Melbourne Storm and the great celery hat debate

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Regardless of this argument, if the players didnt know of the rorting, i can understand the sentiments that Hoffman has voiced in saying that in the players minds, they worked hard and deserved their wins.

Smith well and truly knew. They signed multiple contracts. The only players that I have read that didn't agree to sign multiple contracts was Slater. That's why I still respect Slater because he never took part in any of it.

 

[m1c]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

He HAS to be trolling.

 

[Huge]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Coxy..truly disappointed in you for the childlike attempt to compare the Ben Johnson thing with what the Storm did...although it so simpleminded I will point out that Johnson DID GAIN an advantage with his use of steroids and is a GENUINE example of cheating. Melbourne gained an advantage insomuch as they kept players who otherwise would have been forced to leave but none of those players GAINED some advantage over their opponents, they already were better than others(or more precisely believed in themselves due to superior coaching)......where the gain for Melbourne was in the fact they were able to retain these players. They were not however any different as players than they were the year before and the year before that etc. They simply were valued higher and that was the result of a crap system which rewards failure and penalizes success..what an idiotic system. Naturally it favours the Sydney sides...

the system should reward the sides that develop(I'm aware we have suffered under this system) players. That is why a new system is being developed...I will never blame the players who wanted to stay together and did what they could to do so...the cowardly fans just cannot accept the fact they were beaten by a better team ....like I said,money does not make you better...

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Is the concept really hard to understand CP?

They GAINED an advantage. No semantics here, THEY GAINED AN ADVANTAGE. Just because they didn't "gain" players that doesn't mean they didn't gain an advantage.

Gaining an advantage indicates you had something that other opponents couldn't legally access - for the Storm that's keeping their entire squad when no one else could.

How could you even argue that they didn't gain an advantage?

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Smith well and truly knew. They signed multiple contracts.

hold the phone, they signed multiple contracts! they DEFINITELY knew that one of those contracts was illegal! broncospwn said so!

pull the other one. for all the players knew they were signing third party deals that were either A) approved by the NRL or B) didnt need approval as they were outside the cap legally. the legality of these deals isnt done by the players, its done by their managers. you know, those guys who got found guilty and were banned from being NRL players managers? the managers would give them a pile of paperwork and say sign here here here here here and here. if your manager is telling you to sign these things and says theyve read through them and theyre fine, why would you question that? THATS THE WHOLE REASON YOU HAVE A MANAGER IN THE FIRST PLACE! lol

Gaining an advantage indicates you had something that other opponents couldn't legally access - for the Storm that's keeping their entire squad when no one else could.

you might want to look at their playing rosters over the last 7-8 years before you say that they got to keep their entire roster. even with the cheating they lost more players than pretty much every other team every single year.

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

You can argue your life away about how the system "should be" but that's like me copping a speeding fine for doing 100km/h in a school zone and arguing the system is wrong so I didn't do the wrong thing.

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

hold the phone, they signed multiple contracts! they DEFINITELY knew that one of those contracts was illegal! broncospwn said so!

pull the other one. for all the players knew they were signing third party deals that were either A) approved by the NRL or B) didnt need approval as they were outside the cap legally. the legality of these deals isnt done by the players, its done by their managers. you know, those guys who got found guilty and were banned from being NRL players managers? the managers would give them a pile of paperwork and say sign here here here here here and here. if your manager is telling you to sign these things and says theyve read through them and theyre fine, why would you question that? THATS THE WHOLE REASON YOU HAVE A MANAGER IN THE FIRST PLACE! lol

Did you read the link I put in the thread before? Smith was managing himself at the time when the Titans offered him a contract but he signed with Melbourne instead.

Hmm... Ok maybe I was wrong - he had a manager.

Still though I don't believe you sign for huge money and don't suspect somethings wrong. Or you're getting paid from multiple sources, in separate payments but don't suspect something is off.

Anyway my real beef isn't with Smith, it's with Bellamy who undoubtedly knew what players get paid as that's almost always a process the coach is heavily involved in.

 

[Coxy]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Coxy..truly disappointed in you for the childlike attempt to compare the Ben Johnson thing with what the Storm did...although it so simpleminded I will point out that Johnson DID GAIN an advantage with his use of steroids and is a GENUINE example of cheating. Melbourne gained an advantage insomuch as they kept players who otherwise would have been forced to leave but none of those players GAINED some advantage over their opponents, they already were better than others(or more precisely believed in themselves due to superior coaching)......where the gain for Melbourne was in the fact they were able to retain these players. They were not however any different as players than they were the year before and the year before that etc. They simply were valued higher and that was the result of a crap system which rewards failure and penalizes success..what an idiotic system. Naturally it favours the Sydney sides...

the system should reward the sides that develop(I'm aware we have suffered under this system) players. That is why a new system is being developed...I will never blame the players who wanted to stay together and did what they could to do so...the cowardly fans just cannot accept the fact they were beaten by a better team ....like I said,money does not make you better...

An advantage is an advantage.
An illegal advantage is cheating.

Storm cheated. Johnson cheated. The relative severity of which seems to be proportionate to the ability to forgive an administrative style of cheating of an unpopular rule vs direct competitive cheating.

Whether we like the salary cap or not, it was there for the exact purpose to prevent teams stockpiling talent and as soon as players become successful clubs have trouble holding onto them. The fact the Broncos leaked players for a decade since reconciliation shows both poor management, but also the effects of the salary cap.

The Storm somehow always seemed immune to salary cap pressures, only ever farewelling numpties and replacing them with numpties, while all the while upgrading their stars. I envied how they managed to do that while we saw the likes of Tate, Berrigan, Hunt, Boyd, Eastwood, Stagg, Kemp flow out like a leaky tap.

As it turns out the Storm achieved that through cheating.

