Sam Burgess to Union

[josie andrews]

The Daily Mail has 3 pages all but confirming it will happen.

I can understand Sam going if they are throwing crazy money at him BUT I actually struggle to see how Union can make the most of his talent. In many respects I think George is better suited to Union than Sam.

The only time league gets three pages of a mention is when it is mostly referring to union

[butt monkey]

I read in the Australian press that "if" any offer for Burgess was made then it would have to compensate them to the tune of at least £1m based on three reasons.

One: the length of time remaining on his current contract (three years),
two: Wigan receiving a figure close to £1m for selling S Tomkins and they feel he is of similar stature for a similar sized fee,
three: the matter of the compensation they themselves paid the Bulls to release Burgess early from his contract.

Unless those details have been settled and suitable compensation received, then Souths would not be selling Burgess to anyone

[Panchitta Marra]

The Daily Mail has 3 pages all but confirming it will happen.

I can understand Sam going if they are throwing crazy money at him BUT I actually struggle to see how Union can make the most of his talent. In many respects I think George is better suited to Union than Sam.

Maybe its the match up with slammin Sam against SBW that yawnion are looking to invest in CP.

[x Wigan Warrior x]

Maybe the RFU think that every one wants to play in the 2015 WC ...... I'm surprised they haven't approached Lewis Hamilton n Bob the Builder

Or

Sam could just be using this as a levy to get a pay rise ?

[cpwigan]

For Sam Burgess if this means lifetime financial security then great snatch their hands off. Lifestyle? He is giving up an incredible amount, his image/marketability/lifestyle in Aus, his mother and brothers who all move to Aus etc.

I read somewhere the transfer fee was £500,000. If that is so. Did we receive £750,000 for Sam T ? Andy Faz was the link by all accounts.

In terms of Union!I just do not think the sport suits / makes the best of Sam Burgess. I can only see him as a No 8 or flanker in Union and he will spend most of his life pushing at scrums, standing in lineouts or grubbing on the ground with the rest of the forwards. The chance to use his running / offloading will be minimal and as I said earlier if you compare playing styles / assets then George is the Burgess more suited to Union.

Good luck to Sam B; it does raise the ? can we ever compete financially with Union given Aus RL is cash rich and seemingly cannot fend off Union. One thing is for sure the 'new wonderful' SKY deal leaves League toothless and requiring dentures!

[DaveO]

The issue is what this might trigger. If Sam goes, you can guarantee that George, Tom and Luke more than likely won't be far behind. Whilst Super League can't compete with NRL wages wise, League cannot match what Union can offer these lads.

The NRL can. They have a marquee player clause where they can pay $550K in addition to their normal salary cap but more significantly, player sponsorship is exempt from the salary cap.

If they could find a sponsor Burgess for £300K he could have that plus his NRL salary.

For Union to poach one of the games Superstars at the peak of his career would raise concern of who else might go. Sam Tomkins? There are already whispers about Josh Charnley. The ARU Got Folau albeit via AFL but he'd turned his back on League well before that. If the RFU can get Sam Burgess out of the Rabittohs it really sends a statement that they can take who they want and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

If the Rabittohs sell him it will be because they want the money off Bath not because they can't afford to match the wages.

We on the other hand are powerless to stop them poaching our players. Especially since we are now hamstrung with that paltry Sky deal which pales into insignificance compared to Union and NRL finances for the next 8 years.

[Owd Codger]

The issue is what this might trigger. If Sam goes, you can guarantee that George, Tom and Luke more than likely won't be far behind. Whilst Super League can't compete with NRL wages wise, League cannot match what Union can offer these lads.

The NRL can. They have a marquee player clause where they can pay $550K in addition to their normal salary cap but more significantly, player sponsorship is exempt from the salary cap.

If they could find a sponsor Burgess for £300K he could have that plus his NRL salary.

For Union to poach one of the games Superstars at the peak of his career would raise concern of who else might go. Sam Tomkins? There are already whispers about Josh Charnley. The ARU Got Folau albeit via AFL but he'd turned his back on League well before that. If the RFU can get Sam Burgess out of the Rabittohs it really sends a statement that they can take who they want and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

If the Rabittohs sell him it will be because they want the money off Bath not because they can't afford to match the wages.

We on the other hand are powerless to stop them poaching our players. Especially since we are now hamstrung with that paltry Sky deal which pales into insignificance compared to Union and NRL finances for the next 8 years.

No matter what size of deal we get we will now always be in the shadow of the Union game as it will always have more money than League and will always the backing of the 'old school tie' control of the media. Like I have said before, the one thing which comes out of this kind of news is the simple fact that despite having hundreds of clubs, the game of Union in England is unable to produce a home grown International team without players and even coaches from League. All our game can do is produce more players to replace them.

[DaveO]

No matter what size of deal we get we will now always be in the shadow of the Union game as it will always have more money than League and will always the backing of the 'old school tie' control of the media. Like I have said before, the one thing which comes out of this kind of news is the simple fact that despite having hundreds of clubs, the game of Union in England is unable to produce a home grown International team without players and even coaches from League. All our game can do is produce more players to replace them.

The Sky deal has ensured this is he case but I don't believe it was inevitable. The RFL by going for this deal has made it so when I believe they could have done much better.

For me the interesting thing is the size of the respective deals RU and RL have got. The RU deal is £38m over four years off BT. The RL deal is £40m over five years (from 2016).

The difference is that £38m only goes to the 12 RU Premiership clubs which means it is worth £1.725m a year to them but our SL clubs will only get £600K a year because we hive off £14.5m to the championship sides.

If that doesn't tell everyone you should not be expanding the league to a 24 team competition I don't know what does.

Add in RU gets £20m off Arriva for sponsorship compared to Koukash saying we will be lucky to see £30K-£40K (I don't know if he means per club or as a whole but it is pathetic whichever it is).

It is easy to see why they can pay more than us but the thing is we are talking club Rugby here, not the international game. It remains a poor TV draw and the viewing figures from the RL world cup which exceeded things like Premiership soccer (more than double) and RU England v Argentina (about four times as big) when England played Fiji was giving the marketing men all they needed to put the game out to tender and hopefully secure far more money.

Instead they have left us just waiting for RU or the NRL to come calling.

So yes we can only replace those players that go but you have to ask if young athletes of note are going to even bother signing for Wigan, Warrington or whoever when they can probably earn more as a junior elsewhere and given there is a minimum wage in the NRL of $80,000 (£44K) its going to be attractive to a lot more players than just the marquee players (if we have any of those left by 2016).

[Owd Codger]

What chance have we got of keeping our best players when we have got the likes Andy Farrell encouraging them to defect to Union?

[Alreetas]

Lets not beat around the bush, Union has the money and we have the better rugby players. its a supply and demand, and will only be stopped when Rugby Union start making good rugby players, or we start making the same money as union and that comes once again I beat this drum, marketing in the rfl is shocking.