Storm for Wooden Spoon - Betting Suspended

[m1c]

The breaches most teams get done for come about through injuries or players unexpectedly gaining representative honors. Clubs make allowances for this and allocate funds for these very scenarios. As far as I'm aware these are second tier breaches? This is quite common amongst many clubs each year, and I don't doubt some clubs would stretch the boundaries of fair play HOWEVER the difference here is that the clubs work with the NRL and make sure everything is transparent.

AP, are you saying teams shouldn't field a full 17 on match day, or clubs shouldn't pay certain players?

 

[Huge]

Truly anonymous person you are correct when feeling the frustration over deliberate or unthinking misrepresentation. No matter what words you use some are simply incapable and always come up with banana cake. The hard part is when subsequent posters rub each others c...s as though they've had some great victory all the while missing a well constructed and thoughtful point. Cheer up though, it's my belief that plenty people read, seldom post but understand at least the nub of the matter. Doubtless they appreciate a good read

 

[gUt]

Huge. You can be as articulate and thoughtful as you like, but so long as you're wrong people are going to tell you that. Don't mistake their attempts to correct you as misunderstandings on their part. That's arrogance.

 

[Coxy]

EXACTLY!

Once again Huge is trying to excuse someone doing the wrong thing.

HUH ?? When did I defend a wrongdoer and that's pretty offensive Coxy...I have never defended wrongdoers but have ever only asked for balance.

Easy on the insult..I certainly have not provoked such an attack on my character. it's deeply offensive,[/quote]

By begging for balance and leniency in punishment of bad deeds, you are excusing bad doods. End of story :P

 

[Fozz]

Last time I'm going to say it.

Broncos and other clubs recent salary cap breaches: not hidden from the NRL. Technical and injury related breaches that were picked up by information provided by the clubs.

Storm's salary cap breaches: Hidden from the NRL. Deliberate deception involved. And clearly it was done to give the Storm an unfair advantage in retaining or recruiting players. They cheated.

If the Bulldogs had won a premiership with their salary cap rorting team, I have no doubt that they would have been stripped too.

The decision to strip the Storm of their premierships was 100% correct.

 

[Broncos08]

They are well drilled

It's not Waldrons go !

 

[Emma]

Whilst I'm not 100% sure on whether or not stripping them of their titles was the right decision, I think it was probably the only decision the NRL could make. As for everything else you've said Fozz, couldn't agree more. We're talking about a systematic and comprehensive system of cheating that the powers that be had in place. It's comparing apples and oranges to compare that with the broncos (and other clubs apart from the bulldogs) situation.

 

[Huge]

If I'd listened to everyone who told me I was wrong about an issue then I'd be a fool. A few posters having an opinion at variance to mine hardly makes me wrong about anything. However when in error, as rare as it is, I accept my error and move on. That's what separates people . Unlike some posters I understand success and failure are two sides of the same coin. Most posters here have not learnt that or never will. I live my life according to the same principles eloquently expressed in Kiplings great poem 'IF'.......as a single Dad I printed it out and posted it on to the back of the dunny door and on the wall in my sons room..

it's about balance....before you reply take a few seconds and read it..you'd probably agree it contains great advice and the sort of sentiments any Dad would wish to imbue in his son . It helps to live like that too as an example so when i say I'm wrong then it is genuine.

A few years ago I called for the inclusion of an unheralded player for State of Origin...I got no support at all, most especially when I first proposed his name. he was unfashionable but he was ferocious and deeply passionate for his state. he never called attention to himself and hardly got credited with an enormous workload and staggering toughness and durability. For 2 years before his debut I alone called for his inclusion. I had more than a 100 people write that I was wrong stupid and totally mad, delusional even but I persisted even waking up a few to his efforts by simply drawing attention to his stats,his workrate his onfield contribution.

he made a stunning debut, one and one only game where he excelled, standing head and shoulders above any forward on that night, shining in a beaten team If I'd have listened to the people then then I would have been less of a man. I was right. the majority were wrong. It happens. So a dissenter is not always wrong. I understand, why can't most ??

 

[Anonymous person]

AP, are you saying teams shouldn't field a full 17 on match day, or clubs shouldn't pay certain players?

What




The



F#$%!?!?!!

where did i even say anything REMOTELY like that? [icon_confu

m1c seems to enjoy banana cake too Huge [icon_lol1.

 

[Coxy]

The more I think about it, I don't like this season's punishment. Losing their 8 points they have now, fine, justified.

So the Broncos play the Storm in round 9. Storm can't win 2 points. But Broncos can come away with none. Broncos bust their arse, suffer a serious injury, lose the game and come away with 0 points and their season is damaged. All by a team that is $700K over the salary cap.

It's ridiculous.

