of Andy Clarke's glib promises), would sharpen the thinking at the RFL regarding cap discounts on home-grown talent, on self-negoatiated sponsorship deals and on the reinstatement of a central fund designed to top up the wages of our marquee players, but this didn't happen with Eastmond.

It may do next year when Sam is ready to go as well, but what a pity it wil have taken the sacrifice of so much talent in order to make stupid Yaaarkshire thickheads wake up and smell the coffee.

£400k seems fair to me. Wigan have spent years developing Joel's 'talent' and should be properly reimbursed.
I don't blame him for going. It's not as though he will only be getting a wage increase of £20,000 but it will be in the hundreds of thousands.
However, I do hope that he fails and then RU clubs will have second thoughts about raiding rugby league.
We need to put England on the international map to give our game a much needed boost. If we lose our best players then we may as well not try to compete in the 4 nations. Watching the under 20s I have seen a plethora of talent coming through at quite a few clubs but it would be heartbreaking to lose them to RU. It isn't even good to watch.

He will get paid £140,000 to £200,000 at saracens if you believe that hes going to get £400k a year then you must be daft saracens signed South African captain for less than £200,000 a year there not a rugby union fan in the country believes he will get more than £170k off sarries only way he will get a couple hundred grand more than his 80k at wigan is if he plays for england. Rugby Union people laugh at some of the things we write about how much joel will be paid and all this seting him up for life crap.

Rumour is that the £400k is over 3 years, rather than £400k a year. With the added financial incentives of Yawnion.

Sorry to say it, but I told you so... there will be no massive payout for Joel.

IL will do well to get £250k.

I think you're right.

The really annoying thing about all this is that if only RL could sort out its management and administration and make a better job of running and marketing the game the bigger clubs could afford to pay the sort of wages that would make it a lot more difficult for RU clubs to entice our players to take the risk of moving to a different sport and a different sporting culture. But when even the most intelligent and enlightened of club owners, our own Mr Lenegan, persists in sticking his head in the sand on the SC issue and even gives interviews in which he says he's not worried about RU then nothing is going to change.

That depends on what you call a massive payout I suppose. I dont want Joel to go but anything over £200K cant be sniffed at. Saracens would largely be buying potential. As a centre the jury is still out whilst in the 2nd row he isnt the best in SL......yet. So when you consider what other players have gone for, if he has to go that might not be a bad deal. There is not point demanding a stupid fee just so that the deal doesnt happen, we all know sport is different to pretty much any other business when it comes to employees.

You don't have to demand a stupid fee in order to prevent the deal happening. You just have to demand a reasonable fee to reflect the years of development you've put into developing the player, and as compensation not only for the loss of his talent but for the overall negative impact on the club and fans that his departure will inevitably have (in this case it's put the entire fanbase under a massive downer).

If Saracens regard that as stupidity and walk away, then that's their problem.

To be honest, I don't get all this "we need to consider what other players have gone for" and "Saracens are only buying potential". My answer to that is tough schizer! I'm interested in our loss not their risk. If they want a sure thing, they should buy a world class RU player, or better still, break the habit of a lifetime and actually develop one of their own.

We also need to think of the precedent. The days of RU paying pig money for knackered veterans like Farrell are over. They now are targetting guys like Eastmond and the Tomkins brothers - exciting young stars with big careers ahead of them. We already labour under extreme dfficulty hanging on to these guys. Why should we score another own-goal by making it even easier for people like Andy Clarke to market them elsewhere by sticking reasonable price-tags on them?

I hear all the stuff about market forces, etc, but we really need to stick out for a big payday on Joel. We have to put a marker down to let these parasites know they are not going to benefit from out hard work without paying through the nose for it. If it's true - and I keep hearing people in positions of power saying it is - that many Union clubs are already mortgaged to the hilt, that may well concentrate a few minds about whether it's worthwhile keeping raiding RL. Ultimately we want them to make the decision that it costs a lot less to slam the door in Andy Clarke's face.

Well said. Wigan should not put a low fee on Joel to be nice to Joel either because he can earn more in Union. That is not being vindictive but putting a true value on the player for the reasons you state:

"...to reflect the years of development you've put into developing the player, and as compensation not only for the loss of his talent but for the overall negative impact on the club and fans that his departure will inevitably have... Why should we score another own-goal by making it even easier for people like Andy Clarke to market them elsewhere by sticking reasonable price-tags on them?....We have to put a marker down to let these parasites know they are not going to benefit from out hard work without paying through the nose for it..."

That should mean a high fee not a reasonable one and if they don't want to pay it, no deal.

The problem with charging a high transfer fee to the club is that you are putting the player out by preventing him from earning a much higher wage. It's not like football where there is silly money flying about. If Wigan turned round and said we want £3m for Joel which they obviously wouldnt receive, Joel misses out on the extra wages. You then end up with a disgruntled player.

Some power has to be handed back to the RL clubs so that they are able to fight off advances from union. At the minute, unless the player says NO, then the RL club has to roll over and wave goodbye.

So what? We are constantly told this is a job to the players not a vocation to justify letting them go for higher wages and if so they have to accept the club must view any transfer requests in the same business context. It's simply business and if as Cruncher said setting a high fee that reflects the players value to Wigan sets precedent then one disgruntled player is a price worth paying if that means when Andy Clarke and Co try and manufacture another move out of nothing the players know from the start it is not a forgone conclusion they will be allowed to leave for peanuts. They won't have the expectation they will be allowed to do so without what the club considers adequate compensation.

And no one suggested stupid fees such as £3m either but a fee that sets a fair value on all the things Cruncher mentioned. If the club can justify the fee it sets (which they could not if they asked for £3m) then the player will be able to see why the club values them as they do and he should blame the Union club for not wanting to pay the fee if they walk away, not Wigan for setting it.



No they don't. Are you seriously suggesting if Saracens offered say £50K and no more Wigan would wave goodbye? I think not.

I agree that to ask £3 million would be ridiculous. But I don't consider £400,000 ridiculous, given that fees like that have been paid for RL stars in the past. And if someone ends up disgruntled then I'm sorry but maybe that's the result of a player's agent making his player unrealistic promises.

That said, I don't like these situations when players are frozen out of the game, and by tradition, Wigan don't. They always took the line that if a player wants to go he should be allowed to go. But things are different now. Wigan have invested a lot of time and money in Joel. Not only that, his defection would be yet another blow to the British game overall. These things cannot be considered lightly any longer - we stand to lose too much.

If Joel has decided that he wants to go, and it's a decision based on providing the best future he can for himself and his family, then it's perfectly understandable. But likewise, Wigan have to think about their future and their finances. It's all about hard business these days. There should be no room for sentiment.

I agree 100%. As I said it is often said it is a job to players, well it's a business to Wigan. Letting any player leave for a small amount of money in transfer fees is not good business for Wigan or the game as a whole. Players need to understand that.

JT plays is a first team player for one of the best sides in the game and is an England International. If RU want him then even ignoring things like the development effort Wigan put in and other intangible considerations such as the fans disappointment (which may affect crowds etc) then £400K is about right.