Eels Salary Cap MK IV

[ash411]

ANSWER THE QUESTION: a) Dissolve the Board b) Vote in new Board.

What's the Hineyrulz strategy to achieve an independent factionless board ?

He doesn't have one. He's laser focused on getting rid of them, not about what happens next. That part isn't as important to him as getting rid of the current board.

I'm starting to think, f**k it, let each faction put one or two guys on the board. Let's think, there's currently 3 clearly defined factions right now, right?

hear me out...

Each faction gets 2 seats on the board each, with the chairman to be not aligned with any faction. (I just was reminded in a post made while I was writing this that the NRL wants 3 directors on the board, so we reduce the factions seats to 1 each i guess.)

That way, each faction gets to have their opinion heard, put their best case forward and the chairman can choose the best ideas based on what they feel is best for the club, or, a combination of those ideas.

The way you sell it to the factions is by saying that there is no way any of them will have control of the board again, but at least this way you have a seat at the table. That's a better option that being on the outside looking in. As long as your ideas a good and in the best interest of the club (not those on the board) then you have every chance of your input being taken on.

Then the factions can hopefully learn to work together, of course they are going to disagree on things, but that's actually a good thing too, they can have a debate and the best ideas get implemented, and it safeguards against making decisions based solely on self interest.

The trick to it is finding a strong truly independent Chairman. Someone who has the ability to see past the bullshit, and be able to make decisions based on what is the best direction for the club.

I think that is possible to do, and may actually work going forward...

 

[Gronk]

So your strategy to avoid more of the same is ...

It's up to the members to hopefully vote the right people in.

OMG we're back to the "anyone but the incumbents" scenario. :crazy:

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Baz my former work colleague who is now a barrister informed me. Interesting stuff to say the least.

I know the lady who is the NRL's inside counsel, but I don't think she'd answer me if I rang her up asked what she thought.


It's hard to imagine exactly what it is that would lead to a prediction of a specific reduction in penalty. But who knows?

Maybe additional recordings / transcripts that place a different context on what we've seen.

Maybe some further info about the alleged cash payments (and without that I'd doubt there'd be a reduction).

 

[Avenger]

Remember to get the reduction in fine (of 1/4 of a Mill) we have to appoint 3 "Independant" directors by August so why hold and EGM when the roles will be filled and our relationship with the NRL should be sweet considering we will have 3 NRL members on our board.

What about a reduction in points. Does the club really care about $250k? That's a drop in the ocean for the Eels.

 

[Avenger]

I know the lady who is the NRL's inside counsel, but I don't think she'd answer me if I rang her up asked what she thought.


It's hard to imagine exactly what it is that would lead to a prediction of a specific reduction in penalty. But who knows?

Maybe additional recordings / transcripts that place a different context on what we've seen.

Maybe some further info about the alleged cash payments (and without that I'd doubt there'd be a reduction).

Like I said. Lawyers talk it up all the time. Especially barristers charging $10,000 a day. Can't see a reduction happening.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

The points change would be something like the following in my humble non legal opinion.

1) We prove all of the clubs TPA's are legal and that adding them to the cap was not required. Each win is returned to us (12 points)

2) We prove some of the Clubs TPA's are legal, and that with certain players not playing or injured possibly retiring (Backdated to date of injury), or TPA's rectified we get each legal win (X points)

3) Part 1 with further technical breaches (not informing the NRL of a possible fraudulent TPA) and the 4 points from last season are deducted from this years twelve leaving 8 points.

But the 3 directors, that is something the NRL desperately want and considering it was contingent on the fine and not the points, I can't see that being argued in a reduction. They named 3 board members for a reason, Sharpe has all but raised the white flag as Chairman and Board Member in that last email to other club CEO's

 

[Joshuatheeel]

What if they show the majority of TPA's were not guaranteed?

I find it interesting the NRL have basically claimed we cheated by guaranteeing TPA, with the media now pushing that line.

Yet over the last few years all we heard from media were reports that players were pissed of with us as TPA's had not been paid. Now how would that be possible if the club is now accused of guaranteeing them?

Doesn't make sense.

 

[Gronk]

What if they show the majority of TPA's were not guaranteed?

I find it interesting the NRL have basically claimed we cheated by guaranteeing TPA, with the media now pushing that line.

Yet over the last few years all we heard from media were reports that players were pissed of with us as TPA's had not been paid. Now how would that be possible if the club is now accused of guaranteeing them?

Doesn't make sense.

Yep double standards all over the shop. On week you have the media saying "the Eels better sort out Semi's unpaid TPAs or he'll walk!" then the next week it's "Eels should burn in hell for guaranteeing TPAs!" :crazy:

 

[strider]

In my opinion, I reckon our defense is probably going to be 2 things ...
1) prove that the shenanigans were the actions of ex super CEO Seward;
2) prove that some of our TPAs are legit.

Everyone seems to see the transcripts as damming evidence, but the way i read them it seemed:
- all just talked about the need for TPAs (surely its not illegal to want to help your cap situation via TPAs)
- seward talked to greenburg to get some ideas on things to do
- seward did all sorts of shit ... clearly our board were negligent in not monitoring him
- seems clear the spreadsheets with TPA figures were sewards work ... there is one for 2014, 2015 but no 2016 perhaps cos seward was gone (ie there are figures projection 16/17/18 but not an actual 2016 spreadsheet)
- seward gets discovered to be doing all sorts of weird shit and gets the ass
- the transcripts then have the board talking about the dodgy shit seward put in place

 

[Joshuatheeel]

In my opinion, I reckon our defense is probably going to be 2 things ...
1) prove that the shenanigans were the actions of ex super CEO Seward;
2) prove that some of our TPAs are legit.

