Eels Salary Cap MK III

[Chipmunk]

Thinking about people's doubt about the claims we have intentionally/systematically not represented TPA aspects of our player contracts fairly etc, and wanting to see more proof before they believe it...

In my youth I received a traffic infringement notice in the post for running a red light. I remembered the intersection on the notice, and felt sure the camera flash that day was for the car that followed me through the lights, and that I had made it through on amber.

So I took up the offer on the back of the notice to pay $10 to receive photographic proof of my infringement, before I would decide to pay or challenge. A week later, I received a large glossy photo of my car triggering the camera as the red light appeared... silly me, should have realised that the notice was based on the photo and of course the extra detail wouldn't have changed my assessed breach.

The NRL have got us, arranging/guaranteeing TPAs instead of staying arms length, and inflating invoices etc. YEs, the cap and TPA system needs changing, yes other clubs probably do must of what we have been caught for as well. But the NRL wouldn't have come out with a flimsy accusation and harsh penalties for nothing - they would have been very careful they had the evidence required.

And the red light camera photo? I got my $10 worth by displaying it on the photo posters at my 21st .

I'm not doubting that the club has been involved in some fairly questionable behavior, I just want to know exactly what they've done for the NRL to determine that every TPA is to be included in the salary cap.

 

[phantom eel]

How much actual dodgy behavior went on is not known at this stage.

Hopefully all the evidence will be released to the public in good time.

Does the public want to wade thorugh all the evidence - 750,000 documents? :lol:

I expect the 60 page breach notice (or a version thereof) will be released after the club has had its change to respond, and the response has been weighed up by (presumably) the commission as to whether the breach and penalties stand.

 

[Chipmunk]

Yeah, I realised that after I typed it... but the point stands, we still shouldn't have been greedy enough to go after him for this season, given the alleged knowledge of our system of additional payments, inflated invoices, and non-arms length TPAs .

But did the incompetent fools actually know what they were doing?

 

[phantom eel]

I'm not doubting that the club has been involved in some fairly questionable behavior, I just want to know exactly what they've done for the NRL to determine that every TPA is to be included in the salary cap.

Sure. I would say that the evidence they have found must indicate that we have "facilitated" and or somehow "guaranteed" all of our TPAs, beyond the accepted arms length provisions.

By the sound of the Seward-Mossop extracts from earlier in the process, all it took was for a player manager to start jumping up and down, and it seems like Scotty (allegedly) sorted things out very efficiently and to the clients satisfaction?

 

[Chipmunk]

Late in the agm, a fan asked sharp if he'd stand down if it meant we could save our season. His answer was "yes".... Smmfingh

From what I've heard of his comment, I think you've actualy twisted his words. I believe he was asked if the NRL would not take away any points if it was a requirement that he stand down would he do so and he said yes. I don't see any NRL offer of not taking away any points.

PS - I think he should stand down...I'm just clarifying what he said.

 

[Chipmunk]

Does the public want to wade thorugh all the evidence - 750,000 documents? :lol:

I expect the 60 page breach notice (or a version thereof) will be released after the club has had its change to respond, and the response has been weighed up by (presumably) the commission as to whether the breach and penalties stand.

Yeah look I dont expect the allegations contained in the breach notice to be made public prior to the club making it's response, but once the matter reaches its conclusion I would expect full disclosure of the offences committed.

 

[phantom eel]

If we are deemed unable to earn any more points this season without the 5 standing down, then that is effectively "taking all of our points" and Sharp's pledge to stand down if it would avoid that could well need to come into play?

 

[emjaycee]

I haven't posted too much over the last 48 hours as I have needed to come to terms with the state we as fans and the club we love find ourselves in following the issue of the preliminary breach notice by the NRL.

Once I started dealing with the realisation that the best squad we have been able to field in the last 15 years and the best start we have had to a season since 1986 had been tossed out by the alleged misbehaviour of our elected Board and two key executives, I turned my attention and thoughts to how this had happened.

The ParraFirst ticket under Steve Sharp was returned by PLC members for a second term with 3 new faces, 3 new directors who on paper (and the internet) looked like they were going to bring something to the Board that we hadn't had for a long time, if ever.

