Smith Calls for Storm Premierships to be Reinstated

Discussion in 'Rugby League Talk' started by Eta Carinae, Mar 8, 2019.

    Oh, I didn't know they were caught over the cap in 2016. I didn't see that reported. I thought they were over in the years either side, which on the face of it seems highly suspicious. It'd be great if you could link me to something that shows how much they were over in 2016. I wonder why the NRL have stated they are or were cap compliant in 2016.
  1. Morkel


    He didn’t say they were over the cap in 2016. He said they were cheating it. They found off-the-books illegal payments were made to players in all 3 seasons, 2015, 2016 and 2017.
    abashii likes this.
  2. Gallen is still part of the club. His mere presence, makes anything he's involved with..... suspicious.
    Locky's Left Boot likes this.
    Let's take another premiership off the Storm.
    abashii and Horseheadsup like this.
  3. Eta Carinae

    Eta Carinae NYC Player

    They weren't 'caught in 2016'. Obviously. They were caught cheating for 2016.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2019 at 10:11 AM
    abashii likes this.
  4. Eta Carinae

    Eta Carinae NYC Player

    How many legit premierships do they have? May be time to start exiling their best players to Parramatta or Cronulla.
  5. Not sure what you're talking about here. I don't recall writing they were 'caught in 2016', obviously. So, Cronulla were caught cheating the salary cap during the 2016 season. I could have sworn the NRL said 2016 was okay. Do you know something different about the salary cap at Cronulla in 2016?
  6. Eta Carinae

    Eta Carinae NYC Player

    Well maybe you have severe comprehension problems. The NRL didn't say they were ok for 2016. They said they were "Ok on the day of the GF." Obviously meaning that during the season they weren't ok if explicitly stating and penalizing for that wasn't enough for you to comprehend.
    abashii likes this.
  7. Nope, nope, nopey, nope. Not good enough for me. I don't understand. So the NRL didn't say they were okay for 2016. Ok on the day of the gf you say. So the NRL has explicitly stated they were not okay in 2016.
  8. Why are you defending them so much mate? What gives? We all know your affiliation and soft spot for the club, but it would seem quite clear that they were attempting to cheat the cap, and were indeed circumventing the cap, while not breaching it, in 2016.

    Do you actually, in your own head and heart, believe that a team caught cheating in 2015, and 2017, were not cheating in 2016?

    I'm not saying there is evidence to take away a premiership, there probably is, this is the NRL, but you can't possibly feel good about saying they weren't cheating, even if you're saying it in an round about way?
    abashii likes this.
  9. Battler

    Battler NRL Captain

    The lesson our club should learn from the Sharks and storm: if you have a good crop of players coming through just cheat the cap massively for one year (as a method of front loading contracts) and then self-report. As long as you didn't win a prem you should be fine. There's a precedent that the NRL won't force you to shed players. So say we're in 6-8th in round 26 we should just give any player whose contract is coming up 500k and then self-report. What's the NRL going to do? If they decide to re-sign with us then that's their decision.

    Alternatively just pull a rorters and don't get caught.
  10. I'm not defending them. In fact not once have I defended them. I've only asked, were they definitely cheating, have they been accused of cheating by the NRL, is there evidence they circumvented the cap? If yes then why have they not been charged and found guilty?

    If you've ever been accused and are actually totally innocent you'd know how it feels. I don't know if Cronulla did something wrong, I haven't any evidence to suggest they have and so won't accuse them of cheating. If the NRL says they didn't and have gone over the books then that should be good enough. It's not enough that there's some circumstantial evidence or there's a suggestion, there's got to be proof.

    When a poster declares they were cheating, I'm calling that bullshit out unless it's proven. If they were significantly over the cap then yes, take the premiership off them. If it's not significant then play on. **** false allegations. That's not how Australia rolls.
  11. Eta Carinae

    Eta Carinae NYC Player

    Explicitly and penalized them for the fact.
  12. Morkel


    It's been explained before. The official line is that players had illegal undisclosed 3rd party payments made to them in 2015, 2016, and 2017. However, in 2016, the total of their legitimate payments was enough below the salary cap that even with the illegal payments on top, they still didn't breach the cap. So Greenberg's comment of them not being over the cap on GF day is technically correct.

    What has been implied though, but not reported directly, is that the reason 2015 and 2017 are over, but 2016 is not, is because the Sharks manipulated the figures to keep 2016 "legal". It's as simple as delaying a bunch of the legitimate 2016 payments until 2017. It wouldn't be that hard - an example of "how" would be that they had enough rep players that would have been entitled to rep bonuses at the end of the season, and they just delayed those payments to occur a few days later, when it ticked over to the 2017 cap year.
    abashii, Foordy and Sproj like this.
  13. Sproj


    Plus, this is the NRL, who have caught out so many salary cap scandals it isn't funny.

    I mean, they caught out the Storm all by themselves...didn't they?

    They caught out the Sharks all by themselves...didn't they?

    They caught out the Broncos during Gee's mysterious 300k...didn't they?

    I mean, I cannot think of one salary cap scandal they didn't find all by themselves. So if the NRL says Cronulla was fine, well I'm sure as anything convinced.

    *I hope you noted the sarcasm without needing to read this.

    On another note, the only team could clearly have been trying to play by the book and legitimately found out is Wests Tigers, as they are the only team incompetent enough for the NRL to actually find something themselves.

    I mean, I wish I was as lucky as an NRL auditor, be absolutely incompetent but able to keep my high paying job.
  14. I'm not going to go off and find the links, because I just don't care enough honestly. But there seems to be a lot pointing to them cheating the cap, without breaking the cap, and paying unders for players, and getting the paper bags out.

    We aren't talking humans here, so if it was against PlayerX, different story for mine. But our club absolutely has, and we cop it on the chin. So it's only fair that when a team, that clearly are happy to cheat, do get called out for being filthy cheaters.

    And I know you are done with the peptide thing. But it's just another bit of evidence to show that the club is more than happy to cheat. They came straight off the drugs, and into the illegal payments. So they deserve the shit they're getting, and again, evidence of not, it seems very unlikely for a team to cheat, stop cheating to win a premiership, then start cheating the very year after.
    abashii and Huge like this.
  15. Eta Carinae

    Eta Carinae NYC Player

    Am I mistaken or did the NRL governing body state they were not over the cap (ie. cheating) on GF day. But at the same time penalised them for being over the cap, including 2016. That is to say, they were cheating in 2016 but were complaint on GF day. So winning that game was legit. Having the chance to win that game wasn't legit.
  16. Perhaps you were mistaken. Try and find where the NRL says they were over the cap in 2016, at any stage of 2016. They indeed may have but I didn't see it. Cronulla may have cheated but that's not the point. The only thing that matters is the available facts. We don't hang people on suspicion.
  17. Foordy


    no one has said they were "over" the cap ... but they were cheating the cap...
    I don't think the NRL has come out and said they were cheating the cap either. Paul Kent recently said they were, but I'm not sure if he had any evidence, or if it was opinion.
    Huge likes this.

Share This Page