The controversial round 13 rule is again in the spotlight amid speculation Manly halfback Daly Cherry-Evans is considering reneging on a four-year, multi-million dollar agreement to join the Gold Coast Titans. Under the current rules, the NRL doesn't officially register contracts until round 13 which allows the incumbent club up until then to make a counter offer even if players have signed elsewhere.

While much of the focus has been on the Cherry-Evans contract saga, no club has been more affected than Canterbury. The 'Family Club' signed the Mata'utia brothers - Kangaroos representative Sione, Chanel and Pat - on a deal believed to be worth about $3.7 million over four years. However, the trio recently decided to stay put after Newcastle countered with a lucrative offer of their own. The trio are among the most promising and marketable commodities in the game and their decision has thwarted the Bulldogs' retention and recruitment plans for their backline.

Speaking generally about the signing system rather than about the Mata'utia situation or the round 13 clause, Castle said players had to pay a consequence whenever they broke their contractual obligations.

"I think there should be a standard break clause in all contracts so that if a player wants to exit the contract early then there's an amount they have to give back to the club," Castle told Fairfax Media.

"They should have to pay out of the contract they have broken. Maybe [the right figure] is 10 per cent."

Several clubs have been stung by the round 13 clause in recent years. Canberra were the beneficiaries when Josh Papalii reneged on a deal with Parramatta to remain in the nation's capital, but were on the wrong end when James Tedesco opted to remain at Wests Tigers. Several clubs are also privately sceptical when players have used "compassionate grounds" as an excuse to walk out on a contract.

NRL boss Dave Smith flagged the prospect of scrapping the round 13 rule, which has been a source of frustration for fans and exploited by wily player managers. However, Castle believes players should pay a price in any instance when they go back on a signed commitment.

"I use the example of mobile phones," Castle explained.

"When you decide you want to move from one mobile phone provider to another because you want the new Apple iPhone, you can do that but there's a break clause, maybe a $600 bill. It makes you think about those consequences."

Castle acknowledged that contracted players are sometimes moved on for a variety of reasons and it was appropriate that clubs subsidised part of their wages once they joined a rival. However, she said it was important players took responsibility for their actions.

"We constantly work with all of our players on welfare and educational opportunities and this should be another example of preparing them for the real world," Castle said.

"When they finish playing football and get out and have to start actually having to find a job, sign contracts, buy houses and all of those things, we need to do all we can inside this environment so they know what it's like for the average person that signs a contract and the consequences for breaking that contract. And player managers have to understand that as well because at the moment there is no consequence for looking to move a player."

Cherry-Evans fronted the media briefly on Monday, conceding there would be continued speculation about his future despite giving an assurance, of sorts, that he would head to the holiday strip next year. Should he backflip, it would be a cruel blow for Titans CEO Graham Annesley, who was ironically at head office when the round 13 rule was introduced.

"In my time in the game, collectively we and the clubs have looked at just about every possible option to try and solve the signing issue," Annesley said.

"The game has never been able to agree to a satisfactory solution. If someone can come up with one, I would have thought it would be adopted by now."

• Follow LeagueHQ on Twitter
• Play Ultimate League
• NRL Previews: Round eight