Dog caught in cap dispute- Again

[JK]

Dogs allegedly screwing the cap again...leopards never change their spots.

Maybe all the clubs should have a crack at buying the premiership.

:evil: :evil:

Storm- done every year for the same thing.

Hypocrisy suits you :?

 

[JK]

Its not the size of the breach that worries me...fo I believe this one is minor. The thing that is problematic is the




Just fine them and the suspended half mill. Better still kick them out and bring back Norths.

Rightio - lets kick out a team averaging 15k and bring in one that can pull 8k.

Nice business move! :lol:

 

[RB30DETT]

If it wasnt a Bulldogs player, it would not have even made the paper.

Nothing will come of it.

 

[Zef]

If it wasnt a Bulldogs player, it would not have even made the paper.

One newspaper that is... and that's it. One newspaper article written by a journalist (2 weeks late) with a sucker headline.

Yeah - it's a huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge story.

.... at least the suckers think so.

 

[^ Pando]

p.s.I will be phoning David in 25 minutes.

How did the call to David go?

 

[douglasallen91]

I believe players should be able to get money off whoever they want, whenever they want. How dare people say players shouldnt be earning as much as they can. Thats my main gripe with the salary crap ... its pathetic for some nobody to tell a player they CANT earn money if a company throws money at them.

Yet another reason why England and Yawnion are MUCH better options for any young kid coming through the ranks. Yep, lets make it impossible for our stars to earn what they deserve ... really smart business that is :roll:

the point is, in theory the bulldogs (or the broncos etc) could get a sponser but without the company paying them any money they could use one of their players (i.e. sonny bill) and pay him extra for their advertising method. and sonny signs on for a less price than he is actually getting. thats why it is monited and included

 

[douglasallen91]

History is irrelevant- this breach should be looked at in it's own right, not as a reflection of or as part of the 2002 cheating.

so if the bulldogs ever cheated like they did, they won't have to pay the suspended fine, cause it's in the past.

say person A had murdered someone in the past and done time, three months later he kills again. r u telling me you can't look at his past and use it in the trial.

 

[Timmah]

#-o OK Mr Allen, read the article. Have we made a $1million+ breach again?

Gawd you're really looking for an excuse mate. Let me rephrase your little person A spiel:

say person A had murdered someone in the past and done time, three months later he punches his friend in the arm. Are you telling me he should be locked up for life now? :roll: Great work Sherlock. Maybe you'\ll get a job at the Supreme Court one day :lol:

 

[JK]

Have the Bulldogs sought to systematically breach the cap this time?

Instead of $1million over two years isn't this situation about $50k to a player from a sponsor?

50,000 :arrow: 1,000,000
one error :arrow: systematic rorting

See the difference? See how the 500k suspended fine does not apply?
#-o

 

[El Diablo]

What a terrible analogy

 

[douglasallen91]

#-o OK Mr Allen, read the article. Have we made a $1million+ breach again?

Gawd you're really looking for an excuse mate. Let me rephrase your little person A spiel:

say person A had murdered someone in the past and done time, three months later he punches his friend in the arm. Are you telling me he should be locked up for life now? :roll: Great work Sherlock. Maybe you'\ll get a job at the Supreme Court one day :lol:

dipstick when did i say they had did a offence that big, u still look in the past, to come up with the punishment for a proven allegation.

 

[El Diablo]

A thing I'm wondering is that if the Bulldogs didn't know about this payment are there other players on their books that could be getting money they know nothing of?

 

[JK]

Same is true for every club.

 

[El Diablo]

How so?

Haven't read of any ther clubs not knowing who pays what to their players.

 

[^ Pando]

If we win the comp this year, it will be because SBW did an ad........:|

 

[JK]

Haven't read of any ther clubs not knowing who pays what to their players.

Well then that is gospel then! :roll:

So you think all player managers tell the Clubs everything that is going on all the time?

If you do I have this bridge I want to sell - just over 50 years old but still a stunner :lol:

 

[El Diablo]

It's the players duty to tell them too, not just the managers.

One would think the guys doing the books at the Dogs would ask players if there were any additional monies they're earning that the club doesn't know about. Especially after 2002 and with that 500k suspended fine.

 

[^ Pando]

They should have paid him in Kiwi dollars. #-o That would keep us under cap.

 

[MysteryGirl]

JK:
Sorry about the visual on the other thread....but you know it's happening here too! ;-)


OK - so here is my question...remember - I'm just a stupid seppo...

If SBW hasn't signed yet and it is the off season - who is ultimately responsible for this possible $50K that he made? If he is not resigned by the Dogs - do they still carry that money in their salary cap? If he goes to another team - do they have to carry it?

Why is this such a huge deal on this forum compared to the rest of the internet. I went to look up this story on line and only found one version of it and then all the amazing commentary here.

 

[Cammo]

The story has not been picked up by other media organisations cause it is a nothing story. One journalist had nothing to write so he beat up a 2 week old story that The Dogs and The NRL are already sorting out. It is not a deliberate attempt to circumvent the cap like 2002, but a small problem with a sponsorship payment that has been seen many times before.



Hey Kelly Patrol, how did the call to David go? Did he hang up on you? :lol: