paddyor wrote: paddyor wrote:
Golf Man wrote:....
What it does bring to light is the limitations of central contracts, and the problems that can arise from investing too much in the wrong player - I don't agree with Heaslips contract for example, and Bowe afaik has a contract through to June 2018 which is mad to think about now.
No It doesn't. That's an entirely separate issue that's been tagged on to this saga by people with an agenda.
There are a limited
number of central contracts, and more players looking for them than contracts available. These limitations
can only mean that players who feel they deserve central contracts will not always get them - obviously opens up the possibility of a Ryan type scenario - particularly when its a "last" contract - to suggest there is no link and is agenda driven is naive at best
Says you. He wanted out last year when he was already on a central and was refused.
Which renders the gobbledegook in the 2nd part of your statement irrelevant.
When did these limits come in? IIRC at one point there were upwards of 20 central contracts and that's no been reduced down to a figure of circa 15. It's all at the unions discretion like for e.g. no private money funding contracts. To say Ryan didn't get a central contract becuase computer says no seems well wide of the mark here.
There are limititations to central contracts but the Ryan saga doesn't highlight them. Things like Bowe being kept on past his prime while there are younger players who probably could do a better job do. Nothing to do with Ryan at all.[/quotHe wanted out last year when he was already on a central and was refused.
- Evidence for this? - your opinion on this seems to be based on speculation and journalists stories - bit rich to be claiming other people have an agenda when you are taking all of this as gospel
To say Ryan didn't get a central contract because computer says no seems well wide of the mark here.
- I'm not sure what you are trying to say here - I think we can accept (because Erasmus said it openly in a press conference and it hasn't been disputed) that Ryan wasn't offered a central contract. As you point out
It's all at the unions discretion
- they decided not to offer him one - why?
Taking a reasonable view of the facts (rather than an agenda) - we know that there are a limited number of central contracts (number really isn't important) and that they are reserved for the players that they most want to keep in Ireland. We also know that Devin Toner has one until June 2020 and we know that Henderson's contract with Ulster runs to June 2018 and Dillane's contract with Connacht runs to June 2019 - all relevant facts.
It seems reasonable based on facts to suggest that the IRFU decided that Ryan didn't merit a central contract or as the Times reported (I note that you are taking some of that report and running with it, but not all) that Nucifora gambled on Ryan not leaving and accepting a very good provincial contract. IMO its absolutely a justifiable position to take on Ryan, although not certain I agree with it
There are limitations to central contracts but the Ryan saga doesn't highlight them
I'm really not sure how you can arrive at this conclusion - a current first choice player doesn't get offered a central contract, so then moves abroad, hugely weakening Munster and substantially weakening Ireland - yet thats not showing a limitation in the system???
Your mention of Bowe is relevant too because it is reasonable to assess that this is what the IRFU are trying to avoid.
Much as people don't like the comparison the IRFU had decisions to make on Heaslip and Ryan - there are arguements both ways for both of them - they'll ultimately be judged in 2 years on whether these were good deals - I hope they are - at the moment I don't think they look good given the depth in both positions, both provincially and nationally