Professor47
NRL Player
- Mar 5, 2008
- 1,632
- 81
How did the Sharks avoid the spoon before?
- Status
OXY-351
NRL Player
- Oct 1, 2008
- 2,179
- 899
I can't see how they can automatically hand the premierships over to the teams Melbourne beat in GFs, as some people are suggesting.
Who knows what would have happened if you take Melbourne out of the equation. They've knocked Brisbane out of the finals for how many years throughout their cheating years. If the Storm didn't cheat, it could have been the Broncos in the past few GFs, and they may have won them, not Parra or Manly.
I've defended the Storm before on here for their so called "not in the spirit of the game" tactics, but I can't defend them on this. As far as I'm concerned they are the worse thing to happen to league, barring only perhaps the superleague war.
Who knows what would have happened if you take Melbourne out of the equation. They've knocked Brisbane out of the finals for how many years throughout their cheating years. If the Storm didn't cheat, it could have been the Broncos in the past few GFs, and they may have won them, not Parra or Manly.
I've defended the Storm before on here for their so called "not in the spirit of the game" tactics, but I can't defend them on this. As far as I'm concerned they are the worse thing to happen to league, barring only perhaps the superleague war.
B
Bannermania
NRL Captain
- Mar 5, 2008
- 3,709
- 0
That's just Manly and Parramatta whinging like f*ckwits.OXY-351 said:
OXY-351
NRL Player
- Oct 1, 2008
- 2,179
- 899
Haha, turns out I know one of the guys who put one of the bets on for Melbourne to win the spoon. Put $40 on at 251-1. Happy days
B
Bannermania
NRL Captain
- Mar 5, 2008
- 3,709
- 0
Was that through sportingbet?OXY-351 said:
There were 3 people. Lucky ducks. They will be paid.
J
Je$ter
NRL Player
- Mar 4, 2008
- 2,851
- 255
lynx000 said:
Because Cronulla is flat out giving their players a pie and coke after the game they are that poor. They wouldn't be able to take 1 or 2 decent players cause htey can barely afford it.
J
Je$ter
NRL Player
- Mar 4, 2008
- 2,851
- 255
Anonymous person said:
Cheating is cheating fair enough.
But, your logic suggests if I go out, punch someone in the face I will get the same amount of jail time if I go out and beat someone to the ground, kick them in the head, beat them senseless. I mean, it's all assault right?
And Melbourne are getting charged for the last few years discrepancies because they only just found out. Hence the shockingness of the story.
Scorchie
NRL Captain
Contributor
- Mar 16, 2008
- 4,202
- 5,240
Anonymous person said:
You've missed the entire point of the punishment by so far, you are currently in Iceland.
A
Assassin
NYC Player
- Nov 11, 2008
- 218
- 0
EPIC EPIC EPIC EPIC FAIL STORM
Ok heres my imediate thoughts:
1: how many other NRL teams are cheating around the edges of the salary cap right now? And if they are they must be right now covering all tracks and getting clean ASAP. There have always been rumours about the broncs mostly due to our success so im hopeing to god they keep everything 100% clean now.
2: The storm at present have the bulk of their cap tied up with long term contracts to guys like inglis, smith, slater, and cooper cronk, i am guessing the only real way to pull back to reality will be to set one or two of these big names go for next year. Sooooo which NRL club wants to pick them up? Sounds like its shopping bonanza time and all recruiters will be looking at the storm roster.
3: I would have hoped that if the Storm could release some players now and get back within the cap that they could start acrueing points for this season. Unfortunetly that idea seams dead.
4: WTF storm!!!!
5: Draggx your sig is tragicly funny :roll:
Ok heres my imediate thoughts:
1: how many other NRL teams are cheating around the edges of the salary cap right now? And if they are they must be right now covering all tracks and getting clean ASAP. There have always been rumours about the broncs mostly due to our success so im hopeing to god they keep everything 100% clean now.
