Legacy of the 'big 3'

[sensesmaybenumbed]

What does this statement even mean to you? That the regular law does not apply to the NRL and sportspersons? Sportsperson have less rights than regular folk? What are you trying to say?

I said none of that. The illegal conduct of the storm is impossible to fairly penalise.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Union troll derails thread. That's what I'm trying to say.

 

[ANTiLAG]

I said none of that. The illegal conduct of the storm is impossible to fairly penalise.

You seem to be conflating a lot of seperate issues and seperate persons.

Lets say you work for a company and the CEO and Accountant unknowingly to you decide to cook the books with tax fraud and put this extra money into increasing staff payments to keep yourself and 3 talented and performing coworkers happy with bonus payments and payrises to stop you say joining a business rival or being discontent at work and not performing. Should you 4 have to lose your jobs and leave the company's employment? Should you have to move states and work for 4 different companies? Should you be prosecuted for the actions of the CEO and Accountant? Should you have to pay back those payrise and bonus payments received? Can you be forced not to agree to take a paycut in the future and stay with the company to keep it solvent? Should the shareholders be criminally prosecuted for the unknown to them tax fraud or embezzlement of the accountant and director? Should all the staff be sacked and replaced?

The answer to all of the above is No. Its the Accountant and CEO's fault. Invariably they end up costing the shareholders some financial detriment one way or another even if they goto prison (say fines out of company profits and lost share value from from pre-discovered fraud value) but the staff get to carry on if the business carries on trading.

There were rogues involved. But there's a limit to the reasonableness in reaction to what the rogues did with regards the impact on all the parties effected.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

This isn't just business. It's sport, with a supposedly level playing field being delivered via a salary cap.

To compare it directly to other professions is also misleading.

 

[Travitoh]

The NRL couldn't force Melbourne to offload certain individuals but they should've gotten heavy cap penalties with all contracts becoming null and void in an attempt to force the clubs hand. If the players opt to re-sign with the club still then that is their choice. It's their career afterall.
However, any player who knowingly takes part in salary cap cheating should also be punished via either suspension or being deregistered. They are just as guilty as the club.

 

[Someguy]

The NRL couldn't force Melbourne to offload certain individuals but they should've gotten heavy cap penalties with all contracts becoming null and void in an attempt to force the clubs hand. If the players opt to re-sign with the club still then that is their choice. It's their career afterall.
However, any player who knowingly takes part in salary cap cheating should also be punished via either suspension or being deregistered. They are just as guilty as the club.

Exactly big three should have been forced out of Melbourne and played for <my favourite team>.

 

[Perth Red]

The NRL couldn't force Melbourne to offload certain individuals but they should've gotten heavy cap penalties with all contracts becoming null and void in an attempt to force the clubs hand. If the players opt to re-sign with the club still then that is their choice. It's their career afterall.
However, any player who knowingly takes part in salary cap cheating should also be punished via either suspension or being deregistered. They are just as guilty as the club.

I suspect the NRL did not have any rules relating to player behaviour or responsibility (and probably still don't) so couldn't punish the players even if they could prove they were guilty, and TBH it is almost impossible to prove. Every player would just make up some story or lay claim to not knowing what any other was one so how would they know if the club was overall over the cap? The "gifts" again if there is no NRL player requirement to declare gifts given by clubs or sponsors then why would they care?
CEO: Sign these two contracts
Player: why two?
CEO: Just an admin thing
Player ok:
Player: what about this speedboat?
CEO: Gift from our sponsor
Player: Ok, thanks.

NRL: Did you know the club was over the cap and cheating?
Player: No, I only know what I was being paid
NRL: But you had two contracts
Player: Yes, is that not allowed?
NRL: No
Player: Best talk to the club then
NRL: What about the speedboat
Player: Told it was a gift from a sponsor
NRL: Club has to declare that
Player: Go talk to the club then

 

[Travitoh]

I suspect the NRL did not have any rules relating to player behaviour or responsibility (and probably still don't) so couldn't punish the players even if they could prove they were guilty, and TBH it is almost impossible to prove. Every player would just make up some story or lay claim to not knowing what any other was one so how would they know if the club was overall over the cap? The "gifts" again if there is no NRL player requirement to declare gifts given by clubs or sponsors then why would they care?
CEO: Sign these two contracts
Player: why two?
CEO: Just an admin thing
Player ok:
Player: what about this speedboat?
CEO: Gift from our sponsor
Player: Ok, thanks.

