Rumoured and Confirmed Signings with added crap - XXVI

[Gronk]

If hoppa wanted it dealt with promptly he would apply for expedition on the basis that he will lose income and his potential employment for a year on a career that will only span another ten years max. The court would accommodate that. It's not true to say it wouldn't give a toss.

It's also not true to say it's only a damages case that doesn't effect other signings. The NRL will need to rule on the salary cap implications if there is a payout.

Bulldogs need to know the result of the case because it may well effect how much of his contract we pay. If we pay nothing they may not get their signing of him approved at all if its under market value.

We need to know whether we are off Scott free or whether the NRL is going to apply part of his salary to our cap. We could sign these two centres we are supposedly looking at and then get jumped with hoppa. Best case scenario would be losing 4 points and possibly worse.

Im not sure why you are making these outlandish statements when it's clear that everyone needs to know the cap consequences before proceeding.

No, the 4 points threat was about us agreeing to an external audit of our management practices.

We are not in danger of losing any points when it comes to the 2016 cap. Contracts will only be registered if we can demonstrate to the NRL that our cap has not been exceeded (refer Sam Burgess, Inglis & SBW before that) and I am sure that would include contingent liabilities (hoppa). This is why Schubert is on the payroll.

Happy to be corrected if I'm reading it wrong.

 

[strider]

I think the stalling in dogs making it official was all about them getting best deal they could. But i think people are starting to realise it is going to drag on and they cant really stall any longer. While you can ask the courts to move quicker I dont know if they care too much.

 

[Bigfella]

I think you are correct in saying the 4 points was directly related to the audit issue.

But I understood that the reason the NRL were threatening points was the cumulative effect of breaches in 14 and 15 - basically a message that further f**k ups would mean points are the next available penalty.

If we breach the 16 cap I don't think there is any possibility of a penalty less than points deduction - which is why I said 4 points would be the least result we could expect

 

[Gronk]

I think you are correct in saying the 4 points was directly related to the audit issue.

But I understood that the reason the NRL were threatening points was the cumulative effect of breaches in 14 and 15 - basically a message that further f**k ups would mean points are the next available penalty.

If we breach the 16 cap I don't think there is any possibility of a penalty less than points deduction - which is why I said 4 points would be the least result we could expect

The breaches were 2nd tier. You can ask for leave to breach your cap (pay a reggie to play NRL) but we were doing it all too often and did it once when we were told not too. This is why we were told to have our practices reviewed. The review was never about the NRL cap.

 

[Chipmunk]

If hoppa wanted it dealt with promptly he would apply for expedition on the basis that he will lose income and his potential employment for a year on a career that will only span another ten years max. The court would accommodate that. It's not true to say it wouldn't give a toss.

It's also not true to say it's only a damages case that doesn't effect other signings. The NRL will need to rule on the salary cap implications if there is a payout.

Bulldogs need to know the result of the case because it may well effect how much of his contract we pay. If we pay nothing they may not get their signing of him approved at all if its under market value.

We need to know whether we are off Scott free or whether the NRL is going to apply part of his salary to our cap. We could sign these two centres we are supposedly looking at and then get jumped with hoppa. Best case scenario would be losing 4 points and possibly worse.

Im not sure why you are making these outlandish statements when it's clear that everyone needs to know the cap consequences before proceeding.

That's why I suggested that the club has already got the advice about the situation and knows the cap implications. I dare say the club was informed if they pay Hoppa an out of court payment then it's going to be included in the cap. Let the matter be decided by the courts and it's got nothing to do with us ("us" as in NRL).

 

[Bigfella]

The breaches were 2nd tier. You can ask for leave to breach your cap (pay a reggie to play NRL) but we were doing it all too often and did it once when we were told not too. This is why we were told to have our practices reviewed. The review was never about the NRL cap.

Are you serious?

The prior breaches also weren't for corporate governance or audit issues but the NRL threatened is with 4 points because of the other cap issues.

Do you really think we wouldn't get smashed if we went over the NRL cap this year?

