Aussie boy thought he’d won $50,000 in NRL SuperCoach… but he never got the money
An Australian boy leading the NRL SuperCoach competition has been ruled ineligible for its $50,000 prize because he is under the minimum entry age.
The youngster’s team occupied top position heading into the final round of the season, placing him within reach of the lucrative major prize.
However, a routine review of the leading entries determined that the account did not comply with the competition’s terms and conditions.
SuperCoach announced that entrants must meet a minimum age requirement to qualify for end-of-season prizes and inclusion on the final leaderboard.
The competition confirmed the team would be removed from the rankings, allowing prizes to pass to the highest-ranked eligible participants.
The account belonged to the son of Matthew Rix, a prominent NRL SuperCoach content creator and the host and co-founder of Ballr NRL.
Matthew Rix’s son led NRL SuperCoach before age rules made his family’s entry ineligible for the major prize
Rix confirmed his son was under 13 and said the family accepted SuperCoach’s decision without lodging an appeal
A Broncos fan dances ahead of the NRL Grand Final at Accor Stadium
Ballr, also known as SC ballrs, is an independent platform providing statistics, projections, podcasts and tactical advice for NRL SuperCoach players.
Rix revealed that members of his family had operated the team together under his son’s name.
‘My family ran this team together, in my son’s name,’ Rix said.
‘We knew that with him being under 13, this meant we would likely be found ineligible for the prize, and when SuperCoach contacted us and confirmed that, we accepted the decision and are supportive of it.
‘SuperCoach have been helpful throughout this process. We’re not appealing the decision, and we wish the rest of the leading teams well this weekend.’
SuperCoach said the decision followed a standard check conducted before the competition’s closing round.
‘Ahead of the final round of the SuperCoach NRL season, a routine review of leading entries was conducted in accordance with our competition Terms and Conditions,’ its statement read.
‘During this process, the team currently holding the top position was determined to be ineligible for end-of-season prizes and inclusion in the final leaderboards, as the entrant did not meet the minimum age requirement set out in the competition Terms and Conditions.
Matthew Rix hosts Ballr NRL podcasts offering statistics, trade advice, captaincy analysis and regular Team List Tuesday breakdowns
Social media users argued the child deserved payment if the team finished first after beating thousands of adult competitors
SuperCoach is a fantasy sports platform that has become popular with all types of footy fans
‘The account holder has confirmed and accepted that the entry is ineligible.
‘Consequently, this team will be removed from the final rankings, ensuring all prizes are awarded to the highest-ranking eligible participants.
‘We appreciate the community’s patience as we complete our standard verification processes across the closing week.’
The ruling divided SuperCoach players on social media.
Several argued the child deserved the prize if his team remained on top after outperforming adult competitors.
‘Pay the kid. If he’s towelled up the adults, he deserves it,’ one commenter wrote.
Another said: ‘It’s life changing money for a kid and if he has more points he’s earnt it.’
Some questioned why age verification was not completed when entrants registered.
SuperCoach said entrants under the minimum age requirement were not eligible to collect end-of-season prizes or appear in rankings
‘If it’s such an issue make it so you need age verification,’ one person wrote.
Others supported SuperCoach’s decision and pointed to the published competition rules.
‘Important to read terms and conditions boys and girls,’ one commenter said.
Questions were also raised about family-operated teams potentially allowing an adult to control more than one entry.
‘I’d interview him just to check it’s not his old man’s burner team,’ one person wrote. ‘If he legit, pay the lad indeed.’
Rix has not disputed the age breach and has confirmed his family will not challenge the ruling.