NRL: Did you know the club was over the cap and cheating?
Player: No, I only know what I was being paid
NRL: But you had two contracts
Player: Yes, is that not allowed?
NRL: No
Player: Best talk to the club then
NRL: What about the speedboat
Player: Told it was a gift from a sponsor
NRL: Club has to declare that
Player: Go talk to the club then

I've overlooked the agents who I'm sure would be aware that something isn't right. They should be held accountable too.
If a player is given a banned substance by someone they trust at the club, they are still responsible despite being mislead. I would expect contract negotions to be treated in a similar way.

 

[Weaponhead]

You seem to be conflating a lot of seperate issues and seperate persons.

Lets say you work for a company and the CEO and Accountant unknowingly to you decide to cook the books with tax fraud and put this extra money into increasing staff payments to keep yourself and 3 talented and performing coworkers happy with bonus payments and payrises to stop you say joining a business rival or being discontent at work and not performing. Should you 4 have to lose your jobs and leave the company's employment? Should you have to move states and work for 4 different companies? Should you be prosecuted for the actions of the CEO and Accountant? Should you have to pay back those payrise and bonus payments received? Can you be forced not to agree to take a paycut in the future and stay with the company to keep it solvent? Should the shareholders be criminally prosecuted for the unknown to them tax fraud or embezzlement of the accountant and director? Should all the staff be sacked and replaced?

The answer to all of the above is No. Its the Accountant and CEO's fault. Invariably they end up costing the shareholders some financial detriment one way or another even if they goto prison (say fines out of company profits and lost share value from from pre-discovered fraud value) but the staff get to carry on if the business carries on trading.

There were rogues involved. But there's a limit to the reasonableness in reaction to what the rogues did with regards the impact on all the parties effected.

Did this cast of rogues include the coach? No punishment for him somewhat conveniently.

 

[ANTiLAG]

This isn't just business. It's sport, with a supposedly level playing field being delivered via a salary cap.

To compare it directly to other professions is also misleading.

No, it is not. Like any business, this involves real people's money, livlihoods, lives, their rights and freedom and is governed by the same laws.

People have legal rights. Even if they work for the Storm. Even if they're vested in professional sport.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Did this cast of rogues include the coach? No punishment for him somewhat conveniently.

The coach wasn't balancing the books, doing the negotiations , arranging the third party deals or buying the boat.

Nothing wrong with a player getting a third party deal, or a gift for that matter, but the club went well over the limits of the cap

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

No, it is not. Like any business, this involves real people's money, livlihoods, lives, their rights and freedom and is governed by the same laws.

People have legal rights. Even if they work for the Storm.

And responsibilities. Even if they work for the storm.

Everyone bangs on and on about rights. These come with responsibilities.

Pretty simple ones,like don't cheat

 

[ANTiLAG]

And responsibilities. Even if they work for the storm.

Yes. Are you suggesting that the Big 3 did not meet there's? Its not their role to audit. Nor is it the shareholders.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

Yes. Are you suggesting that the Big 3 did not meet there's?

There were certainly suggestions of negligence or indifference to the rules, yes.

 

[Pedge1971]

What does this statement even mean to you? That the regular law does not apply to the NRL and sportspersons? Sportsperson have less rights than regular folk? What are you trying to say?

That in his view because of the cheating anything the Storm achieves will be tainted until all 3 retire. Ffs stop arguing law it is an opinion.

 

[Pedge1971]

Unless it was Melbourne who used PEDs. Then it would be the crime of the century

Rodney Howe says hi.....

 

[ANTiLAG]

There were certainly suggestions of negligence or indifference to the rules, yes.

Suggestions?

Criminal negligence to not seek an audit?

Yeah, nah.

If they weren't party to it, or at the very very least had some form of knowledge of it, you're basically pissing against the wind before you even get started.

 

[ANTiLAG]

That in his view because of the cheating anything the Storm achieves will be tainted until all 3 retire. Ffs stop arguing law it is an opinion.

I'll stop arguing law when people stop suggesting unlawful penalties that the NRL "should" have imposed.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

Suggestions?

Negligence?

Multiple contracts. Boats.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Multiple contracts. Boats.

And?

These are people getting 3rd party deals and gifts amended to their contracts on salaries getting nigh to 1m dollars.

This was business as usual. Got me a 3rd party deal home reno, a new car for my wife, a Maui holiday and some tickets to the Ashes too, thanks. Ill sign a new contract and do the promo work each time too unless I have reason to suspect something foul.

Its not their job to keep and audit the books, and get NRL clearance for the 3rd party deals over and above the cap. Thats the CEO's responsibility.