1. Political experience at the state and local levels;
2. Access to the 'bigger' end of town, at least in some small capacity;
3. Improved governance and control based on best-practice audit procedures and processes;

Surely a long term local Councillor (Garrard), a former local State MP (Gadiel) and a respected partner in an Auditing firm (Cordwell) would be good additions to our existing Board which included 2 former footballers, the CEO of a marketing and events company and a Commercial Manager of a government body.

But for some reason this didn't happen.

The orginal ParraFirst team had been elected in 2013 on a slogan of "Club First, Team Second, Individual Third", which was interpreted as meaning the interests of the PLC comes first, the interest of the Eels NRL team comes second and the interest of the individual director comes third. A great slogan and one the electorate obviously wanted to hear after a few years of alleged mis-management. This seemed to be the case as they improved the Leagues Club financially and physically, they hired a true Parramatta man as coach commencing 2014 and looked to be improving the playing roster of the Parramatta Eels. They also appeared to be fixing problems with the salary cap that were allegedly a legacy from previous administrations.

When the new team was re-elected in 2015 they promised to continue this previous effort and to improve the governance and controls of the club, particularly the NRL side of the group, so the issues of the past would not return. And how could this not be so - a former State MP with a Bachelor of Law and experience in running a successful NFP, a local councillor of long standing with contacts in both local government and local business and finally a practising Auditor who would surely be able to implement the governance required.


Which brings me to the question I posed in my opening. How has this happened?

Maybe we need to get the Auditor on the Board to explain what he has done since being elected and why he let this happen?

 

[Avenger]

This happened because the current board is alleged to be inexperienced, incompetent, corrupt and without integrity.

 

[phantom eel]

If the NRL breach penalty is an indication, if happened because a group of 3 directors (not the new ones elected in 2015 that your post is focused on) and several staff (2 current, plus at least presumably Seward) acted under delegated authority - or with delegated oversight by each other - to conduct and sign off on these contracting affairs.

If you are asking what role the other remaining directors could or should have had, I think it's impossible that every single contract and TPA come before every one of the 7 directors for oversight and signoff. And in all likelihood a newly elected director would hve some (albeit misplaced) trust in the chairperson and two fellow directors alongside the then CEO, footy manager and whatver position Bolous had been in.

The NRL certainly seem to think that the issue was restricted to three ofBoard members - a contracting sub-committee if you like? In terms of governance it sounded like it should hve been a fair arrangement, and passed muster when the NRL was auditing us late last year prior to the TPA revelations and media coverage/leaks...

 

[emjaycee]

If the NRL breach penalty is an indication, if happened because a group of 3 directors (not the new ones elected in 2015 that your post is focused on) and several staff (2 current, plus at least presumably Seward) acted under delegated authority - or with delegated oversight by each other - to conduct and sign off on these contracting affairs.

If you are asking what role the other remaining directors could or should have had, I think it's impossible that every single contract and TPA come before every one of the 7 directors for oversight and signoff. And in all likelihood a newly elected director would hve some (albeit misplaced) trust in the chairperson and two fellow directors alongside the then CEO, footy manager and whatver position Bolous had been in.

The NRL certainly seem to think that the issue was restricted to three ofBoard members - a contracting sub-committee if you like? In terms of governance it sounded like it should hve been a fair arrangement, and passed muster when the NRL was auditing us late last year prior to the TPA revelations and media coverage/leaks...

Except the Chair of the Retention and Recruitment Committee has been the Auditor so he missed some stuff and the Chair of Risk and Audit Commitee has been the former State MP so she missed some stuff too.

 

[Chipmunk]

If we are deemed unable to earn any more points this season without the 5 standing down, then that is effectively "taking all of our points" and Sharp's pledge to stand down if it would avoid that could well need to come into play?

I think they'll all stand down once we're under the cap next week. If the NRL refuses to take Watmough off the books then I think there is next to no chance of us getting under the cap and I think it's fair to say it'll be on like Donkey Kong.

I expect the NRL to come to the party on Watmough though.

 

[emjaycee]

Maybe we should all send a respectful email to the 3 Board members directly and ask them to step down?
firstname.surname@parraeels.com.au for those who want to send an email.

 

[phantom eel]

Ah, fair point if those directors chaired/were part of those committees. (Presuming those titles applied to NRL/footy side of things, not just leagues club recruitment and leagues club risk etc.)

 

[phantom eel]

So if the NRL has identified that three Directors were involved in the alleged cap breaches, and they have gained leave to help the club in their response to the breach notice... then after that response is prepared in five days time, why don't the remaining four directors (Gerard, Garrard, Gadiel and Cordwell) then vote that the club not support any further court action by the three named directors?

The NRL has apparenty said that the court action will prevent us playing for points by Friday week, even if we get under the salary cap by then. The court action doesn't appear to be about regaining a points penalty, and it doesn't appear to be about challenging the NRL's salary cap system... it just seems to be about allowing the 5 to keep their current roles.

If the court action is what stops the team earning 2 points against Souths, then the majority/remaining directors need to get together on the same page and steer the ship a little... Maybe the other three directors can cease their action in the interest of the team, or pursue it later at their own costs?

 

[emjaycee]

You would think that Cordwell, Gerard, Garrard and Gadiel would between them have enough experience and in the case of 2 of them enough political nous to see that was the best way forward for both the club and any aspirations they have to remain on the Board(s).

 

[Parra]

It happened because the rules are policed differently for different clubs at different times.

We are as weak as piss rolling over for Greenberg like this.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

PARRAMATTA Lord Mayor Paul Garrard has slammed the NRL over what he calls a “savage” directive lacking procedural fairness.

The NRL’s Integrity Unit handed down its preliminary findings on Tuesday morning in a report that accused the club of systematic salary cap rorting, dating back to at least 2013.

Mr Garrard, who is on Parramatta Rugby League Club’s board of directors, said he believes the allegations refer to the actions of previous board members.

“What is the system? I haven’t seen any system there,” Mr Garrard said.

He said the report “reads like a movie script” with reliance on what he called “subjective allegations”.

“Ironically it was people who disgraced the club in their time here who have given evidence [to the NRL].

“The people involved in this nonsense are clearly not with the club anymore, and they’ve got a lot to answer for.”

The people involved in this nonsense are clearly not with the club anymore, and they’ve got a lot to answer for. - Lord Mayor and Eels board member Paul Garrard

The NRL claims the club will need to wipe $570,000 from its budget to be compliant with the 2016 salary cap.
Mr Garrard said he believes the current Parramatta Eels squad is within the 2016 cap, speculating whether the figure was a cumulative total from previous seasons before his time on the board.
He likened the report to a jigsaw puzzle and said the club still does not know the specifics of the allegations against them.

On Tuesday night the Supreme Court of NSW issued an injunction against the NRL, which will permit the directors and officers of the club to carry out their duties until a hearing next week.
“The board was left exposed. We have 100 employees needing direction every day,” Mr Garrard said.

“This will give us time to get appropriate personnel in to run the club, get a team on the field, and analyse the documents provided to us.”

Mr Garrard said he believes all accusations of wrongdoing date back to actions of previous board members.

“I can’t comment on the board before my arrival but the present members are very conscious of the salary cap. We had a rogue CEO in Scott Seward and I think it took the board two months to remove him.”

Mr Garrard said Parramatta prides itself on being a community club, and an NRL recommendation to bring in three independent directors by August would impact that negatively.

“It’s no secret the NRL likes clubs controlled by individuals not members. The more say they have, the better.

“The way they’ve handled it is a kick in the guts to the fans, the players and the sponsors.

Mr Garrard said he does believe any wrongdoing should receive appropriate punishment.

http://www.parramattasun.com.au/story/3887819/nrl-report-like-a-jigsaw-puzzle-mayor-garrard/

 

[Parra]

Glad to see we are at least trying to fight back.

So far this whole thing has been a farce.

Greenberg needs to have some real details or should shut up.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

While I am sure some cheating went on, I don't think we should just accept the NRL report and move on. I am starting to think the cheating may not be as bad as reported.

I also think the 5 will stand down in a few days.

We really need to see the fully report to make a judgement