RugbyRebels

Ross. S wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37754595

George, Jamie and Toby been given the ok to play.

PRL don't seem the generous type IMO so has the WRU spunked up some cash or have PRL been bitch slapped with some release clauses?

I suspect PRL have given them some leeway this time ion order for them to strengthen the bargaining that will need to take place for future release of marquee players.

PRL can't be bitch slapped with release clauses as they have no contracts with the players in question.

But there could be release clauses with th clubs which players and the WRU would expect to be honoured. I get the impression that the English game is managed through a fair bit of diplomacy between the PRL and the clubs, so if the relevant clubs were pointing out a potential contract dispute and the fact that the WRau were prepared to release the players back to the clubs for the last weekend, which is an international window, when they could be biter used at the clubs then I can see why a compromise has been reached.

Numbers wrote: I suspect PRL have given them some leeway this time ion order for them to strengthen the bargaining that will need to take place for future release of marquee players.

PRL can't be bitch slapped with release clauses as they have no contracts with the players in question.

Please correct if I have got this wrong as it confuses me.

As far as this specific part of the PRL agreements.

The PRL is an organistion of the Premier League clubs
So the clubs have the contracts with the players and they have a joint agreement with each other not to release non english players outside the international windows.
Their stance is normally that there is no agreement for payment and player insurance cover with the WRU.

That being the case...until the international window changes OR there is a clear change by the PRL ...this will continue.

So what do we think...will the WRU finally make an agreement with the PRL or will realignment of the season in 2019 resolve the problem and the PRL is accepting the changing market.

For me , no one comes out of the whole issue looking good

ALunpg wrote:

Numbers wrote: I suspect PRL have given them some leeway this time ion order for them to strengthen the bargaining that will need to take place for future release of marquee players.

PRL can't be bitch slapped with release clauses as they have no contracts with the players in question.

Please correct if I have got this wrong as it confuses me.

As far as this specific part of the PRL agreements.

The PRL is an organistion of the Premier League clubs
So the clubs have the contracts with the players and they have a joint agreement with each other not to release non english players outside the international windows.
Their stance is normally that there is no agreement for payment and player insurance cover with the WRU.

That being the case...until the international window changes OR there is a clear change by the PRL ...this will continue.

So what do we think...will the WRU finally make an agreement with the PRL or will realignment of the season in 2019 resolve the problem and the PRL is accepting the changing market.

For me , no one comes out of the whole issue looking good

From what I understand of the whole situation is that PRL have allowed player release as an exception on this occasion and will seek an agreement with the other unions going forward, so I don't think they have been in anyway unfair, far from it.

The WRU should have sorted this out when the issue first came to light instead of burying their heads in the sand imo.

Glad it's been sorted out amicably (at least on the surface). Hopefully the WRU hasn't had to fork out any extra cash, but who knows. Maybe the PRL didn't see this as something worth fighting over if the players have it in their contracts.

My understanding is that players are contracted to the clubs, and at contract negotiation anything is negotiable; a player can insist on release clauses, but will have to give elsewhere, like £££ or risk the club pulling out.
Equally the clubs have a less formal contract with PRL, which includes an agreement not to release players outside of IRB9, unless the national union stumps up £££ - which the RFU do.

A club like Saints can therefore be in breach of a legal contract with the player, by not releasing. In which case the player may well sue and break the contract to play for someone else. OR they could breach an agreement with PRL, in which case they will be fined £60k(?) per contract.

PRL want release agreements (and cash) from the national unions, like they have with the RFU, but so far no-one's wanted to negotiate.

This year (and only for this year) PRL hae agreed to release outside of IRB9, officially as a gesture of good will whilst a new global season is being talked up (AKA, we'll play nice if you do). Of course, it could be that all 3 players have release clauses - though it's beyond unlikely that all 12 (IIRC) do, and that PRL want to save face, or prove that they can't stick together (by fining 3-4 clubs, or 1 club for 3 release clauses for example).

Son of Mathonwy wrote:Glad it's been sorted out amicably (at least on the surface). Hopefully the WRU hasn't had to fork out any extra cash, but who knows. Maybe the PRL didn't see this as something worth fighting over if the players have it in their contracts.

Except the majority don't have any clauses written in, North's expired when he signed his 1 year extension for instance, I think Roberts has a release clause, not sure about Faletau, Moriarty doesn't.

The WRU could afford to fork out some extra cash as the games outside the International window are money spinners and the big name players draw larger crowds, why they don't have the lesser fixtures outside the window and the meaningful ones inside the window is still a mystery, it seems that they would be the games that would suit trying out the youngsters and all this could then be avoided but maybe that is too easy.

I actually agree that the PRL have been quite assistive in this years discussions. It could be the change in the WRU management as opposed to the previous management team adopting the ostrich approach and this change has actually paid some dividend.. if to date not yet any cash ...but who knows.

But commendation to all parties...may I say sense has prevailed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37839057

Alun Wyn Jones: Wales lock to miss Australia Test after father's death

Very sad for AWJ and a big blow for Wales.