The Rugby League Players Association (RLPA) reaffirms that the contracting system in the NRL is governed by the collective bargaining agreement (CBA). It is a negotiated and agreed framework that does not include a trade system.
- Contracted players aren’t bargaining chips. They cannot be shopped, pressured, or leveraged without their knowledge or consent.
- Clubs cannot call for contract certainty while also trying to create their own unregulated trade-style market. The CBA is clear: it’s not optional and must operate as intended.
- Informal and unregulated ‘trade talks’ risk tampering, undermining trust, and eroding confidence in the integrity of the system.
- The RLPA will continue to work with the NRL to ensure that contracting arrangements operate as intended in our agreed framework.
The NRL is the destination for the best athletes in our region, largely because of the strength of player terms and conditions in their CBA. This benefits not just players, but clubs and the game more broadly.
Everyone in the sport should be working toward outcomes that retain and attract elite talent. A player, as part of a so‑called “mutual” agreement, being pressured to waive or restrict their future right to play in the NRL is not good for the game.
In our view, mutual termination agreements should not come with restraints of trade placed on players. We would advise our members not to agree to them. Mutual terminations must be genuine, not a chance for leverage.
Players should not be prevented from earning an income by playing our game because of disputes between clubs.
‘Shoulder Tapping’ in the NRL
It has become increasingly common for contracted players to be discussed or proposed to other clubs without their consent. This practice, which is rife in the NRL, is often painted for the public as ‘permission to leave’ but does not reflect the lived experience of many players.
In our 2025 player survey, 76% of NRL players believe clubs are pushing out contracted players (shoulder tapping) more often than players trying to leave before the end of their contract. This isn’t an anecdote. It is hard data from our player survey that reflects the growing perception that the balance of contract certainty is not equal.
Players are regularly told they must honour the contracts they sign. In principle, we agree. But it must work the same way for clubs, too. It’s a two-way street where some claim the moral high ground while in the same breath shoulder tap their own players or demand other clubs push theirs out.
Trading Contracted Players Without Consent
The idea of moving a contracted player through informal trade-style discussions is an unregulated concept driven by a number of clubs. It does not form part of the current fair and open contracting system established in the CBA. The players have consistently rejected a trade system for good reason.
Even if a public comment doesn’t name a specific player, it creates an environment where clubs feel they can approach, shop, or pressure players who are under contract.
The RLPA is concerned by the normalisation of clubs referencing player trades as leverage in discussions about releases or terminations. Mutual terminations exist to provide flexibility where necessary and where agreed. They should not be used as tools to create trades or extract concessions.
Respecting the CBA is fundamental. Trust in the system depends on it. The CBA and its framework have been negotiated, agreed and endorsed by the RLPA and NRL. The expectation for clubs is that they operate within it.
The growing trend of shopping, shoulder tapping, and informal trade-style behaviour is not good for the game, the players, the contracting system or the long-term strength of the game.
The RLPA will monitor these practices and take appropriate action to ensure the agreed rules are upheld and our players are protected.