2: The storm at present have the bulk of their cap tied up with long term contracts to guys like inglis, smith, slater, and cooper cronk, i am guessing the only real way to pull back to reality will be to set one or two of these big names go for next year. Sooooo which NRL club wants to pick them up? Sounds like its shopping bonanza time and all recruiters will be looking at the storm roster.
3: I would have hoped that if the Storm could release some players now and get back within the cap that they could start acrueing points for this season. Unfortunetly that idea seams dead.
4: WTF storm!!!!
5: Draggx your sig is tragicly funny :roll:
F
Flutterby
International
- Mar 5, 2008
- 5,245
- 1
- Thread starter
- #334
OK - this is a bit out there but as close a comparison as I can get, so go with me. (Although I do expect certain people to miss my point and flame at me.)
If someone commits major crime, when they are caught part of their punishment is that all proceeds of crime are stripped. This would include any proceeds that may not be in the direct possession of the person who committed the crime/s - eg if they bought a house for their parents/sbilings/best mate whoever, who is a purely innocent party with no involvement in the crime.
In this instance Melbourne Storm executives commited a "crime" against the salary cap at the very least (in fact it seems to me they commited the actual crime of fraud - but that is still to be determined). One of the proceeds of said "crime" was 2 premierships - therefore these are stripped. The players are the innocenct (unless proven guilty) beneficiaries, so unfortunately they lose their premiers status (in the same way innocent party loses house as above). It is harsh, but I see no alternative.
In regards to the players contracts. I actually have seen a standard NRL player contract - not one specific with any details (player name or payment amounts) filled in, but the standard template. Basically there is a section that says the Total Remuneration player x is to receieve and then there are sections that break-down exactly how this remuneration is made up - $x direct from club as salary, $x direct from Third Party A, $x direct from Third Party B etc. There is also a section detailing any bonues the player is in line for - $x for playing origin, $x for playing tests, $x for playing set number of games per year - whatever other bonuses the club may like to agree to. If a further Third Party Sponsorship is arranged and comes into force after the intial contract has been lodged with the NRL - a new contract must be drawn up and signed and registered to replace the original contract.
So if a player does in fact read his contract (though I am not certain they do - a lot of them just trust their player managers who say it's all above board and to sign it) he would know the full amount of the renumeration they should receive and where from so if they end up getting an actual payment of MORE or a payment from someone else they would have to be suspicious that all was not above board. However that being said - players may have been told an extra Third Party Sponsorship had come in for them and sign the new contract. The club may then have not lodged the second contract with the NRL, in which case the player/s in question probably wouldn't have had any suspicions. I am not saying this is what happened, but it's one possible scenario. We wait to find out exactly how it was all done.
I really truly hope that no players knew about the fraud that was being perpetuated, but again I wait to find out the details.
If someone commits major crime, when they are caught part of their punishment is that all proceeds of crime are stripped. This would include any proceeds that may not be in the direct possession of the person who committed the crime/s - eg if they bought a house for their parents/sbilings/best mate whoever, who is a purely innocent party with no involvement in the crime.
In this instance Melbourne Storm executives commited a "crime" against the salary cap at the very least (in fact it seems to me they commited the actual crime of fraud - but that is still to be determined). One of the proceeds of said "crime" was 2 premierships - therefore these are stripped. The players are the innocenct (unless proven guilty) beneficiaries, so unfortunately they lose their premiers status (in the same way innocent party loses house as above). It is harsh, but I see no alternative.
In regards to the players contracts. I actually have seen a standard NRL player contract - not one specific with any details (player name or payment amounts) filled in, but the standard template. Basically there is a section that says the Total Remuneration player x is to receieve and then there are sections that break-down exactly how this remuneration is made up - $x direct from club as salary, $x direct from Third Party A, $x direct from Third Party B etc. There is also a section detailing any bonues the player is in line for - $x for playing origin, $x for playing tests, $x for playing set number of games per year - whatever other bonuses the club may like to agree to. If a further Third Party Sponsorship is arranged and comes into force after the intial contract has been lodged with the NRL - a new contract must be drawn up and signed and registered to replace the original contract.
