Storm for Wooden Spoon - Betting Suspended
- Thread starter Flutterby
- Start date
- Status
Anonymous person
Banned User
- Dec 16, 2008
- 4,635
- 932
it is doable, considering theyre offloading basically EVERY 'name' player apart from their big 4.audragon said:
their other 21 players will be from their feeder clubs, never have played NRL before other than a game here or there this year/last year, and would probably think 100k a year is the bees knees.
their problems come when any of those players needs a contract upgrade and/or bonus for rep footy.
- Feb 27, 2010
- 30,045
- 12,321
I understand that.Anonymous person said:
They could even contract 21 "nobodies" at the minimum wage and give the other 4 an increase! [icon_drun
Let me rephrase the question. How do they expect to do that and still be competitive?
Although they seem to have a knack to find very promising players, I doubt they will be able to find enough that will be up to NRL standards. And those that evenatually get there, will have to be let go early because they won't be able to fit them in the cap, etc... Vicious circle really.
This spells disaster (wooden spoon) to me and I think the likes of Inglis and co. will soon be a lot less interested in staying there...
Black Philip
State of Origin Captain
- Mar 5, 2008
- 9,600
- 1,305
I think wooden spoon might be a bit drastic, but while they can only afford fringe players for the remaining 21 squad members, I don't see them being a massive threat.
- Mar 5, 2008
- 55,236
- 35,859
I have a feeling this is going to end bad for the Storm. I see Inglis in a Broncos jersey. I see one of their top players being de-registered over this 6 figure deal with a director, and I see a club very much having trouble drawing players.
Donny
NRL Player
- Mar 31, 2010
- 1,110
- 96
Danny Widler was just on Channel 9 news. He said that he has information that says the Big four are willing to take huge pay cuts and that Storm will approach the NRL to see if they will let them. I thought thay David Gallop said he wouldbnt let the Storm keep all for. Plus isnt there that rule after the Bulldogs salary cap drama that says players cant take pay cuts under what their actually NRL value would be??
Donny
NRL Player
- Mar 31, 2010
- 1,110
- 96
audragon said:
I dont know if anybody else watched the interview on channel 9 with the Storm Ceo/manger what ever he is was having the biggest cry. He basically said that that storm shouldnt of lost any of their points or premeirships until the enquiry was finished. And he said that the inquiry was biest and that it wouldnt be a true representation of what happened.
FFS YOU FUCKING CHEATING DOGS!!!! You CHEATED now its time to pay for it!!!! You cheating Dogs knocked us out the last three years in a row. Go back to Melbourne and cry some more!!! Stop playing the poor bugger hard done by card because nobody cares about your shitty cheating club!!!
God they make mem angry!!!!
nopatience101
NRL Captain
- Mar 4, 2008
- 3,470
- 6,333
If that was to happen they would have to be released from their current contracts and other clubs be allowed to challenge for their signatures, meaning the storm would have to still pay market value, they got into this mess because other clubs were denied the fair opportunity to challenge for their signatures, anything short of that would make the whole saga pointless.broncospwn said:
- Apr 26, 2008
- 34,578
- 35,550
That would be pointless too, they will all re-sign with the Storm if they're willing to re-do their contracts to take a pay cut then they will just sign with the storm whether they're officially off market or not.
They simply should not be allowed to take pay cuts, either cancel the contract and do not allow STORM to re-sign them this year(effectively no pay cuts allowed) or make them honour their inflated contracts, either way I'll be happy.
They simply should not be allowed to take pay cuts, either cancel the contract and do not allow STORM to re-sign them this year(effectively no pay cuts allowed) or make them honour their inflated contracts, either way I'll be happy.
audragon said:
Considering so much of their young quality came from Norths, who Melbourne is no longer affiliated with, I think that they may no longer have the same quality in their talent pool to get a fieldable team together. How things have changed - hahahahahahah _woohoo_ _woohoo_ _woohoo_ _woohoo_ _woohoo_
- Thread starter
- #843
OK - the report that is being released tomorrow (or whenever they get around to it) isn't actually going to be the Deloitte report. It will be News Ltd's summary of the Deloitte report. The NRL has not even seen the full Deloitte report yet. (Basically it was News as the club's owners, not the NRL that commissioned Deloitte to do the investigation, so that's who gets the report - but why it was them not the NRL is a whole other discussion).
Also Brad Tallon was on Sports Today on 4BC tonight and he said that he had spoken to David Gallop this afternoon and 2 key things came out in the course of that conversation:
1. The NRL has applied it's punishments. The extent of the rorting will not change the punishments imposed on the Storm organisations - the fines and stripping of premierships will stand, and not further penalties will be applied TO THE CLUB. However if it is proven that particular individuals who had not previously been identified or proven to be knowingly involved, then the NRL can still imposed penalties against them as inidividuals;
2. Gallop said that the NRL had decreed that players could not take paycuts for 2010 to get the Storm under the cap and competing for points; however they could take paycuts for 2011 and future years. But not 'ridiculous' paycuts - only reduction to the point of what the NRL considers them to be their genuine minimum market value. ie (based on figures that have been speculated) Inglis could take a paycut from current $600,000 to around $400,000 - $450, 000 to stay with the Storm. This to me is ridiculous!!!!
Also Brad Tallon was on Sports Today on 4BC tonight and he said that he had spoken to David Gallop this afternoon and 2 key things came out in the course of that conversation:
1. The NRL has applied it's punishments. The extent of the rorting will not change the punishments imposed on the Storm organisations - the fines and stripping of premierships will stand, and not further penalties will be applied TO THE CLUB. However if it is proven that particular individuals who had not previously been identified or proven to be knowingly involved, then the NRL can still imposed penalties against them as inidividuals;
2. Gallop said that the NRL had decreed that players could not take paycuts for 2010 to get the Storm under the cap and competing for points; however they could take paycuts for 2011 and future years. But not 'ridiculous' paycuts - only reduction to the point of what the NRL considers them to be their genuine minimum market value. ie (based on figures that have been speculated) Inglis could take a paycut from current $600,000 to around $400,000 - $450, 000 to stay with the Storm. This to me is ridiculous!!!!
Donny
NRL Player
- Mar 31, 2010
- 1,110
- 96
So basiclly they can still field a team in 2011 that in reality should still be over the cap?? By the big 4 being payed the very lowest they are aloud to be payed means the storm will be able to keep them?? This to be defeats the whole purpose of the rule the NRL introduced after the Bulldogs scandal.
I was sure that Gallop made a statement when the Salary cap scandal broke to the effect of "the Strom wont be aloud to keep all of the big 4, the NRL wont allow it".
This will be a big dirty slap in the face to all other NRL clubs and fans if the Strom big 4 are aloud to take pay cuts to stay togeather!!
- Status
