Cheaters never prosper

[Snappy]

not to mention not one player agreed to cooperate with the forensic accountants who were authorised to investigate all the melbourne Storm dealings.
.

Thats the bit that really bugs me. If they had nothing to hide, why wouldnt they ?

 

[_Johnsy]

Thats the bit that really bugs me. If they had nothing to hide, why wouldnt they ?

Everyone knows the answer to that.

 

[Billythekid]

Except there were plenty of players who weren't receiving extra money so why didn't they agree to it?

I think the hate for the storm is a great thing. Did you guys see the ratings for last night? One of the teams wasn't even from Australia and it was still the highest rating game of the finals so far.

 

[Big Pete]

....and where was it that Melbourne weren't at their best Pete? There will be a few teams who will improve out of sight next season, more so than Melbourne. They will do well to make the top four. Surely at least one of their "big three" are due for injury. They've had a golden run for years, are not getting any younger and will have to play a shit load of footy again in 2012.

What?

I never said they weren't at their best.

 

[2_Smoking_Guns]

Except there were plenty of players who weren't receiving extra money so why didn't they agree to it?

I think the hate for the storm is a great thing. Did you guys see the ratings for last night? One of the teams wasn't even from Australia and it was still the highest rating game of the finals so far.

The investigators requested the interviews of selected players, none of which accepted the invitation, on more than one occasion. What makes you think any of these that refused weren't receiving any extra money?

But you're right, the hate for the melboring scum is great for the ratings. Fortunately for many them losing means they don't have to support the manly scum next week. :lol:

 

[Shorty]

Except there were plenty of players who weren't receiving extra money so why didn't they agree to it?

I think the hate for the storm is a great thing. Did you guys see the ratings for last night? One of the teams wasn't even from Australia and it was still the highest rating game of the finals so far.

Please don't flatter yourself, the hate for the Storm is because they cheated nothing more.

 

[Cloudsurfer]

The investigators requested the interviews of selected players, none of which accepted the invitation, on more than one occasion. What makes you think any of these that refused weren't receiving any extra money?

But you're right, the hate for the melboring scum is great for the ratings. Fortunately for many them losing means they don't have to support the manly scum next week. :lol:

Ah, the fraud office & tax department investigations...

 

[2_Smoking_Guns]

Ah, the fraud office & tax department investigations...

Ah, what? Are you serious?

 

[snoozer]

the hate for the Storm is because they cheated nothing more.

what about the way they play(wrestling, chickenwings, grappling etc).

the dirty merkins they've got playing for them(blair).

their bad acting (quinn)

their whining, achieved nothing coach.

 

[undertaker]

Everyone knows the answer to that.

What is it? Is it because the higher paid players knew and the lower paid players didn't necessarily know they were paid overs, the ppl at the top (administration) told all the players to shut up and not say anything that could potentially contradict any statements of other players or make their situation look worse?

 

[Cloudsurfer]

Ah, what? Are you serious?

Yeah serious...those guys get to look at whatever they want to, with or without your permission & the reports were passed on to them to investigate. Strangely, neither office decided there were charges to be laid. I say strangely because if there had been cases to answer & charges to be laid they would've done just that. But lets not let a good story and malignant mindset get in the way of your theory.

 

[big_matt]

Yeah serious...those guys get to look at whatever they want to, with or without your permission & the reports were passed on to them to investigate. Strangely, neither office decided there were charges to be laid. I say strangely because if there had been cases to answer & charges to be laid they would've done just that. But lets not let a good story and malignant mindset get in the way of your theory.

I wouldn't bother trying to present facts on here mate - they don't fit in with everyone's version of what they want to have taken place at the storm.

They are too busy talking about 'tax-free boats' which the tax audit office quite clearly say didn't exist :lol::lol:

 

[God-King Dean]

Because you can't prove it. No where on the contract will it say 'I know we're ororting the cap... F**K YEAH!' All the players need to say is 'I didn't know....'

What are your thoughts on Smith signing 3 contracts?

 

[big_matt]

Because you can't prove it. No where on the contract will it say 'I know we're ororting the cap... F**K YEAH!' All the players need to say is 'I didn't know....'

What are your thoughts on Smith signing 3 contracts?

How do you know he signed 3 contracts? The only mention of that seems to be from a few articles in the daily telecrap who wont name sources. The same articles that said "Smith clearly wont be staying at the club".

If there is concrete proof he had 3 illegal contracts why haven't Deloitte or the NRL mentioned that, or banned or fined him for that behaviour?

 

[M2D2]

Cheaters prosper. If they dont get caught.

 

[Dragon2010]

Cheating for Dummies

Learn2Cheat :Crazy: A tale of Bellamy

A cure for all Bellyaches.

 

[Cloudsurfer]

Because you can't prove it. No where on the contract will it say 'I know we're ororting the cap... F**K YEAH!' All the players need to say is 'I didn't know....'

