Melbourne Storm and the great celery hat debate

[ningnangnong]

This guy!

 

[broncos4life]

no, because in rowing what one team does doesnt affect the other teams. like with the 100m sprints they can just take the medal off the winner and give it to second since the team that cheated being there didnt affect anyone else.

melbourne beat teams and lost to teams all throughout those seasons, causing the ladder to be affected. some teams got 2 points when they played them, some got 0, some played them twice, some once. so its not as simple as saying "the runners up get the premiership" because the entire season wouldve been different had melbourne not cheated.



they paid players more than they should have. thats it.

now that could mean that they keep players that they would have lost, but thats not certain. whos to say that slater/smith/cronk wouldnt have stayed for a legal amount? they seem to like the club and the coach, and are still there now after the whole ordeal, so thats something to consider. they would probably have lost a few fringe first graders/depth signings, but really that wouldnt have hurt them too much as they have had a pretty amazing run with injuries for what seems like forever. unfortunately we'll never know what wouldve happened.

i havent said they didnt get an advantage, they clearly did - so i dont know why its so important that someone answers that question?

Yeah true, the definitely would have spent 3.5 million on fringe first graders and depth signings.... its the fringe first graders that kill the cap, greedy little bastards.

But like you say we will never know if the smith, slaters, cronks etc would have stayed for less money, but to be honest I doubt it. I mean they are all from QLD and you can't tell me that earlier on in their career if they got big money offers from the gold coast or brisbane that they would not have left to be closer to their family etc.

The argument of "the stayed now so they wouldnt have left earlier" doesn't wash for 2 reasons. I doubt that the trio would want to risk splitting up there combination this late in their career, I mean the 3 of them have never played without each other. (to me this is what is so criminal about what the storm did, no other team in the NRL could keep a combo like that together, but anyway). Secondly those guys will now never leave the storm because the whole ordeal glavanised them and the club. Through adversity people stick together and with everything that happened it allowed the club to create an us against them scenario, it's the same way that cult leaders operate. By having a 'world is against us' atmosphere it forms people to unite and galvanise, also doesn't hurt the motivation either.

 

[Coxy]

The second reason is the bigger one. If they left it'd just show that the Storm needed to cheat the cap to pay them enough to stay. By staying and taking a pay cut (allegedly) it "disproves" that theory (or at least in their minds and the minds of their apologists like AP).

 

[broncos4life]

The second reason is the bigger one. If they left it'd just show that the Storm needed to cheat the cap to pay them enough to stay. By staying and taking a pay cut (allegedly) it "disproves" that theory (or at least in their minds and the minds of their apologists like AP).

Totally agree. I have no doubt that the storm will win this weekend and all we will hear about is "we would have won without cheating the cap" "give us back dem pwemerships" blah blah blah. But no matter what that still isn't true because they are still reaping the benefits of their cheating. To put it bluntly that spine world never stay together in a legel salary cap environment. I said this back in 2010 when this all happened, the true measure of the Melbourne storm and craig bellemy will not be known until smith, slater and cronk retire. (personally I think it's no coincidence that bellemy is planning to retire after his next contract, which is when most likely those 3 will be wither retired or at the end of their careers).

Personally what I believe the NRL should have done was tear up all the contracts, have an independent auditor assign each player a market value and make them reform the team that way, but anyway.

 

[Anonymous person]

Yeah true, the definitely would have spent 3.5 million on fringe first graders and depth signings.... its the fringe first graders that kill the cap, greedy little bastards.

$3.5mil over 5 years...... the most they were over in a season is $1mil, most of which went to cronk/smith/slater.

By staying and taking a pay cut (allegedly) it "disproves" that theory (or at least in their minds and the minds of their apologists like AP).

well no, thats not what i said. all i said is that its something to consider. inglis jumped ship, as did a few others because they still wanted the big dollars.

Personally what I believe the NRL should have done was tear up all the contracts, have an independent auditor assign each player a market value and make them reform the team that way, but anyway.

so do i, i said as much a few posts back.

 

[Coxy]

Inglis made it pretty clear with his negotiations with the Broncos and backing out therefrom that he has himself as his top priority, and public/peer perception of him is pretty irrelevant. Nothing wrong with that, that's his right - not that I would choose to associate with people with that attitude personally.

On a side note, Inglis's selfish attitude probably contributed to him picking Queensland over New South Wales - a feeling it would be better for his career, rather than any real passion for QLD itself. Though I'm sure that's developed in his 7 years in the team.

Slater, Smith and Cronk on the other hand seem to give more thought and consideration to the "game" rather than just themselves.

 

[subsbligh]

The second reason is the bigger one. If they left it'd just show that the Storm needed to cheat the cap to pay them enough to stay. By staying and taking a pay cut (allegedly) it "disproves" that theory (or at least in their minds and the minds of their apologists like AP).

Well that's what the Storm exec said in the paper this morning; they didn't need to cheat, they could have retained the talent without the salary cap breaches. If you're a sympathiser, that's the crying shame in it all I suppose.

I think a lot of people (me included) were glad when it happened. The Storm have always acted "bigger" than the game; their tactics on the field (and evidently off) were hated by everyone. A bit like now if the same were to happen to Manly. Graceful winners hardly.

I have no statistical data to prove it, but the Storm over the last 2 years have certainly felt more "beatable" than the side before the salary cap scandal.

 

[Coxy]

Well that's what the Storm exec said in the paper this morning; they didn't need to cheat, they could have retained the talent without the salary cap breaches. If you're a sympathiser, that's the crying shame in it all I suppose.

I think a lot of people (me included) were glad when it happened. The Storm have always acted "bigger" than the game; their tactics on the field (and evidently off) were hated by everyone. A bit like now if the same were to happen to Manly. Graceful winners hardly.

I have no statistical data to prove it, but the Storm over the last 2 years have certainly felt more "beatable" than the side before the salary cap scandal.

5 losses in a row this year for the first time since Bellamy took charge says volumes about how much they've come back to the field.
That they still finished 2nd and are favourites for the GF also speaks volumes about Bellamy's quality as a coach.

 

[subsbligh]

5 losses in a row this year for the first time since Bellamy took charge says volumes about how much they've come back to the field.
That they still finished 2nd and are favourites for the GF also speaks volumes about Bellamy's quality as a coach.

Oh god yes. Bellamy is a great coach. That he couldn't coach another team (NSW) with a quality roster to beat a team of his own best players (long bow I know) may also say volumes about his true coaching ability vis a vis the Slater, Cronk, Smith and Inglis factor.

 

[Anonymous person]

That he couldn't coach another team (NSW) with a quality roster to beat a team of his own best players (long bow I know) may also say volumes about his true coaching ability vis a vis the Slater, Cronk, Smith and Inglis factor.

i dont think it says anything about Bellamys coaching ability. the QLD team when Bellamy was the NSW coach was at the peak of their ability, with 4, possibly 5, future immortals (lockyer, smith, slater, thurston, inglis) all in near career best form at the time. doesnt matter how great a coach is, if youre playing one of the greatest football teams ever assembled in any level of the game, youre gonna have a hard time winning.

 

[Browny]

I reckon Bennett could have done the job tho AP ;)

 

[OXY-351]

i dont think it says anything about Bellamys coaching ability. the QLD team when Bellamy was the NSW coach was at the peak of their ability, with 4, possibly 5, future immortals (lockyer, smith, slater, thurston, inglis) all in near career best form at the time. doesnt matter how great a coach is, if youre playing one of the greatest football teams ever assembled in any level of the game, youre gonna have a hard time winning.

Bellamy's team had 17 rep players in it though, so I'd say he underacheived.

 

[Coxy]

Bellamy's team had 17 rep players in it though, so I'd say he underacheived.

BAZINGA!

 

[GCBRONCO]

He definitely underachieved, the way AP makes it out that he had a squad of Queenslanders made from parts from 1995 up against a NSW side bloated with quality rep talent, Queensland had the upper hand during that period yes, but Bellamy still had the talent to win each year and couldn't win a series.

 

[Anonymous person]

Lol

Like I said, the Queensland team had 4 possibly 5 future immortals in it at the same time. It is/was the best team we will ever see in rugby league. Yes the nsw team was good, but there was no beating QLD from a coaching perspective. It was up to the players, and QLD was full of big game performers who could single handedly turn a match.

It'd be like if Bellamy was coaching a 100m sprinter who was up against usain bolt. Just because he loses doesn't mean it proves his coach is no good.

 

[GCBRONCO]

Lol

Like I said, the Queensland team had 4 possibly 5 future immortals in it at the same time. It is/was the best team we will ever see in rugby league. Yes the nsw team was good, but there was no beating QLD from a coaching perspective. It was up to the players, and QLD was full of big game performers who could single handedly turn a match.

It'd be like if Bellamy was coaching a 100m sprinter who was up against usain bolt. Just because he loses doesn't mean it proves his coach is no good.

AUSTRALIA: Garry Jack, Michael O'Connor, Brett Kenny, Gene Miles, Les Kiss, Wally Lewis (c), Peter Sterling, Greg Dowling, Royce Simmons, Paul Dunn, Noel Cleal, Bryan Niebling, Bob Lindner. Rep: Mal Meninga, Terry Lamb

that side has at least 5 possible immortals and was one side from the touring side of the 1986 of the 1986 unbeatables, hell Meninga and Lamb couldn't even make the starting side! GB never had a chance compared to NSW did during recent times. the Queensland side of recent times has done great, but hardly the end all and be all sides in the history of the game especially SOO AP, I rate the Queensland side of 1987-1989 far better(especially when you consider they can still thump NSW in a game with losing several of their best players in the process and be playing with only 12 players), your clutching at straws.

 

[OXY-351]

Lol

Like I said, the Queensland team had 4 possibly 5 future immortals in it at the same time. It is/was the best team we will ever see in rugby league. Yes the nsw team was good, but there was no beating QLD from a coaching perspective. It was up to the players, and QLD was full of big game performers who could single handedly turn a match.

It'd be like if Bellamy was coaching a 100m sprinter who was up against usain bolt. Just because he loses doesn't mean it proves his coach is no good.

I like it how when it suits you (eg, defending Bellamys ability) it's all up to the players and how they perform and it's ok to lose if he's up against a better team, but other time when it suits (eg, downplaying Bennetts abilty), it comes down to the coach, and he had a fairly decent squad, so should have done better.

Both Bellamy and Meninga had 17 rep players, so I guess that all rep players aren't equal?

 

[broncos4life]

Lol

Like I said, the Queensland team had 4 possibly 5 future immortals in it at the same time. It is/was the best team we will ever see in rugby league. Yes the nsw team was good, but there was no beating QLD from a coaching perspective. It was up to the players, and QLD was full of big game performers who could single handedly turn a match.

It'd be like if Bellamy was coaching a 100m sprinter who was up against usain bolt. Just because he loses doesn't mean it proves his coach is no good.

Ok. While I don't agree that those four or five players will all be immortals, that's besides the point.

The point is that bellemy got no where near even looking like beating qld, sticky (as much as I hate to say this) came within one point of us. Yes locky was gone but he was replaced by one of your future immortals and Cronk came into the starting side.... And I don't regard sticky as a good coach.