I really believe it should be:
Storm have to release player(s) to reduce their salary expenditure in 2010 to a legal level
Until that time:
- Storm forfeit the points for their games to their opposition
- Opposition still must play the game, but are entitled to field a reduced quality team (rest their better players), and the for and against doesn't count. Effectively a trial game.

Once the Storm have their squad legal, they can play full games for points.

 

[Black Philip]

The more I think about it, I don't like this season's punishment. Losing their 8 points they have now, fine, justified.

So the Broncos play the Storm in round 9. Storm can't win 2 points. But Broncos can come away with none. Broncos bust their arse, suffer a serious injury, lose the game and come away with 0 points and their season is damaged. All by a team that is $700K over the salary cap.

It's ridiculous.

I really believe it should be:
Storm have to release player(s) to reduce their salary expenditure in 2010 to a legal level
Until that time:
- Storm forfeit the points for their games to their opposition
- Opposition still must play the game, but are entitled to field a reduced quality team (rest their better players), and the for and against doesn't count. Effectively a trial game.

Once the Storm have their squad legal, they can play full games for points.

Agreed 100%. If there is an injury to a big player who is playing the storm, heads should roll.

 

[Kimlo]

Huge. You can be as articulate and thoughtful as you like, but so long as you're wrong people are going to tell you that. Don't mistake their attempts to correct you as misunderstandings on their part. That's arrogance.

This is Huge we are talking about. Fear does not course through his veins.
Any opinion he has is absolutely correct and if anyone does not agree they are less intelligent than him or just misunderstand him [icon_lol1.

 

[Coxy]

The more I think about it, I don't like this season's punishment. Losing their 8 points they have now, fine, justified.

So the Broncos play the Storm in round 9. Storm can't win 2 points. But Broncos can come away with none. Broncos bust their arse, suffer a serious injury, lose the game and come away with 0 points and their season is damaged. All by a team that is $700K over the salary cap.

It's ridiculous.

I really believe it should be:
Storm have to release player(s) to reduce their salary expenditure in 2010 to a legal level
Until that time:
- Storm forfeit the points for their games to their opposition
- Opposition still must play the game, but are entitled to field a reduced quality team (rest their better players), and the for and against doesn't count. Effectively a trial game.

Once the Storm have their squad legal, they can play full games for points.

Agreed 100%. If there is an injury to a big player who is playing the storm, heads should roll.

And having premiership points taken away by a team that is known to be illegal under the salary cap rules...

 

[Kimlo]

100% agree Coxy.
Melbourne are already grubs they could take it to a new level with nothing to lose.

 

[ethos]

Storm have to release player(s) to reduce their salary expenditure in 2010 to a legal level

That could be harsh on the players though. What if they don't want to relocate from Melbourne? Is it just a case of tough luck?

However, overall I think your proposal makes more sense than the current predicament.

 

[Coxy]

Storm have to release player(s) to reduce their salary expenditure in 2010 to a legal level

That could be harsh on the players though. What if they don't want to relocate from Melbourne? Is it just a case of tough luck?

However, overall I think your proposal makes more sense than the current predicament.

Well they can't just take a pay cut. The NRL wised up to that after the Bulldogs did it in 2002 (and won a premiership with basically an unchanged squad 2 years later...man that left a bitter taste in my mouth, I couldn't even watch that grand final).

So it's up to the Storm. They can ask players to volunteer to be released (and after this, I wouldn't be surprised if a few jumped at the chance). If not, then the football club would have to cut players.

It's simple as that IMO.

The punishment as handed down by the NRL for 2010 right now is completely untenable IMO.

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

The more I think about it, I don't like this season's punishment. Losing their 8 points they have now, fine, justified.

So the Broncos play the Storm in round 9. Storm can't win 2 points. But Broncos can come away with none. Broncos bust their arse, suffer a serious injury, lose the game and come away with 0 points and their season is damaged. All by a team that is $700K over the salary cap.

It's ridiculous.

I really believe it should be:
Storm have to release player(s) to reduce their salary expenditure in 2010 to a legal level
Until that time:
- Storm forfeit the points for their games to their opposition
- Opposition still must play the game, but are entitled to field a reduced quality team (rest their better players), and the for and against doesn't count. Effectively a trial game.

Once the Storm have their squad legal, they can play full games for points.

Problem with that solution is, what if the storm dont get their act together for 8 weeks. All the teams that play them those 8 weeks get 2 free points, then the team in the 9th week has to face a storm team, out for blood, with 2 points on the table. Half the comp just got free points against them, now the other 8 have to play them, minus only 1 or 2 players. Very unfair

 

[Coxy]

True. Really the only fair thing is to exclude the Storm from the 2010 premiership, and all teams who have/are scheduled to play them get 2 points for an extra bye. But even then, some teams play them twice, others only once. So even THAT's not fair.

Besides, the TV contracts require 8 games a week, so the games can't just be called off.

Whole situation just sucks.