What are your thoughts on Smith signing 3 contracts?

First, how about you show us where it says he did?
Some of the terms that get thrown around on here & elsewhere are becoming folklore...eg Gallop didn't say they were keeping a separate set of books, he made the comparison (yes, another one :sarcasm in that the system Waldron & a few administrators kept was almost like keeping a second set of books, and yet every man and his dog is now adamant that the Storm kept a second set of books. Same goes for Cam Smith's supposed '3' contracts. If, a third party contract was signed by Smith, it would've been a done deal & why would he question that it was not above board - players have agents to sort that stuff out.
The deception by Waldron & co was that agreed outcomes of negotiations for players & subsequent offers/contracts were not forwarded to the NRL. What the NRL received was letters, contracts and figures that said Storm was salary cap compliant. The players being held responsible for this is ridiculous. They had no reason to know what Waldron was doing. Should the players have been more savvy? - undoubtedly, & probably will be from now on. A lot of current & past players from all clubs would easily fall into that same trap & probably have.

 

[God-King Dean]

How do you know he signed 3 contracts? The only mention of that seems to be from a few articles in the daily telecrap who wont name sources. The same articles that said "Smith clearly wont be staying at the club".

If there is concrete proof he had 3 illegal contracts why haven't Deloitte or the NRL mentioned that, or banned or fined him for that behaviour?

rofl, you think the Telegraph just made it up?
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/smiths-three-contracts/story-e6frexnr-1225875916005

NRL salary cap investigators have discovered champion hooker Cameron Smith had THREE separate contracts with Melbourne Storm.

One was registered with the NRL, one was in a file at the Storm's administration headquarters and another was being hidden at the home of former CEO Matt Hanson.
The contracts, which were drawn up by disgraced former boss Brian Waldron, also included payments for a home renovation and a guaranteed commentary role at Fox Sports. Super League architect John Ribot negotiated the Fox Sports deal.

That's a pretty elaborate 'lie' by the Telegraph. They may be grub journalists, but they're not stupid & know they can & can't say. If it wasn't true, Smith could sue the pants off them. But he didn't..... curious....

There is nothing illegal about signing multiple contracts. As I said, it's never gonna be in the contract saying 'we're cheats'. All the players have to say is 'we jus dumb football players, deeeeeeeeerp!'. But none of em are stupid, especially Smith.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2954852.htm

BRONWYN HERBERT: Specifically the report reveals how extra player payments were made via third parties, including the charity Unity Foundation.

JOHN HARTIGGAN: In summary, what happened is that Unity and McManus companies would pay the players but issue invoices to the club and describe the reason for the invoice as things such as "donations” or “consulting fees".

.......

BRONWYN HERBERT: Seven players who received payments were named.

These include club stars Cooper Cronk, Matt Geyer, Greg Inglis, Billy Slater, and captain Cameron Smith.

However, the boss of News Limited was quick to point out the players were unaware of the rorts.

lol, yes I'm sure.....

 

[big_matt]

rofl, you think the Telegraph just made it up?
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/smiths-three-contracts/story-e6frexnr-1225875916005



That's a pretty elaborate 'lie' by the Telegraph. They may be grub journalists, but they're not stupid & know they can & can't say. If it wasn't true, Smith could sue the pants off them. But he didn't..... curious....


lol, yes I'm sure.....

You are just linking the articles I was talking about, but there is no proof in them whatsoever. They say Smith will be sold. How did that turn out? Or that Waldron was going to jail for 12 years. Was that a fact? Having 3 contracts would have tax implications for the club and player yet the tax audit office have said there is no wrongdoing.

I'll ask again: if there is proof Smith was using 3 contracts why haven't the NRL sanctioned him, and why isn't it mentioned in the official Deloitte investigation? You don't seem to be able to answer that.

Do you believe everything you believe in the tabloid newspapers?

It's a bit strange having a moderator of a board making completely false and potentially libelous statements about players who have been cleared of all wrongdoing is it not?

 

[_Johnsy]

You are just linking the articles I was talking about, but there is no proof in them whatsoever. They say Smith will be sold. How did that turn out? Or that Waldron was going to jail for 12 years. Was that a fact? Having 3 contracts would have tax implications for the club and player yet the tax audit office have said there is no wrongdoing.

I'll ask again: if there is proof Smith was using 3 contracts why haven't the NRL sanctioned him, and why isn't it mentioned in the official Deloitte investigation? You don't seem to be able to answer that.

Do you believe everything you believe in the tabloid newspapers?

Maybe because they (the players) refused to co-operate with the (forensic accountants from delloitte's) investigators. They didn't even speak with them, they did not even have the decency to turn up to the meeting arranged by the club.

Since they refused to co-operate with the forensic investigators they are open game, hell why can't we take liberty with an of the information provided (as there would be no evidence to implicate players as they did not utter a single word to investigators).

i am amazed that some people still try to defend these dishonest, corrupt lying merkins.