Storm for Wooden Spoon - Betting Suspended

[Dexter]

The problem is Coxy, if the Storm are allowed to play for points this year and keep the same team, what happens if they won the comp in 2010? Imagine if that happened, the game would be in tatters, it would be a disgrace.

I'm not saying they should play for points. What you've said is a real possibility. As it is there's still a real possibility they'll turn around and win next year. Is that any more palatable if all the Storm do is release some players who weren't the recipients of the dodgy deals anyway?

Why should it matter who they keep as long as they are inside the rules?

 

[Coxy]

If the rules were bent to allow Inglis to stay and still be "rewarded", then what have they learned if Inglis just takes a paycut to stay anyway? Zip.

 

[gUt]

Paycuts should not be being talked about - that can't happen. Players should be paid out and cut/dropped/replaced from the squad of 25.

 

[Coxy]

Paycuts should not be being talked about - that can't happen. Players should be paid out and cut/dropped/replaced from the squad of 25.

Yes but also the "2nd contract" money that was hidden should be voided/repaid and thus their officially registered contract with the NRL is all that should count.

 

[gUt]

Paycuts should not be being talked about - that can't happen. Players should be paid out and cut/dropped/replaced from the squad of 25.

Yes but also the "2nd contract" money that was hidden should be voided/repaid and thus their officially registered contract with the NRL is all that should count.

What if it could be somehow proven that the players genuinely thought this money was legit and included in the cap?

 

[Foordy]

Melbourne Storm accept players may not follow through on pay-cut offer

If Melbourne Storm's highest-paid players want to take pay cuts to keep the team together, they can.

But sentiment is slowly giving way to reality for Storm officials, who can't see any possible way for the team to shed $700,000 from its player spend without losing some serious star power.

The man at the coalface of chopping the cap back to legal levels, football manager Frank Ponissi, said most players had probably not considered their personal financial commitments when they passionately offered to take salary sacrifices.

"At the moment everyone is quite emotive, they don't want to break up, and it may stay like that," Ponissi said.

"But you have to look at individual situations.

"A player on a three-year deal would have financial commitments over the course of that, and all of a sudden he is asked to take a huge cut. It is going to be a very difficult time because we have a very committed group of players who want to stay."

Making things more difficult for the Storm is the fact they have eight players on minimum wages in their top 25 squad who can't accept lower pay under the NRL rules.

That means the $700,000 burden would be shouldered by the highest-paid stars, who would presumably have to take six-figure cuts to keep the side together.

Outside the start quartet of Cooper Cronk, Greg Inglis, Billy Slater and Cameron Smith, it seems inevitable the blood-letting will start with mid-tier players Jeff Lima, Ryan Hoffman, Brett White and Brett Finch.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 66,00.html

 

[Kimlo]

Which essentially means the top 17 of the top 25 (the side that plays when at full strength for arguments sake) must take pay cuts and massive ones.
They are predicted to be 1.2 million over for next year over 17 players, that's an average of 70k per player most players on the 100-150k mark will not accept their pay being halved unless their 4 stars take a 150k paycut each it will bring it down to 600k for the rest of the 13 players which is about 40k per player, again people on the 100k pay packet likely won't accept minimum wage.

I really can't see them being the same team next year they wouldn't of stayed in the first place on minimum wage and mots of the stars probably won't be too keen on 150k+ paycut.

They shouldn't be allowed to paycut anyway, that would be a joke NRL should force the Storm to honour the real contract amounts of make the Storm get under the salary cap on THE REAL AMOUNTS they are getting paid, that would truly disband an illegal team and make it a level playing field and for the next 3 years they can suffer with 4 hugely overpaid players.

 

[Coxy]

They shouldn't be allowed to paycut anyway, that would be a joke NRL should force the Storm to honour the real contract amounts of make the Storm get under the salary cap on THE REAL AMOUNTS they are getting paid, that would truly disband an illegal team and make it a level playing field and for the next 3 years they can suffer with 4 hugely overpaid players.

That'd be the problem. As far as the players are concerned they have a legally binding contract (2 in fact) that says how much they signed on for. That that doesn't match the NRL records is a problem. If the NRL wanted to enforce those terms, then the Storm's contracts with those players are invalid and thus the players would be free to walk.

Ultimately I agree that's what needs to happen, and then those players either accept their real amounts, or walk away.

If the reports are true and Inglis for example had close to $150K extra promised to him in other incentives, and the contract lodged with the NRL is still around the $350K mark (ie, total contract of $500K) I can't see him accepting that paycut....

 

[Nashy]

I feel sorry for any team who has ever lost to a cap cheat.

do you feel sorry for Melbourne in 2006? [icon_wink

[quote="OXY-351":3r0dg1hk] Surely you'd have to start asking questions when you're getting given $30K speedboats and $20 "gift" vouchers? If these players have to lose out, then so be it.

from what ive read, players are allowed to get given $30k speedboats and $20k gift vouchers as long as they dont wear their teams clothes in any promotions they do, and the CLUB reports those deals to the NRL. for all Inglis new, his club were reporting them. remember, thats how this whole thing came about - the CLUB werent being honest. Inglis and co had no reason to assume there was anything illegal going on.[/quote:3r0dg1hk]

What gets me. Why did Slater specifically request for his contract to be put through the NRL. Is this regular practice with some players, did he not trust the club, or did he know what was going on?

 

[Kaz]

I would say Slater know the deal was dodgy, so requested it be included in his contract.

But he didn't sign the letter, that went with the offer.

 

[Flutterby]

Brian Hartigan (News Ltd) met the players after training tonight and told them:

1. News Ltd will not support or fund any appeal against the sanctions imposed by the NRL

2. The playing roster WILL have to change for next years season - ie, players will definitely have to go.

 

[Meat77]

Brian Hartigan (News Ltd) met the players after training tonight and told them:

1. News Ltd will not support or fund any appeal against the sanctions imposed by the NRL

2. The playing roster WILL have to change for next years season - ie, players will definitely have to go.

I've been really impressed with how Hartigan has dealt with this issue - you can see how angry he is that News have been dragged into the muck by the Storm and he's damned if he's going to put up with their crap any more.

 

[Dexter]

If the rules were bent to allow Inglis to stay and still be "rewarded", then what have they learned if Inglis just takes a paycut to stay anyway? Zip.

I still can't see a problem at all, if they somehow manage to keep their stars but shed others and stay within the rules then thay are a legal side.

Its a moot point anyway, because there is no way they can keep all of the big guns with the contracts being backended into 2011 and 2012 they will have to offload at least 2 of them.

The NRL should make the Storm honour the extra payments and they should count towards the cap then they would have to offload probably 3.

 

[Kimlo]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/league/vide ... 92,00.html
Gallop has said they won't allow paycuts, good!

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

why not? they let the bulldogs take paycuts? double standards

 

[Hatchy]

I don't mind them keeping their star players, just as long as they put their contract price down to the correct amount within the cap. If they don't, then they can just f*** off for all I care.

 

[Fozz]

why not? they let the bulldogs take paycuts? double standards

Yeah, and they don't want that to happen again.

 

[Bucking Beads]

why not? they let the bulldogs take paycuts? double standards

I'd say it is because of the size and duration of the rort. [icon_shru