To this day they, as a club and a playing unit, have not apologised for it. And in fact, like Hoffman, get their back up saying "we worked hard, we deserve those titles". No. You didn't.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Did you read the link I put in the thread before? Smith was managing himself at the time when the Titans offered him a contract but he signed with Melbourne instead.

you mean the link that has this as the second paragraph?

"Smith at the weekend denied all knowledge of an estimated $3 million package available to him at the Titans, which was negotiated by his estranged agent Jim Banaghan."

all players and the coach were cleared of any wrong doing. cant stress that enough. you might want to believe theyre all evil, but they were found not guilty.

Still though I don't believe you sign for huge money and don't suspect somethings wrong. Or you're getting paid from multiple sources, in separate payments but don't suspect something is off.

Anyway my real beef isn't with Smith, it's with Bellamy who undoubtedly knew what players get paid as that's almost always a process the coach is heavily involved in.

i dont think you understand how third party deals work.

players are 100% allowed to sign deals outside of the salary cap. theyre allowed to be given cars/boats/money etc as long as theyre not using their teams jersey/name etc for the work. greg inglis was allowed to give his name to a company in return for a boat. the only thing is that the club isnt allowed to get these deals or guarantee them - thats up to the player and their manager. what happened, however, is that the corrupt people in the club DID get these deals for the players and guaranteed them to the manager, who then passed it on as a legit deal to the player who then signed.

Bellamy was found not guilty too btw.

 

[Coxy]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

you mean the link that has this as the second paragraph?

"Smith at the weekend denied all knowledge of an estimated $3 million package available to him at the Titans, which was negotiated by his estranged agent Jim Banaghan."

all players and the coach were cleared of any wrong doing. cant stress that enough. you might want to believe theyre all evil, but they were found not guilty.

So was Greg Bird (eventually).

 

[Huge]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

BRONCOPRAWN..the reason I won't respond to you is simple enough...you don't read the POSTS !!!!!!!!!!!!no semantics here read the dam post before responding..not just the bits you want

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

The fact that is was Inglis who scored that try against us in 2008, who is no longer with them since they got caught for cheating is all the proof I need to show they got an unfair advantage.

I still don't believe Bellamy didn't know. Coaches and the CEO work hand in hand on all recruitment decisions.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

I envied how they managed to do that while we saw the likes of Tate, Berrigan, Hunt, Boyd, Eastwood, Stagg, Kemp flow out like a leaky tap.

I wouldnt use Hunt and Boyd as examples. Hunt chased the money that no NRL team could possibly offer, and Boyd follows Bennett like a lost puppy, would never have stayed.

So was Greg Bird (eventually).

true, but theres not guilty and then theres "not guilty". bird is the latter. he got off because someone changed their story.

every player and the coach got off because there was not a single shred of evidence to suggest that any of them knew.

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

BRONCOPRAWN..the reason I won't respond to you is simple enough...you don't read the POSTS !!!!!!!!!!!!no semantics here read the dam post before responding..not just the bits you want

The players did gain an advantage by having better players around them. That's like saying Wallace wouldn't gain an advantage if we could breach the salary cap to buy Thurston.

 

[Huge]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

I never argued that Melbourne did not gain an advantage as you would have noticed had you read the post. I just don't blame the players who were better than us nor do I blame the coach who was also better than ours at the time...the funny thing about the game of rugby league is the players from all clubs,in every game, cheat. The rules are there to stop players gaining an unfair advantage yet the players regularly 'cheat' by breaking the rules,off-side,hands on the ball,illegal strips that go unpunished but are deliberate acts of cheating etc etc etc...the CLUB cheated the rules, absolutely no doubt but it's elemental to our game...one will never change though is history. Melbourne won however you'd like to remember history...

 

[Jeba]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Surely players would be smarter than just to sign where indicated instead of reading contracts first? Otherwise how does Cameron Smith know that it doesn't say "Jim Banaghan will have full access to Cameron Smith's wife in any capacity that he shall desire".

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

I never argued that Melbourne did not gain an advantage as you would have noticed had you read the post. I just don't blame the players who were better than us nor do I blame the coach who was also better than ours at the time...the funny thing about the game of rugby league is the players from all clubs,in every game, cheat. The rules are there to stop players gaining an unfair advantage yet the players regularly 'cheat' by breaking the rules,off-side,hands on the ball,illegal strips that go unpunished but are deliberate acts of cheating etc etc etc...the CLUB cheated the rules, absolutely no doubt but it's elemental to our game...one will never change though is history. Melbourne won however you'd like to remember history...

Melbourne cheated, you cannot compare that to other clubs going off side during a game... Are you even serious?

And no - history says Melbourne's last premiership was in 1999.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Surely players would be smarter than just to sign where indicated instead of reading contracts first? Otherwise how does Cameron Smith know that it doesn't say "Jim Banaghan will have full access to Cameron Smith's wife in any capacity that he shall desire".

how do we know the contracts didnt look 100% legitimate though? im sure they did, otherwise the players wouldnt have signed them and the players that did would not have been cleared of any wrong doing.

the contracts couldve been 100% legitimate if not for the fact that the corrupt people had gotten them guaranteed thus rendering them illegal. so everything stated in the contract looks fine, only the means of acquiring the contract - which is what the managers and corrupt people were responsible for - was illegal.

if i was to say buy you a drink with $5 that you saw me take out of my wallet and you accept it, but then found out that i stole that $5 off someone, does that mean that you knew that the drink you accepted was acquired illegally? from all you saw it was fine, just me buying you a drink - even though i got the money illegally. thats pretty much what it looks like happened. the players managers and the club officials arranged these third party deals illegally, but presented them as legal deals. the person signing the deal isnt to know that it was arranged illegally.