Everyone seems to see the transcripts as damming evidence, but the way i read them it seemed:
- all just talked about the need for TPAs (surely its not illegal to want to help your cap situation via TPAs)
- seward talked to greenburg to get some ideas on things to do
- seward did all sorts of shit ... clearly our board were negligent in not monitoring him
- seems clear the spreadsheets with TPA figures were sewards work ... there is one for 2014, 2015 but no 2016 perhaps cos seward was gone (ie there are figures projection 16/17/18 but not an actual 2016 spreadsheet)
- seward gets discovered to be doing all sorts of weird shit and gets the ass
- the transcripts then have the board talking about the dodgy shit seward put in place

I really can't see the issue with the spreadsheet. Surely the club needs to know what TPA's each player has, and best method is to record in a spreadsheet.

Gee how professional would the club look if they were asked to provide details of TPA for the club? And didn't have it?Additionally isn't this information required to be reported to the NRL? Another reason to have it recorded.

It isn't dancing evident as claimed.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Everyone seems to see the transcripts as damming evidence, but the way i read them it seemed:
- all just talked about the need for TPAs (surely its not illegal to want to help your cap situation via TPAs)
- seward talked to greenburg to get some ideas on things to do
- seward did all sorts of shit ... clearly our board were negligent in not monitoring him
- seems clear the spreadsheets with TPA figures were sewards work ... there is one for 2014, 2015 but no 2016 perhaps cos seward was gone (ie there are figures projection 16/17/18 but not an actual 2016 spreadsheet)
- seward gets discovered to be doing all sorts of weird shit and gets the ass
- the transcripts then have the board talking about the dodgy shit seward put in place

Indeed I didn't see them as overly damning.

Saw them as setting up the Premiership club and then dealing with Seward going Rogue.

 

[eel01s]

Interesting post Avenger. The one thing that doesn't make sense to most of us is why Sharp and co. are so adamant that they have done no wrong. Could there be another side to the story?

Will be interesting to see how much of the response to the breach notice gets leaked.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Their positions are untenable, it's ridiculous to expect to function for a year until the next elections with just 4 board members who are currently at war.

They can't agree on who should be the chairman let alone anything else.

If four can't agree how will seven agree? Unless they're part of the same faction of course...

 

[strider]

I really can't see the issue with the spreadsheet. Surely the club needs to know what TPA's each player has, and best method is to record in a spreadsheet.

Gee how professional would the club look if they were asked to provide details of TPA for the club? And didn't have it?Additionally isn't this information required to be reported to the NRL? Another reason to have it recorded.

It isn't dancing evident as claimed.

The only bad thing in the spreadsheets was the title ... "Undisclosed" .... was that the NRLs title or our title?

 

[ek999]

I really can't see the issue with the spreadsheet. Surely the club needs to know what TPA's each player has, and best method is to record in a spreadsheet.

Gee how professional would the club look if they were asked to provide details of TPA for the club? And didn't have it?Additionally isn't this information required to be reported to the NRL? Another reason to have it recorded.

It isn't dancing evident as claimed.

Except all TPAs need to be registered with the NRL for them to be excluded from the cap. If the NRL discover a list of TPAs which have never been registered with them there is a very big issue

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Interesting post Avenger. The one thing that doesn't make sense to most of us is why Sharp and co. are so adamant that they have done no wrong. Could there be another side to the story?

Will be interesting to see how much of the response to the breach notice gets leaked.

The thing that has been upsetting me during the entire run up to the breach notice being issued is the reports that no one currently serving at the Eels were interviewed. They weren't given a chance to respond or give their side of the story.

This is where the words "Natural Justice" have come to bare. Has the NRL before handing down its breach notice acted fairly and without bias, obviously if you haven't asked for the clubs side of the story before telling them their punishment and executing it (suspending directors) then you haven't afforded the club Natural Justice.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

Except all TPAs need to be registered with the NRL for them to be excluded from the cap. If the NRL discover a list of TPAs which have never been registered with them there is a very big issue

Yeah I agree but the media report didn't provide that information.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

The only bad thing in the spreadsheets was the title ... "Undisclosed" .... was that the NRLs title or our title?

Surely which weren't that stupid ?

 

[ash411]

The thing that has been upsetting me during the entire run up to the breach notice being issued is the reports that no one currently serving at the Eels were interviewed. They weren't given a chance to respond or give their side of the story.

This is where the words "Natural Justice" have come to bare. Has the NRL before handing down its breach notice acted fairly and without bias, obviously if you haven't asked for the clubs side of the story before telling them their punishment and executing it (suspending directors) then you haven't afforded the club Natural Justice.

The thing that's weird is that both sides are telling the contradicting story.

The NRL are saying they asked them to come in, and they didn't respond.

And the board are saying they weren't approached but were eager to co-operate.

Obviously one is lying, but the question is, which?

It's easy to just instantly say that the NRL are lying, cause it is in our best interest for that to be the case. The problem is, we don't know, and unless one of them fesses up, we'll never really know, and neither is likely to at this point.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

If four can't agree how will seven agree? Unless they're part of the same faction of course...

At least seven is an odd number.