Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 42

Thread: Sydney and Nick Davis locked in dispute over payments - Melbourne Herald Sun

  1. #25
    Support Staff Claret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,104
    I haven't read the article so apologies if this is covered elsewhere BUT does this injury payment come under the salary cap?

    Also, what is the minimum Total Player Payment? Is it 90% or 92.5% or something else altogether?
    And the man who started it all, the Schneiderman . . . . .

  2. #26
    Veterans List Bas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Gosford - Central Coast
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Hartijon View Post
    How would we all feel if we saw Nick Davis's name in the team against Collingwood say in the forward pocket??
    You'd have to send someone out and check his pockets for a few hidden KFC drumsticks!
    In memory of my little Staffy - Dicey, 17.06.2005 to 1.12.2011- I'll miss you mate.

  3. #27
    Silver member, not Gold pinkemu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    419
    Quote Originally Posted by Hartijon View Post
    How would we all feel if we saw Nick Davis's name in the team against Collingwood say in the forward pocket??
    It would be confusing if he had his head shaved like Shaw

  4. #28
    expat Sydneysider JF_Bay22_SCG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Yarraville, Victoria, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    3,978
    Quote Originally Posted by ROK Lobster View Post
    "Joint manager" indeed. Perhaps Davis has finally shown some good judgement?

    Well he had joint girlfriends when he came back from LA a couple of years ago. So why not?

    JF
    "Never ever ever state that Sydney is gone.They are like cockroaches in the aftermath of a nuclear war"
    (Forum poster 'Change', Big Footy 04Apr09)

  5. #29
    scott names the planets stellation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    peaches eaten, trousers rolled
    Posts
    9,693
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Claret View Post
    I haven't read the article so apologies if this is covered elsewhere BUT does this injury payment come under the salary cap?

    Also, what is the minimum Total Player Payment? Is it 90% or 92.5% or something else altogether?
    I could be wrong, but I think it would count towards the TPP but not to the cap.
    I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
    We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time

  6. #30
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Glorious Peoples Republic of Hookturnistan
    Posts
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by Hartijon View Post
    How would we all feel if we saw Nick Davis's name in the team against Collingwood say in the forward pocket??
    Extremely worried - knowing that his usual efforts would effectively give Collingwood 19 on the field.

    Would rather see Vespa or DOK
    sprite

  7. #31
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,929
    Blog Entries
    1
    A thread about Nick Davis and contracts on RWO? Good heavens.

    *grabs popcorn and watches lobster and connolly fight it out*

    Seriously if what stella says is correct I see no reason why Nick shouldn't get the payment. He was out for a while after getting injured in the ressies which pretty much ended his chances of ever getting back into the team even if he did have the application/desire to do so, which was pretty rotten luck however you look at it.

  8. #32
    scott names the planets stellation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    peaches eaten, trousers rolled
    Posts
    9,693
    Blog Entries
    2
    I should say reading over what I wrote previously I think I've probably made it sound more clear cut than it actually is, I believe there is still scope for a review of the specific injury (ongoing career impact) etc. which may also be a point of contention with it all.

    One thing that may throw a spanner in the works is whether AFL Canberra is classified as being a fully fledged state body competition, and if so whether listed players receive a seperate match payment or not for it. If it is then he is entitled to up to 2 years of potential games (capped at 30) at that rate (approx $600, so about $18,000 if a state body and they receive seperate match payments)- however if it's either not a state body competition or the player's aren't paid a match payment for it then he is possibly entitled to the same number (capped at 30) at his contracted senior match payment rate; based on the minimum senior match payment for 2008 that'd be $2600 per game- so for 30 games it'd be $78k, however if they did opt to put hefty incentive components in Nick's pay and they offered him a relatively low base but a significantly increased senior match payment (which I believe they can do) then that figure could stack up pretty quickly.
    I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
    We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time

  9. #33
    The voice of reason! DST's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Content to meet my maker!
    Posts
    2,705
    Quote Originally Posted by stellation View Post
    I could be wrong, but I think it would count towards the TPP but not to the cap.
    I think you are allowed a certain amount of injury payments outside of the cap up to a threshold and then anything over is counted in the salary cap.

    You would need to know how close we were to the injury payment threshold before knowing if any further payments would have an impact on the cap.

    Basically a way to try and stop clubs from retiring players early due to injury and then paying outside of the cap for the rest of what thet ate owed.

    In Nick's case, the dispute is over whether he is owed anything.

    DST
    "Looking forward to a rebuilt, new, fast and exciting Swans model in 2010"


  10. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by DST View Post
    I think you are allowed a certain amount of injury payments outside of the cap up to a threshold and then anything over is counted in the salary cap.

    You would need to know how close we were to the injury payment threshold before knowing if any further payments would have an impact on the cap.

    Basically a way to try and stop clubs from retiring players early due to injury and then paying outside of the cap for the rest of what thet ate owed.

    In Nick's case, the dispute is over whether he is owed anything.

    DST
    EXCLUSIVE: THE Sydney Swans and their 2005 premiership hero Nick Davis are in a protracted and potentially explosive dispute relating to his parting with the club last year. Davis is seeking a financial settlement believed to be about $200,000.

    Any payout would need to be recorded by the Swans in their salary cap.

    Says in the article it would be included
    The edge is not the limit, It's just the starting point...

  11. #35
    Leadership Group goswannie14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Belmont, Victoria, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    11,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Pace To Burn View Post
    EXCLUSIVE: THE Sydney Swans and their 2005 premiership hero Nick Davis are in a protracted and potentially explosive dispute relating to his parting with the club last year. Davis is seeking a financial settlement believed to be about $200,000.

    Any payout would need to be recorded by the Swans in their salary cap.

    Says in the article it would be included
    But would it come under this years cap? After all he is no longer a contracted player.
    Does God believe in Atheists?

  12. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by goswannie14 View Post
    But would it come under this years cap? After all he is no longer a contracted player.
    If it needs to be in last year's salary cap, then we're even more screwed, as I doubt we left an extra $200,000 room there.

    If it needs to be in the salary cap at all, it should be in next year's, so we can negotiate new contracts in a way that will let it fit. Otherwise we're being forced to breach salary cap rules. Is that fair?
    Officially on the Reid and Sumner bandwagon!

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO