Eels Salary Cap Mk V

[84 Baby]

"When two tribes go to war, one is all that you can score"

Time to burn the NRL down

 

[Joshuatheeel]

I know that the media are just releasing excerpts of interviews or affidavits used in the evidence gathered by the NRL (however they are being published as BOOM news) but really after all these brown paper bag payments taking place over the years, 12 points is a pretty good result.

I agree with Sharp that we deserve a written verdict which must deal with our responses and why ultimately they were ineffective in having the punishment reduced.

The rogue employee stance has merit if it can shown that the board had knowledge of the shenanigans. Albiet hard to establish when the board are on record about arranging dodgy TPAs.

I'm in two minds about the appeal. Part of me wants to move on but also I see merit in trying to claw 2/4/6 points back as it would certainly mean the difference between playing finals or not.

It seems everything that has happened had Stewart's hands in it. And his mate who gave him a reference for the job at the eels made a decision on the matter.

Gee the dogs have the same issue many years ago with sales going missing.

The board may be stupid and idiots but for no determination made against Stewart and co just does seem right.

Did Stewart / Irvine / Nolan get permission from the board to act as they did ?

Appeal the matter, maybe not to get our points back but to maybe give us an even start cap wise for next year.

 

[phantom eel]

As for the NRL handing down a written penalty to us - didn't they already do so as part of the premilimary breach notice? The only change in penalty seems to be the clarification that points deduction includes a wipe of our for and against for those 9 games. They'll just have to advise us that provisional penalty has been upheld - which can be a sentence in an email as far as I can tell... it's the NRL's competition and we play by their rules in all this, including how they notify us of penalties.

And if Sharp is waiting for written advice including reasons the club's submission wasn't good enough to reduce the provisional penalty, before he decides whether he's going to appeal... sigh.

It's like my anaology early on in this saga, of sending away for the photo of my red light camera infringement, thinking that it would prove they'd made a mistake... and not realising that they'd based the infringement on the photo in the first place. $10 wasted, but at least I got a souvenir to display at my 21st... Bottom line we got caught out cheating, we're lucky to only lose 12 points - time for the club, the fans and Sharp etc to all move on imo.

 

[84 Baby]

Hey Kate, you were supposed to be investigating cheating at other clubs...

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/pa...t-underthetable-payments-20160711-gq3et2.html

If these statements are true

Irvine then withdrew the cash and handed it to Scott Seward who paid cash to whichever player "was hammering him the most"

"It was diabolical," Irvine told investigators about the "six grand" he gave to Peats early last year. He claimed Peats had said, "Mate, I am not playing footy no more" unless the club honoured his arrangements

I don't think it will be clubs she'll be investigating

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Of course you can trade out of poor practices. Illegally arranged TPAs are replaced by legitimate ones. Contracts that are topped up with carpark cash are upgraded to reflect a true consideration.

That's exactly was Issa was alluding to when he referred to serious sins. Nothing to do with debt etc.

That's not 'trading out' of anything.

In 2014, the GC copped the same treatment as we did in 2015 (for breaches by a former administration regarding payments to Scott Prince). They got a suspended 4 point fine, on the condition that they got their house in order, and ceased the dodgy payment practices. We implemented some governance reforms (after pushing it as far as we could, and did not fess up about the extent of payment problems. We are paying the -penalty for our own dishonesty.

FFS it is not the NRL's fault, no matter much you lot want to deflect blame.

 

[selkirk]

If it proven Nolan did pass on cash then his new employer needs to be fully investigated. Kate could bring down the Broncos as well. Wonder if the NRL will give us leniency then to keep the Broncos out of trouble.

 

[ash411]

That's not 'trading out' of anything.

In 2014, the GC copped the same treatment as we did in 2015 (for breaches by a former administration regarding payments to Scott Prince). They got a suspended 4 point fine, on the condition that they got their house in order, and ceased the dodgy payment practices. We implemented some governance reforms (after pushing it as far as we could, and did not fess up about the extent of payment problems. We are paying the -penalty for our own dishonesty.

FFS it is not the NRL's fault, no matter much you lot want to deflect blame.

If, and that's a big if, members of the board found about about the payments etc after the fact, their biggest sin was not going directly to the NRL for help.

The fact that they tried to "fix" it themselves is the main reason the NRL are being so belligerent with us now. It's also the reason that Seward and Irvine will probably not cop that harsh of a penalty.

I dare say we'll never really know the complete picture, there are so many sides to this story you could play dungeons and dragons with it.

 

[Gronk]

That's not 'trading out' of anything.

In 2014, the GC copped the same treatment as we did in 2015 (for breaches by a former administration regarding payments to Scott Prince). They got a suspended 4 point fine, on the condition that they got their house in order, and ceased the dodgy payment practices. We implemented some governance reforms (after pushing it as far as we could, and did not fess up about the extent of payment problems. We are paying the -penalty for our own dishonesty.

FFS it is not the NRL's fault, no matter much you lot want to deflect blame.

You have directed your argument to when the Titans lost 4 points. It seems that Issa was referring to both the Titans and Newcastle being able to "trade out" or to use another word "rectify" past sins without sanction. If that it true, then they were never made public. Why ? Maybe something to do with the NRL running both clubs now ?

Deflecting blame is not what is happening here. I don't believe in taking your pussy roll over position. If other clubs have received different treatment under similar circumstances then it needs to be outed and the NRL need to explain why. Transparency and equity is all that is asked for. If after all the facts are tabled and we are clearly without peer with our rorting and ineptitude then I am quite happy to accept the punishment.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

If these statements are true





I don't think it will be clubs she'll be investigating

Yeah. Shines a new light on 'Let's do it for Peatsy!'

 

[Kornstar]

Yeah. Shines a new light on 'Let's do it for Peatsy!'

Is there any requirement for TPA money to be paid through electronic funds transfer?

If I'm owed money and someone from the club is giving it to me and it is not stipulated that it must be into my bank account why can't I play stupid?

Normal pay I understand but TPAs?

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

You have directed your argument to when the Titans lost 4 points. It seems that Issa was referring to both the Titans and Newcastle being able to "trade out" or to use another word "rectify" past sins without sanction. If that it true, then they were never made public. Why ? Maybe something to do with the NRL running both clubs now ?

Deflecting blame is not what is happening here. I don't believe in taking your pussy roll over position. If other clubs have received different treatment under similar circumstances then it needs to be outed and the NRL need to explain why. Transparency and equity is all that is asked for. If after all the facts are tabled and we are clearly without peer with our rorting and ineptitude then I am quite happy to accept the punishment.

When did I say that we should 'roll over' (find a single post....just one, Gronk....I challenge you)? I've always been behind using every sensible appeal option (if we have some evidence), including going to Callinan. We should only be nailed for the stuff we've done. But I don't accept people like Issa laying the blame on the NRL, rather than on himself.....and then being congratulated for it. This is the attitude that has got us in this situation.

The GC were nailed for one historical payment to Scott Prince, with respect to prior years. AFAIK there were no future commitments, so there was nothing to 'trade out of'. Further, the NRL found no evidence of systematic salary cap cheating there.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...e/news-story/e97e1f75998ea00e60beae49164457c6

The Knights most recent breach (2013) also pertained to the interpretation of a single deal with a single player, and there was no suggestion of a systematic attempt to beat the cap:

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...-for-breaching-salary-cap-20130705-2pg9f.html

 

[84 Baby]

Is there any requirement for TPA money to be paid through electronic funds transfer?

If I'm owed money and someone from the club is giving it to me and it is not stipulated that it must be into my bank account why can't I play stupid?

Normal pay I understand but TPAs?

Club officials aren't (or at least shouldn't be) the only ones who have to abide by salary cap rules, or code of conduct. Can't just claim to be a dumb footballer unfortunately

 

[Kornstar]

Club officials aren't (or at least shouldn't be) the only ones who have to abide by salary cap rules, or code of conduct. Can't just claim to be a dumb footballer unfortunately

That's not my point. It's not about being dumb it's about whether it is normal practice to be handed cash for TPAs. If it's not then you can't play dumb but if it is you can be as dumb as you want as how are you to know where the money has come from?

The NRL needs to take some responsibility too if you can accept cash payments as you can never track it without these forensic audits, which would be ridiculously poor business practice for an organisation like the NRL.

 

[Gronk]

When did I say that we should 'roll over' (find a single post....just one, Gronk....I challenge you)? I've always been behind using every sensible appeal option (if we have some evidence), including going to Callinan. We should only be nailed for the stuff we've done. But I don't accept people like Issa laying the blame on the NRL, rather than on himself.....and then being congratulated for it. This is the attitude that has got us in this situation.

The GC were nailed for one historical payment to Scott Prince, with respect to prior years. AFAIK there were no future commitments, so there was nothing to 'trade out of'. Further, the NRL found no evidence of systematic salary cap cheating there.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...e/news-story/e97e1f75998ea00e60beae49164457c6

The Knights most recent breach (2013) also pertained to the interpretation of a single deal with a single player, and there was no suggestion of a systematic attempt to beat the cap:

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...-for-breaching-salary-cap-20130705-2pg9f.html

Baz just because you can't find a link about clubs being allowed to trade out of their sins, does not mean it did not happen.

