Melbourne Storm and the great celery hat debate

[Huge]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

I'm not comparing, just pointing out that the 'crime' of cheating is relative. I'm sure the concept is beyond your capacity to understand. No matter...like AP said,he saw Melbourne win...........and so did I. makes no difference to me how you remember history.at least for we two,history is the same

 

[m1c]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

It disturbs me that the NRL didn't seem to pursue or investigate many of the allegations against players or coaching staff. I honestly don't think they wanted to know the answer. Only last week George Mimis gave up fighting his slap-on-the-wrist 6 month ban, conceding involvement.

It irritates the hell out of me that no one seems to have taken the fall for this professionally besides Waldron who was absolutely (and probably unfairly) vilified in the News press. He didn't write, sign, register and pay out those contracts by himself.

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

It disturbs me that the NRL didn't seem to pursue or investigate many of the allegations against players or coaching staff. I honestly don't think they wanted to know the answer. Only last week George Mimis gave up fighting his slap-on-the-wrist 6 month ban, conceding involvement.

It irritates the hell out of me that no one seems to have taken the fall for this professionally besides Waldron who was absolutely (and probably unfairly) vilified in the News press. He didn't write, sign, register and pay out those contracts by himself.

The NRL couldn't have the Australian captain banned along with other superstars of the game.

It's very much a case of "If we don't try to find out then it never happened". The fact that Billy Slater refused to sign a second contact screams he knew something was suspicious, so unless he's the only one with a brain I'm sure the other players knew too damn well what was occurring.

The fact that they can re-sign Hoffman and none of the contracts were invalidated is a joke. Melbourne weren't punished highly enough, all that happened was they got to sit out one season... The fine they got is paid for by the NRL's $6 million grant every year so that was just a joke anyway.

Bellamy got off as an innocent saint. If Bellamy is innocent then so is Greg Bird.

 

[Big Pete]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

I'd rather support a team that's had to overcome one of the toughest punishments in the history of the game and basically done it using their own players/rejects than a side that's attempting to buy a premiership and capitilised on unfair representative scheduling.

In terms of quality footy, 2012 has been a crap year. Really looked like it was going somewhere until Origin came around and nothing has been able to live up to that standard ever since.

EDIT: Not that I can blame others on here hating them. I was surprised to see very few Broncos fans lay the boot in when they cheated the cap. Think the Dragons, Sea Eagles & Eels fans carrying on like pork chops turned a lot of fans off.

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

I'd rather support a team that's had to overcome one of the toughest punishments in the history of the game and basically done it using their own players/rejects than a side that's attempting to buy a premiership and capitilised on unfair representative scheduling.

In terms of quality footy, 2012 has been a crap year. Really looked like it was going somewhere until Origin came around and nothing has been able to live up to that standard ever since.

EDIT: Not that I can blame others on here hating them. I was surprised to see very few Broncos fans lay the boot in when they cheated the cap. Think the Dragons, Sea Eagles & Eels fans carrying on like pork chops turned a lot of fans off.

Toughest punishment in history?

What was tough? That they were stripped on premierships achieved with an unfair advantage? Or a fine which would be paid for by the huge NRL Grant they get every year ($6m more than every other club)? I honestly don't understand what was harsh, it wasn't harsh enough if anything.

The Bulldogs have done everything legally, they purchased players like everyone else but you seem to have it in for them because they purchased well as opposed to most other clubs who make rubbish purchases. And they didn't choose to capitalise on representative scheduling, that's just how it turned out.

Melbourne are cheating scums with the same core of the team they had to cheat the cap to keep, Bulldogs are a completely legal team they had to purchase and sign legitimately.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

The NRL couldn't have the Australian captain banned along with other superstars of the game.

It's very much a case of "If we don't try to find out then it never happened". The fact that Billy Slater refused to sign a second contact screams he knew something was suspicious, so unless he's the only one with a brain I'm sure the other players knew too damn well what was occurring.

The fact that they can re-sign Hoffman and none of the contracts were invalidated is a joke. Melbourne weren't punished highly enough, all that happened was they got to sit out one season... The fine they got is paid for by the NRL's $6 million grant every year so that was just a joke anyway.

Bellamy got off as an innocent saint. If Bellamy is innocent then so is Greg Bird.

independent auditors found no evidence to say that the players or coach knew anything about it. the NRL had no influence on who did or didnt get found to have taken part in the whole thing.

werent punished enough? only had to sit out one season? their 2 premiership victories and however many minor premierships have been removed from the books......pretty big punishment if you ask me.

im done replying to you about their lack of guilt though, since its clear youre a fan of some big conspiracy theory.

 

[Jeba]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

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.

Because it was a second contract. Remember there were 2 sets of books. Billy was smart enough not to sign, so why wouldn't the others be??

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Because it was a second contract. Remember there were 2 sets of books. Billy was smart enough not to sign, so why wouldn't the others be??

so how come the independent auditors found no players to have any knowledge of or taken part in the rort? surely if there is a paper trail of players signing blatantly illegal contracts something wouldve been done, wouldnt it?

like i said, im sure the contracts all looked 100% legit to the players signing them. their managers, who advised them of all things contract related, who they pay very well to handle all of this stuff, got deregistered for their part in the rort. do you really find it that hard to believe that the players would take their managers word on signing some contracts?

 

[Jeba]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

To be honest I do. If I get offered a job I read every single word of my employment letter of offer before I sign it. I'd be mad not to, as who knows what the hell it stipulates.

I am not saying the players knew for sure, and happy to give them the benefit of the doubt, but there will always be doubt in my mind about it because of the 2 sets of books at the Melbourne Storm.

 

[Jeba]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Edit double post.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

To be honest I do. If I get offered a job I read every single word of my employment letter of offer before I sign it. I'd be mad not to, as who knows what the hell it stipulates.

I am not saying the players knew for sure, and happy to give them the benefit of the doubt, but there will always be doubt in my mind about it because of the 2 sets of books at the Melbourne Storm.

even if you had hired someone to take care of all contract related business, like say a manager for example?

 

[The Brizz]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Yep from what I gather they signed two different contracts for differing amounts. I can't honestly believe at least one or two of them weren't cluey enough to question this.

I have a lot of respect for the way they have handled themselves in terms of recruiting rejects and transforming them since the scandal in order to keep the big 3 together. What they did was wrong and the club was punished by having those achievments wiped from the books. They can think what they want but everyone knows they cheated, I don't blame the players for having that attitude as they would feel like they earnt it, they didn't cheat (not according to Ian Schubert anyway) so they should feel proud of their achievments whilst feeling very let down by their club.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

does noone here understand the role of a player manager?

if youre paying someone to take care of your contract negotiations, you generally trust them in regards to the contract theyve negotiated. if you dont, why did you hire them to do it? there are also stringent guidelines set out by the NRL on how player managers must behave and act to become and remain accredited, so that you dont get screwed over.

when i go to a tax accountant to get my tax done, i dont pay him to do it, then go over the whole thing with a fine toothed comb and basically do my tax again by myself to make sure its all above board. i payed him to do it, its his legal job to do it correctly, so i trust him and i sign on the dotted line.

same deal with player managers. its their legal and ethical job to get legal contracts for their clients. the managers involved didnt do that. you cant say the players knew just because their manager broke the law/ethics.

 

[vertigo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

None of us know what actually happened, you can speculate and theorize but what's the point?

What's done is done.

 

[Jeba]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

does noone here understand the role of a player manager?

if youre paying someone to take care of your contract negotiations, you generally trust them in regards to the contract theyve negotiated. if you dont, why did you hire them to do it? there are also stringent guidelines set out by the NRL on how player managers must behave and act to become and remain accredited, so that you dont get screwed over.

when i go to a tax accountant to get my tax done, i dont pay him to do it, then go over the whole thing with a fine toothed comb and basically do my tax again by myself to make sure its all above board. i payed him to do it, its his legal job to do it correctly, so i trust him and i sign on the dotted line.

same deal with player managers. its their legal and ethical job to get legal contracts for their clients. the managers involved didnt do that. you cant say the players knew just because their manager broke the law/ethics.

However, if something is wrong on your tax return you are still the one who is legally liable for it, not your tax agent unless its error on their part. You can pay someone thousands to handle your finances, but the buck stops with you if there is an inconsistency. Same thing with playing contracts I'd imagine - yes the managers are hired to take care of the terms of the contract, but I'd be very surprised if they were solely liable for anything that may be wrong with it.

If players don't read through their own contracts before signing they're ****ing idiots as far as I'm concerned. And if they don't think something is up when their club offers them a second contract they're dumber than ****ing idiots. Smith, Cronk & co don't strike me as dumb individuals so that's why there will always be doubt in my mind that the players didn't know.

 

[Jeba]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

even if you had hired someone to take care of all contract related business, like say a manager for example?

Well technically my line manager at work is hired (by the company) to take care of it, so yes definitely would still read every word.

 

[Big Pete]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

Toughest punishment in history?

What was tough? That they were stripped on premierships achieved with an unfair advantage? Or a fine which would be paid for by the huge NRL Grant they get every year ($6m more than every other club)? I honestly don't understand what was harsh, it wasn't harsh enough if anything.

The Bulldogs have done everything legally, they purchased players like everyone else but you seem to have it in for them because they purchased well as opposed to most other clubs who make rubbish purchases. And they didn't choose to capitalise on representative scheduling, that's just how it turned out.

Melbourne are cheating scums with the same core of the team they had to cheat the cap to keep, Bulldogs are a completely legal team they had to purchase and sign legitimately.

I never said the punishment was 'harsh', just that it was the toughest in the codes history, which it had to be. No other side was punished as much as they were for breaking the salary cap.

Raiders 91 - Copped a fine
Bulldogs 02 - All accumulated points taken off them, fined, still allowed to re-negotiate existing contracts to keep core of their illegal squad
Warriors 06 - Fined, stripped of bye points, that's all.

Melbourne had all their accolades stripped, couldn't accumulate ANY points in 2010 and weren't allowed to re-negotiate any pre-existing contract which saw an exodus of around 20 players.

Not everybody was going to be satisfied with their punishment but it was fair.

It's simple, I don't like clubs who play chequebook Rugby League. I like clubs that are proud of their club right through the grades, not those who fancy themselves as fantasy footballers and sign anything that movies. That hatred doesn't apply just to the Dogs, I dislike the Titans just as much. Rabbitohs would be right up there too if there wasn't already a bandwagon of haters.

Both sides have a history of cheating, both sides enter the grand final 'legally' but only one side has an actual identity, culture and actually contributed heavily to the greatest spectacle of the year.

 

[Kimlo]

Re: Grand Final Discussion

You mean ruined the greatest spectacle of the year by being in it illegally for what... 5 times? Stripping many other clubs of a legitimate chance to win the premiership.

They completely tainted the game for 5 years by being cheating scums. They did a lot more damage to the code than the Bulldogs.