Eels Salary Cap MK IV

[IFR33K]

We should really try and iffload foran now

I caan also now see where the semi to leave rumours make sense as well.

However, I'd rather offload Jennings and put semi at centre.

If watmough retired, and the NRL are still including his tpa's into our cap, what good will releasing Foran do?

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Umm....if we have been a party to TPAs agreed for 2017 and 2018 that the NRL have deemed are not at arms length, how do you think they should be treated?

Wouldn't previous cheats have had players signed for future years with dodgy tpas? But we never heard about them counting under future years cap.

 

[IFR33K]

Umm....if we have been a party to TPAs agreed for 2017 and 2018 that the NRL have deemed are not at arms length, how do you think they should be treated?

By all accounts, all our tpa's are in our cap from this year onwards. Even the legitimate ones. I'm not sure what the answer is, but don't think including all our tpa's into the cap is. Especially the watmough ones. He's retired and his salary gets exempt from the cap, yet his tpa's are included??? Fans aren't asking for much, just a little consistency. Our penalties are far worse than what the other two teams face.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

What's your point ? If we have been caught fiddling the books then our season should be over for 2016. That's what happened for Dogs, Storm etc.

What Toddy failed to explain at the presser, was that the punishment was not actually 12 points, get cap compliant for the rest of 2016 and $1m fine. It runs deeper than that and you cannot expect fans to be happy when the goal posts are seemingly shifted every week. Now we find out that in 2017 & 2018 we are not going to be able to compete under the same cap as our competitors. IF that is the case and we are not afforded the opportunity to replace the TPAs then fans will think that we have been hit with new sanctions. I totally get why they are pissed.

What fans want is to be dealt with the same way as the Dogs & Storm. Don't deliver a punishment which ends our 2016 season with a comforting "I'm thinking of the fans" speech when really you are setting us up to fail in 2016/17/18.

My point is that if our (alleged) fiddling of the books affected TPA or other payments agreed for future years then it is perfectly reasonable for those payments to be assessed under the cap. (NOTE: we have heard nothing specific from the NRL yet on the treatment of TPAs going forward....and the NRL are yet to respond to our response). I don't expect people to be happy...I'm not happy. I just get sick of the constant attempts to deflect responsibility. If we keep doing this we'll just elect another bunch of f**kwits, and then another bunch of f**kwits.

The offender doesn't get to choose their punishment.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

By all accounts, all our tpa's are in our cap from this year onwards. Even the legitimate ones. I'm not sure what the answer is, but don't think including all our tpa's into the cap is. Especially the watmough ones. He's retired and his salary gets exempt from the cap, yet his tpa's are included??? Fans aren't asking for much, just a little consistency. Our penalties are far worse than what the other two teams face. By far!!!

Have you considered the possibility that the NRL think that, by virtue of the system we were apparently operating, none of our existing TPAs were at arms length?

With regard to Watmough, his salary going forward is exempt from the cap partly because it was covered by insurance. The TPAs were not covered by the insurance, and if the NRL determines that those TPAs were really an inducement to play for us, then I can see why they have treated them differently (if they actually have.....we haven't got a final ruling yet).

 

[hybrideel]

So we are guilty and have to prove innocence then baz?

 

[Kornstar]

Have you considered the possibility that the NRL think that, by virtue of the system we were apparently operating, none of our existing TPAs were at arms length?

With regard to Watmough, his salary going forward is exempt from the cap partly because it was covered by insurance. The TPAs were not covered by the insurance, and if the NRL determines that those TPAs were really an inducement to play for us, then I can see why they have treated them differently (if they actually have.....we haven't got a final ruling yet).

I find it hard to believe that every single tpa that we organised and sent to the nrl were wrong?

How did not one thing ever twig with them?

Absolutely we were managed by morons and it is 100% our fault but the nrl don't like that switched on in all of this either to be honest.

Oh and they're still leaking shit to the media too.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

So we are guilty and have to prove innocence then baz?

Hang on....I'm responding to people who already magically know what the NRL are going to do. You'll note that several times I've included qualifiers such as 'apparently', 'allegedly'.

But I'm not sure what you mean? Where have I said that anything about the presumption of guilt?

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

I find it hard to believe that every single tpa that we organised and sent to the nrl were wrong?

How did not one thing ever twig with them?

Absolutely we were managed by morons and it is 100% our fault but the nrl don't like that switched on in all of this either to be honest.

Oh and they're still leaking shit to the media too.

What I'm saying is that the discovery of the (apparent) system underpinning one or two TPAs may have led the further investigate (or just provide further information regarding) the circumstances surrounding other TPAs. So, for instance, if we had 3 or 4 TPAs provided by party X, and then by investigating one of those TPAs, the NRL discover that party X is not independent of the club, then I can see pretty easily how the other TPAs arranged with that party get treated similarly. Remember, the TP provider is not supposed to be associated with the club, even if the TPA is notionally negotiated independently.

And, someone is leaking to the media....it could someone from the NRL (most likely but not certain), someone at our club, or both.



Again.....the NRL only got our response to the prelim. findings on Friday. So nobody can know the specifics of their final judgement.


And......let's assume that all existing TPAs for 2017, 2018 are going to be counted under the cap, and that we can't change that. What we can do is extend those players, guarantee the TPAs (as they are included in the cap) and offer a lower direct salary in the early years, increasing in the later years. The total cap rated expenditure will still be at a level consistent with their assessed value (as previously the NRL accepted the stated valuation implied in their normal contract).