You have for a long time taken a position of (paraphrasing) "when will people accept that we have done this or that" "this is our fault not the NRLs fault" etc etc. I CBF finding quotes but will when I have time if you insist.

I have never argued for anything other than a fair go. If that is your position as well, then we are on the same page.

 

[eel01s]

Interesting that the NRL couldn't pursue Gee once he quit the Broncos (as he was no longer employed by a club) and so let that matter go.

However Seward was not only an ex-employee (hence NRL couldn't compel him or Irvine to talk) he was also bound to stay silent under a confidentiality agreement.

I know our club waived the confidentiality agreement, but you have to wonder why we did so given the Gee situation. At the time I recall reading that the NRL were pressuring Parra to get access to Seward. Talk about double standards!

I know Seward's agreement was to end around June or July anyway, but you have to wonder why he and Irvine were so happy to incriminate themselves. So what if they got immunity? It's not like they will ever work in the NRL again.

 

[phantom eel]

Is there any requirement for TPA money to be paid through electronic funds transfer?

If I'm owed money and someone from the club is giving it to me and it is not stipulated that it must be into my bank account why can't I play stupid?

Normal pay I understand but TPAs?

I can imagine the way league is there could even be a few strip joints etc paying TPAs in services rendered...

Eberything has a financial value even services offered in kind - time the NRL cracked down across the game on allowable TPAs and how they are paid/reported.

Ultimately centralised salary payments is the only way to go. Instead of giving clubs grants to cover the salary cap, the NRL pays clubs directly. And for the course of their registration players agree that any additional income (secondary employment) be declared, invoiced and paid by the TPA/sponsor via the NRL accounts and onto the player.

NRL audits clubs and registered TPA sponsors to (try and) ensure there are no dodgy post-retirement inducements that are hidden in a player's final contract... thus last bit's a work un progress and the potential loophole.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Interesting that the NRL couldn't pursue Gee once he quit the Broncos (as he was no longer employed by a club) and so let that matter go.

However Seward was not only an ex-employee (hence NRL couldn't compel him or Irvine to talk) he was also bound to stay silent under a confidentiality agreement.

I know our club waived the confidentiality agreement, but you have to wonder why we did so given the Gee situation. At the time I recall reading that the NRL were pressuring Parra to get access to Seward. Talk about double standards!

I know Seward's agreement was to end around June or July anyway, but you have to wonder why he and Irvine were so happy to incriminate themselves. So what if they got immunity? It's not like they will ever work in the NRL again.

As you say below.......coz the confidentiality agreement was going to expire soon anyway. Wasn't really any point in simply delaying the investigation.

Gee didn't want to talk to the NRL, and neither did that other bloke who stood up in court and testified about dodgy payments involving the Broncs.

 

[phantom eel]

With talk of comparisons with GC and Newie previous situations... I'm sure the NRL would happily let us "trade out" of any 2017 cap trouble - in return for taking over the running of our club as well!

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Baz just because you can't find a link about clubs being allowed to trade out of their sins, does not mean it did not happen.

You have for a long time taken a position of (paraphrasing) "when will people accept that we have done this or that" "this is our fault not the NRLs fault" etc etc. I CBF finding quotes but will when I have time if you insist.

I have never argued for anything other than a fair go. If that is your position as well, then we are on the same page.

Yep. Those are fair representations of things I've said, and they focus squarely on fans' attitudes to the whole mess. They don't have anything to do with whether the club should pursue avenues of appeal for issues where we think we've been dudded for stuff we didn't do. I'm sure that we do agree on the idea of a fair go. It's the attribution of responsibility for what has happened in the past where we appear to differ. The more we try to blame outsiders / Seward etc, the less likely we are to fix the core problems at the club (which involve both governance and the individuals charged with implementing it). The NRL / Seward (in particular) may well have contributed to the mess.....but the club and its past and present directors are responsible for the mess.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

As you say below.......coz the confidentiality agreement was going to expire soon anyway. Wasn't really any point in simply delaying the investigation.

Gee didn't want to talk to the NRL, and neither did that other bloke who stood up in court and testified about dodgy payments involving the Broncs.

Yeah but why did they choose to talk? In Seward's case was it because his mentor, who also happens to be the prosecutor and the judge, told him to? And if so, is that fair?