 

[Bigfella]

Add to that - if we did breach the cap because of hoppa, and a contract we claimed our board didn't know had been offered, that would be directly related to the governance issues David Smith expressly mentioned when he handed down the breach notice and the suspended 4 points.

 

[Gronk]

Here are the facts, so you and I don't need to speculate any further.

NRL.com Thu, May 21, 2015 - 03:06PM

The Parramatta Eels are facing a fine of $525,000 for salary cap breaches last year.

The NRL issued a breach notice to the club on Thursday which also imposes a penalty of 4 competition points for breaches of the cap.

The competition points will be deducted at the start of the 2016 season unless the Eels undertake an independent review of its governance and organisational capability - and implement changes recommended by that review.

CEO Dave Smith said on Thursday the breaches were significant and were the product of inadequate oversight and governance at the club, largely by previous administrations.

He said that in 2014 the club overspent in each of the four salary cap categories. The amount of each breach is:

• NRL Top 25 - $101,718
• NRL 2nd tier - $233,036
• NYC Top 20 - $60,915
• NYC 2nd tier - $8277

In addition, benefits provided to Eels players by the Parramatta Leagues Club in 2013 were also identified and represent a breach of the salary cap.

Mr Smith said the NRL had worked proactively to try to help the club avoid breaching the caps. The club had been given multiple warnings that it was in danger of breaching the caps but did not take sufficient steps to address the non-compliance.

He said that the NRL generally imposed a fine commensurate with the level of the breach.

But the club would be fined an additional penalty, taking the total to $525,000, for failing to take action to rectify its salary cap problems despite being warned to do so.

Mr Smith said the club's governance had failed but he acknowledged that steps were now being taken to improve the systems at Parramatta.

He said the club would have until 29 February next year to undergo an independent governance review and implement the changes recommended by that review.

This will include a review of the club's organisational capability.

The club must also ensure it does not breach the salary cap rules before 29 February 2016.

If the club fails to satisfy these conditions it will start the 2016 Telstra Premiership on minus four competition points.

"The salary cap is one of the reasons we have the closest sporting competition in Australia," Mr Smith said.

"We have to continue to take a hard line against breaches, particularly where a club's governance and compliance systems are demonstrated to be inadequate.

"This action is aimed at improving the underlying problems at the club which have caused this breach."

Mr Smith said Parramatta would have an opportunity to respond to the breach notice before a final determination is made.

The Sydney Roosters also face a fine of $41,292 for a breach of the salary cap rules. The breach related to inaccurate reporting of education allowances in the Club's NYC Top 20. The Roosters will also have an opportunity to respond to the breach notice.

 

[Bigfella]

Hardly all of the facts about a situation which wasn't even in comtplation at the time. It's one article.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

But that is not the scenario we are facing......
That is the point of the precedent! It is rather unique isn't it? It requires a CEO being sacked who may have been falsifying contracts to rort the cap process....

Well, when any evidence is presented to support the fact that the ex-CEO was trying to rort the process, rather than just being incompetent, we'll deal with that. Either way, the NRL can't make rules/exceptions for clubs based on the competence of other attributes of their CEO.

I also wonder, if a contract is signed by all parties, and the club doesn't forward to the NRL, what is to stop the player manager doing so? Or, would he not know? Surely once fatified everyone gets a final copy? If a club was bollocksing round per your scenario, just sign with someone else?

Yes, they should get a copy once ratified and lodged. These deals typically seem to comprise two steps though 1) A letter of offer, which the player can accept / reject and return to the club, 2) A standardised NRL contract reflecting the terms agreed in 1), whcih is then fwd'd to the NRL for registration. If the NRL allow clubs to play silly buggers between 1 and 2, it creates potential problems. The player would be in possession of a signed agreement 1) but not the finalised 2nd agreement.

 

[phantom eel]

Hardly all of the facts about a situation which wasn't even in comtplation at the time. It's one article.

But it's one (official) article outlining all of our breaches and penalties - including the requirements for us to avoid being penalised 4 points at the start of next season.

It clearly blames the previous administration - that'd be Spagnolo and his cowboy crew .

The Hoppa situation sits with Seward - but looking at the date of the article, who's to say that the NRL wasn't aware of the Hoppa future contract issues at that stage, and that it/Seward's conduct wasn't part of their reason for imposing the governance and organisational capacity review already?

It basically reads like a "make sure 3P stay away from the club, and make sure Seward leaves" requirement. Mission accomplished, and we've been working with NRL to get things to where they should have been - regardless of Hoppa and his management.

 

[oldmancraigy]

Well, when any evidence is presented to support the fact that the ex-CEO was trying to rort the process, rather than just being incompetent, we'll deal with that. Either way, the NRL can't make rules/exceptions for clubs based on the competence of other attributes of their CEO.



Yes, they should get a copy once ratified and lodged. These deals typically seem to comprise two steps though 1) A letter of offer, which the player can accept / reject and return to the club, 2) A standardised NRL contract reflecting the terms agreed in 1), whcih is then fwd'd to the NRL for registration. If the NRL allow clubs to play silly buggers between 1 and 2, it creates potential problems. The player would be in possession of a signed agreement 1) but not the finalised 2nd agreement.

Maybe I am wrong, but was certain part of the issue was the 2 contracts allegedly drawn up, one to be submitted to NRL, and the other the actual pay one...

Like the Storm scenario?

And in your scenario, any agent worth his salt would be saying 'oi, what is happening? Submit or we take club x's money'

 

[Noise]

Maybe I am wrong, but was certain part of the issue was the 2 contracts allegedly drawn up, one to be submitted to NRL, and the other the actual pay one...

Like the Storm scenario?

And in your scenario, any agent worth his salt would be saying 'oi, what is happening? Submit or we take club x's money'

There was never 2 contracts at the same time. Nothing like what the Storm were doing. There was an original offer that was retracted (alledgedly) and then another offer was made that was apparently lower.

 

[HayneKloppter]

There was never 2 contracts at the same time. Nothing like what the Storm were doing. There was an original offer that was retracted (alledgedly) and then another offer was made that was apparently lower.

this is how i understand it, which says the eels gave tyran smith every chance to go find another deal asap. he chose to cling onto hope that the nrl and the eels would clear enough space to allow the contract, which we were never legally obligated to do, the new lower offer is enough proof the eels gave smith enough notice imo.

 

[phantom eel]

Whether it was enough notice would depend a bit on how much time passed between the two "offers" - e.g. less than a week, or several weeks where Hoppa/manager were under the impression they had a done deal.

It might also depend on whether Hoppa/Smith have evidence that they had received other offers and rejected them (on the basis that they had signed an agreement with the Eels), and that those offers were no longer available to them at the time the Eels offered the lower than originally agreed contract.

 

[emjaycee]

A significant amount of time passed between the letter of intent and the revised contract being offered.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Canterbury Bulldogs sign Parramatta Eels star Will Hopoate
Date
December 7, 2015 - 2:12PM

State of Origin representative Will Hopoate is officially a Canterbury Bulldog after signing a two-year deal on Monday.

The 23-year-old utility back scored seven tries in 38 matches for Parramatta over the past two seasons in his return from a two-year Mormon missionary. He made his debut in 2010 with Manly and was a member of the Sea Eagles' 2011 premiership-winning team.

A five-time representative for NSW, Hopoate has replaced Tim Lafai in the Canterbury backline after he successfully gained a release from the club on Saturday.


Bulldogs chief executive Raelene Castle was pleased to have Hopoate on board.

"Will is an exciting young player who has already achieved so much in the game," Castle said.

Bulldogs coach Des Hasler said: "Will will be a valuable and experienced acquisition for the Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs and I look forward to him joining the club."

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/canterbury-bulldogs/canterbury-bulldogs-sign-parramatta-eels-star-will-hopoate-20151207-glhalh.html

 

[Gronk]

Good luck with that mofos.

 

[Noise]

haha 7 tries in 38 matches. Yes, what an 'exciting' player.

 

[emjaycee]

So maybe with the Hoppa to Dogs announcement we will see the all pieces relating to centres that are moving fall into place.

Next announcement should be Lafai to ??? and then Hiku to ???