So if a player does in fact read his contract (though I am not certain they do - a lot of them just trust their player managers who say it's all above board and to sign it) he would know the full amount of the renumeration they should receive and where from so if they end up getting an actual payment of MORE or a payment from someone else they would have to be suspicious that all was not above board. However that being said - players may have been told an extra Third Party Sponsorship had come in for them and sign the new contract. The club may then have not lodged the second contract with the NRL, in which case the player/s in question probably wouldn't have had any suspicions. I am not saying this is what happened, but it's one possible scenario. We wait to find out exactly how it was all done.
I really truly hope that no players knew about the fraud that was being perpetuated, but again I wait to find out the details.
T
tkday
Banned User
- Mar 10, 2010
- 1,118
- 65
I think I saw on the footy show that they now have to remove players to come under the cap again. So that will make it fair when teams play them this year. I now hate storm, I can no longer say that they were/are a good team. This goes above and beyond just the normal amount of cap cheating the teams do.
Huge
International Rep
Contributor
- Mar 7, 2008
- 13,620
- 10,547
I watched the Matty Johns show last night purely for this debate and was really pleased to see someone like Webbke say to the viewers to sit back,take a breath, let the dust settle a little before going off the deep end making silly ill-considered irrational emotive and just plain dumb statements. He sounded just like someone I know well, lol. [icon_lol1.
I averaged out the payments they made and it equates to roughly ONE quality player per year extra in the make-up of the Storms team. This is worth noting. If you think about it it means that the overwhelming majority of the team is still the same as every other club. The rorting does not mean they had a team of superstars but rather they were able to hang on to ONE EXTRA player or overpaid the majority. Either way the advantage is no more than 3.9/4.0% over and above what all other teams had.
I'm only highlighting that fact because it quantifies what most people are angry about. It puts a value on or defines what people are upset over. The Storms efforts have really very little correlation with the payments made or at the most the money has/had little impact on their results. The Storm players won on their merits not because they cheated on the cap.
I in no way think what they achieved is lessened because a player or several players were given a few extra dollars. In fact it is probably fair enough as 99% of the team(managers included) are forced to live away from home( in case you missed my point..no-one in the Storm CHOOSE to live in Melbourne pre the existence of the STORM ) and when considering that the percentage required to do so is so high being paid a bit extra does not really mean that much to me. No other club has that scenario. At least 75% of the staff of the competing teams lives in the state/town/region they would otherwise choose to live in.
Before screaming abuse at me please at least consider your responses (if any). Also consider this, if Cronulla (insert team of choice) were each paid a million a season would they be any better ??? The money paid to each player does not change the players inherent ability. A million dollars a minute would not add a single atom of ability to a player that the player does not elementally possess.The Storm did have an advantage but not a particularly great one.
With that said I am also disgusted that the Storm management overpaid staff and hid it for so long.
I averaged out the payments they made and it equates to roughly ONE quality player per year extra in the make-up of the Storms team. This is worth noting. If you think about it it means that the overwhelming majority of the team is still the same as every other club. The rorting does not mean they had a team of superstars but rather they were able to hang on to ONE EXTRA player or overpaid the majority. Either way the advantage is no more than 3.9/4.0% over and above what all other teams had.
I'm only highlighting that fact because it quantifies what most people are angry about. It puts a value on or defines what people are upset over. The Storms efforts have really very little correlation with the payments made or at the most the money has/had little impact on their results. The Storm players won on their merits not because they cheated on the cap.
I in no way think what they achieved is lessened because a player or several players were given a few extra dollars. In fact it is probably fair enough as 99% of the team(managers included) are forced to live away from home( in case you missed my point..no-one in the Storm CHOOSE to live in Melbourne pre the existence of the STORM ) and when considering that the percentage required to do so is so high being paid a bit extra does not really mean that much to me. No other club has that scenario. At least 75% of the staff of the competing teams lives in the state/town/region they would otherwise choose to live in.
