Is the Draft a restraint of trade?

[Craig]

Something me and a friend of mine have been talking about, whether or not in sport, if the draft is a restraint of trade. It basically came about as we were talking about how 170 rugby league players were able to take action in the High Court and it was ruled in their favour as "an unreasonable restraint of trade" (Backround article url=http://http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/08/1044579986324.html]NRL revisits the draft -smh.com.au - 19/2/2003]) back in 1991.

We were wondering how if league players can take legal action and win, why haven't AFL players or any of the big American sports haven't taken a similar path? Heck, America basically thrives off having a free market system (I know it goes into a bit more detail then that). Just want to know what other people thought.

FTR I would be in favour of a draft in the NRL if they could come up with a workable system.

[Redbacks]

I think the AFL's case the clubs realise that they can make more money by having an even competetion because the television games are probably more likely to be interesting. If the top 5 rich clubs got an unrestricted salary cap, some of the clubs would possibly fail/become feeder clubs to the wealthy ones and in the end I don't think it would maximise the wages of the players.

Having no higher comp to go to also quashes the debate about the players not earning what they are worth. Pretty sure the Players Associating want a % of revenue to be given to them which is in line with other major competitions around the globe. Free agency is in the pipeline however.

[Mister Wright]

The problem with the NRL is that the salary cap only really, truly works with a draft system. That way the team that finish towards the bottom have first choice over the youngsters.

Given that players so regularly change clubs these days I think a draft should be considered.

[BoyBrumby]

NRL is always going to struggle with a cap because it's not the only game in town like AFL. Ways will be found to keep truly egregious talents like Joey & Locky (not all necessarily 100% pukka either, I would guess), but when first choice origin and test players like King & Gasnier give it away in their playing primes for the extra quid/Euro up here you know money's a factor.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

NRL is always going to struggle with a cap because it's not the only game in town like AFL. Ways will be found to keep truly egregious talents like Joey & Locky (not all necessarily 100% pukka either, I would guess), but when first choice origin and test players like King & Gasnier give it away in their playing primes for the extra quid/Euro up here you know money's a factor.

In the salary cap NRL 3rd part sponsorships are at $150k for each team, perhaps changing it to allow each player whatever he likes through 3rd party sponsorships. By all means declare it in the books come auditing time by the NRL.

[howardj]

From a legal stanpoint, courts look try to determine whether the restraint is unreasonable in the circumstances. Legally, many employment conditions are in the strict sense a restraint of trade (for example Commonwealth workers being forbidden to undertake other employment other than in exceptional circumstances). The courts are concerned with whether that restraint is unreasonable. That the courts found that the ARL draft was unreasonable, doesn't automatically mean that other drafts will be found to be so. Although the chances would likely be fairly high, I would expect.

[Craig]

What was about the ARL draft that was unreasonable? In my defence, I wasn't yet 6 years old when that happened.

[chaminda_00]

I was thought players had the option to reject a offer through a draft if they weren't happy with it or the club. Or is it just a case of suck it up and wait till your contract is over before you leave.