Veteran Wallabies playmaker Stephen Larkham wants changes to Australian rugby's contracting system, fearing beefed-up corporate deals will harm player development and create Super 14 disparity.

In the wake of Brumbies teammate Matt Giteau signing a $4.5 million deal with the Western Force, Larkham accused the Force of ignoring the development of players and the game by "buying" a competitive team.

Larkham made the comments as NSW coach Ewen McKenzie said a salary cap, to be considered by the Australian Rugby Union following concern over increased third-party deals, would be impossible to police.

Queensland chief executive officer Theo Psaros also declared the Giteau signing a defining moment in the code which "has the potential to change the state of the game".

Larkham said the ARU and players' association, RUPA, needed to get together to work out a best solution to regulate corporate sponsorship to ensure all four Australian Super 14 teams could compete on a level playing field.

The Test five-eighth, who has played inside Giteau for the bulk of the inside centre's 31 Tests, felt extra money in the game from third-party deals should be better used for development than players.

"I don't think he (Giteau) had a choice - I think that's the problem with the system," he told AAP. "The money that was being thrown at him, you would be a fool to turn it down.

"So I think it's really good for Matt that he's got that offer but I think the system has to change now. That money could be better utilised.

"I think the way Perth are handling their situation at the moment in trying to buy a team is the wrong way to go about it.

"I think they need to have some longevity in the game over there and some sustainability and that involves developing the local competition and local players over there and not just buying a team over there because the money is going to dry up."

The Brumbies, NSW and Queensland have all aired concerns about corporate sweeteners in the west, but RUPA has strongly defended the system which has been in place since the game went professional in 1996.

Larkham disagreed with RUPA boss Tony Dempsey who questioned why the rest of Australia should suffer with a salary cap because the Brumbies struggle to compete for corporate support in a smaller marketplace.

"Financially, it's definitely better for the player but for the development of the game in Australia ... I don't think it's a good thing that we have two rich provinces, or one rich province," he said.

"I just think the system at the moment is not conducive to develop good rugby players in Australia."

Psaros was another to take issue with the RUPA boss over his claims a salary cap would force players to take bigger deals offshore.

"The threat that everyone will go overseas is complete nonsense. These guys want to play for the Wallabies."

McKenzie, who denied the cashed-up Waratahs would increase their bid for league star Mark Gasnier after failing to lure Giteau, believes there is no foolproof system and feels a salary cap would just as easily be breached.

"It's impossible to police," he said.

"You can put all the regulations in that you like but, unless you're living in the player's house or the manager's house, you don't know what's going on."

The Force is also opposed to a salary cap and have vigorously denied overspending to secure Giteau's services for three years.

"We are running a prudent business here in its formative stages," said chief executive Peter O'Meara.

"I can't comment specifically about the (third-party) deals because that was actually coordinated through his management company.

"Matt having the profile he has in Australian rugby and world rugby is going to attract corporate attention.

"But this isn't new to sport. It is certainly not new to rugby."

Brought to you by AAP © 2024 AAP