Before screaming abuse at me please at least consider your responses (if any). Also consider this, if Cronulla (insert team of choice) were each paid a million a season would they be any better ??? The money paid to each player does not change the players inherent ability. A million dollars a minute would not add a single atom of ability to a player that the player does not elementally possess.The Storm did have an advantage but not a particularly great one.
With that said I am also disgusted that the Storm management overpaid staff and hid it for so long.
F
Flutterby
International
- Mar 5, 2008
- 5,245
- 1
- Thread starter
- #337
It may only equate to 1 player - but if that one player is Smith, Inglis, Slater or Cronk (which is the likely scenario), it is still one massive advantage. We all saw in the 2008 GF how much the loss of Smith impacted on the Storm.
Meat77
NRL Player
- Feb 10, 2010
- 1,792
- 77
Reading through this I'm convinced AP is doing what Rocky did in his "argument" that Todd Carney is a fullback - he's now in so deep into his own ridiculous position that he can't back out
gUt
NRL Player
- Mar 4, 2008
- 2,460
- 328
You've missed the point imo Huge.
No one is saying that the team and coaching staff weren't top shelf. It's been shown that the team should not have been assembled in all its gusises throughout this time in the first place. Even if that DOES mean only one player.
No one is forced to live or play in Melbourne, full stop. I don't understand the relevance or the point of the second part of this sentance.
You're right, money paid to a particular player doesn't change the way they play. No one claims it does and it's so far beside the point here, it's a second moon. The cap is there to regulate the CLUB'S ability to pay 25 players, not what they can pay any individual.
No one is saying that the team and coaching staff weren't top shelf. It's been shown that the team should not have been assembled in all its gusises throughout this time in the first place. Even if that DOES mean only one player.
No one is forced to live or play in Melbourne, full stop. I don't understand the relevance or the point of the second part of this sentance.
You're right, money paid to a particular player doesn't change the way they play. No one claims it does and it's so far beside the point here, it's a second moon. The cap is there to regulate the CLUB'S ability to pay 25 players, not what they can pay any individual.
Huge
International Rep
Contributor
- Mar 7, 2008
- 13,620
- 10,547
Entitled to your opinion and I'm sorry you cannot understand what the relevance of my points are. Unfortunately I can find no simpler words to express my thoughts. Best of luck with lifes long journey.
gUt
NRL Player
- Mar 4, 2008
- 2,460
- 328
Huge. said:
ok smart arse, you asked for no abuse and you got none from me. I explained myself pretty clearly but if you don't see where you're getting it wrong, don't act like I'M the one who's dense.
No one wanted to live in Melbourne before the Storm were there. Great point.
C
Coxy
International Captain
- Mar 4, 2008
- 31,212
- 1,886
I can't believe AP is referring to the Broncos' salary cap breach as "cheating".
Cheating implies a deliberate attempt to subvert the rules. If the NRL thought the Broncos' salary cap breaches of the past were deliberate attempts to break the rules and get away with it, they would've copped more than a fine. Look at the Warriors. Look at the Bulldogs. Look at the Storm.
In all three of those cases there was a calculated, concealed method to hiding the extra undisclosed payments and they were only revealed when someone leaked the info, or owned up (in the Warriors case the new administration noticed what their predecessors had done and owned up).
To even have the Broncos' 2006 undisclosed payment and the Storm's calculated 5 year rorting of the system in the same postcode is an utter joke.
Cheating implies a deliberate attempt to subvert the rules. If the NRL thought the Broncos' salary cap breaches of the past were deliberate attempts to break the rules and get away with it, they would've copped more than a fine. Look at the Warriors. Look at the Bulldogs. Look at the Storm.
In all three of those cases there was a calculated, concealed method to hiding the extra undisclosed payments and they were only revealed when someone leaked the info, or owned up (in the Warriors case the new administration noticed what their predecessors had done and owned up).
To even have the Broncos' 2006 undisclosed payment and the Storm's calculated 5 year rorting of the system in the same postcode is an utter joke.
- Status