Foran's case is different, as he has the option to leave after next year.

 

[Swiftstylez]

Foran won't be back.

I hope he sorts out all the troubles and issues he faces into the future as an individual.

The jersey is cursed at the Eels without a shadow of a doubt.

Sad times to be a fan of this club, sad times to be a fan of the NRL.

 

[Jake the snake]

By all accounts, all our tpa's are in our cap from this year onwards. Even the legitimate ones. I'm not sure what the answer is, but don't think including all our tpa's into the cap is. Especially the watmough ones. He's retired and his salary gets exempt from the cap, yet his tpa's are included??? Fans aren't asking for much, just a little consistency. Our penalties are far worse than what the other two teams face.

Unfortunately it's the fans that always cop it.

You want consistency that's fine. But look at it from the NRL's view point.....Can you believe that the current board or the 5 merkins (as they are called) are still hanging around? How does this help our situation? You are asking for fair go from the NRL but the idiots in charge took them to court. They didn't resign, try and negotiate or anything it was straight out legal. Had our 5 donkeys been honest from the outset and came clean when they ample opportunities we would not be in this mess. The penalty was for ongoing dishonesty by the 5 donkeys.

 

[IFR33K]

Unfortunately it's the fans that always cop it.

You want consistency that's fine. But look at it from the NRL's view point.....Can you believe that the current board or the 5 merkins (as they are called) are still hanging around? How does this help our situation? You are asking for fair go from the NRL but the idiots in charge took them to court. They didn't resign, try and negotiate or anything it was straight out legal. Had our 5 donkeys been honest from the outset and came clean when they ample opportunities we would not be in this mess. The penalty was for ongoing dishonesty by the 5 donkeys.

Jake, that's my point!!! All I'm asking for is consistancy.

Warriors self reported and copped a 4 point penalty. Broncos and Andrew gee play dumb, and get off Scott free. We are almost set to be rubbed out of semi final contention over the next 2.5 years. This is uncharted waters for an club in the NRL.

The penalties were handed down to the eels long before the GO5 decided to pursue the matter in the courts. The NRL has never shown us any favours over the past few years, and only asking the question, why?

 

[hybrideel]

Hang on....I'm responding to people who already magically know what the NRL are going to do. You'll note that several times I've included qualifiers such as 'apparently', 'allegedly'.

But I'm not sure what you mean? Where have I said that anything about the presumption of guilt?

Sorry Baz, wasn't having a go at you.Was asking what you thought of that but didn't clarify it too well. All reports pretty much state that we are having all TPAs included in the cap. So they have assumed guilt on all parts. It seems we have to explicitly prove that they aren't dodgy which is still then up to the NRLs discretion as to whether they accept it

 

[Glenn]

Wouldn't previous cheats have had players signed for future years with dodgy tpas? But we never heard about them counting under future years cap.

Since when has the NRL been consistent.
I struggle to see how legally the NRL can say all TPAs are not at arms length, if the club can prove otherwise.

 

[T-Boon]

If any player agents are found to be involved as they were in Melbourne they need to be given life time bans. Nothing stinks more than the slap on the rise player agents and O'Sullivan got out of the Melbourne scandal. Those 'penalties' leave me convinced that the agents involved had something on someone as is almost certainly the case here.
Why has Seward not been mentioned when he appears to have been heavily involved? What is the nature of his relationship with Greenberg? Did he get Greenberg's advice on how to do TPA's while G'Berg was at the Bulldogs. What was Greenberg up to at the Bulldogs? Do the Telegraph have material on and therefore own Greenberg?
I am hoping Ando will open up about everything (in particular player agents) and sink the ship.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Sorry Baz, wasn't having a go at you.Was asking what you thought of that but didn't clarify it too well. All reports pretty much state that we are having all TPAs included in the cap. So they have assumed guilt on all parts. It seems we have to explicitly prove that they aren't dodgy which is still then up to the NRLs discretion as to whether they accept it

No offence was taken mate, was just taking a figurative step backwards to where the discussion started.

As above, my point is that, if the NRL are lumping all TPAs into the cap, it doesn't necessarily mean that that is part of some 'penalty'. It may mean that the NRL have observed the system that was used to generate those TPAs, and the identity of the TP providers, and think that all of them fail to meet the requirements for cap exemption.

We'll find out in about a week or so I guess.

 

[hybrideel]

I suppose we don't know for sure and it may be an extra TPA but it appears Jennings Nike TPA might also be included which would be difficult to justify if he already had the one at the roosters.

 

[hybrideel]

I am a little worried that it is our accusers that get to make the final decision on our guilt especially since our innocence would lead to questions regarding their competence in their jobs.
So it looks like there are 2 options to them:
1. accept some our our arguments which may lead to a reduction in financial, TPA inclusion or points penalty. Will then possibly cause heads to roll in their organisation due to incompetence.
2. reject our claims, look like they have done a great job. Win all round for them while we are screwed for a couple of years

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

I suppose we don't know for sure and it may be an extra TPA but it appears Jennings Nike TPA might also be included which would be difficult to justify if he already had the one at the roosters.

Yeh, well, if it turns out that a contract signed before he came to the Eels is going to be included, I would agree.....that is wrong.....and clearly challengeable.

 

[strider]

Why do we thinkjennings nike tpa is included in our cap?

Im willing to bet our players might have some kegit tpas ... but perhaps it alsopanned out that our merkins just goton a good thing and decided thats the easiest path and gave up on bothering trying to organise legit ones cos the dodgy ones were easy to setup .... just guessing