Magnay Fails: Parramatta officially cleared of salary cap breach

[Dogs Of War]

Probably a good year for the Eels to admit any guilt, and tell them to take there points!

Though the Roosters would be spewing because they haven't had a wooden spoon for so many years and would get robbed of the opportunity.

 

[Eelementary]

Strip their premierships.. oh hang on they didn't win any

As opposed to the Roosters, whose only title this decade has come from the REAL Premiers, the Dogs, being caught cheating the cap and thus being taken out of Finals contention...:roll:

 

[Iafeta]

As opposed to the Roosters, whose only title this decade has come from the REAL Premiers, the Dogs, being caught cheating the cap and thus being taken out of Finals contention...:roll:

Dogs shouldn't feature in any discussions of 2002. They cheated very blatantly. The Roosters and Warriors weren't far off them and deserve to be recognised as Grand Finalists without any inference whatsoever of the Bulldogs issue impact. I completely and utterly lose all respect for people when they moan about the Dogs not being there, everyone knows the rules, they got caught out. The Warriors had beaten them a few weeks earlier at Auckland before they got caught.

 

[Parra]

Depends how big it is, I dont see why docking points is out of the equation

Take 'em all this year.

 

[El Diablo]

Depends how big it is, I dont see why docking points is out of the equation

i'd just suspend Ryles

 

[Eelementary]

Dogs shouldn't feature in any discussions of 2002. They cheated very blatantly. The Roosters and Warriors weren't far off them and deserve to be recognised as Grand Finalists without any inference whatsoever of the Bulldogs issue impact. I completely and utterly lose all respect for people when they moan about the Dogs not being there, everyone knows the rules, they got caught out. The Warriors had beaten them a few weeks earlier at Auckland before they got caught.

I'm not denying that. But had they not gotten caught they would have won the title imo.

 

[ibeme]

Am I missing something? They're buying off the plan and selling for a profit. I don't see where this can be classed as salary cap rorting. They're not being given additional money. Unless they're purchasing the properties at artificially low prices to begin with, it's nothing more than good investment advice.

 

[Loudstrat]

There would be some fine print. I remember the infamous "salary cap rorting to come second last" back in 1992 that Fitzy presided over. There was also the time when a players missus (think it was Dallas Weston) was employed at the club - and they got done for the salary cap rort because of that.

I'm worried that 30 years of Fitzy has left a "bad apple" syndrome - and it will take a lot more han removing him to clean the club out.

I'm also wondering if Brian Smith will be implicated - since he did the hiring and firing at the time - depends on who did the negotiations.

Still, as ibeme said -it all seems legal, but may still be a salary cap breach. We will see.....

 

[Green Machine]

The Herald has been digging around for a month or two on this. They put story out a while back on a connection between Roy Spagnolo and Joe Tripodi. I think someone mentioned that the uncovering of the Canterbury’s Salary Cap scandal was by accident. Kate McClymont was investigating the connection between a disgruntled developer (who got removed from Oasis) and Liverpool Council, when she found money from Oasis going into footballers accounts. She took it to the SMH sport department and asked does this mean anything?
It will be interesting if anything comes out. There was a mention of the two ex Storm players being offered property deals to sign with Manly a few years ago. I would not be surprised if it is widespread across all football codes, that sponsors help out players who sign for their clubs with property deals

 

[mightybears]

Did Zappia screw Magnay's mother or something?

No, just Cronulla and now apparently Parra.

 

[mightybears]

Of course not, he is a league man.

No league player or administrator could possible be dodgey, it must be a media driven plot to besmirch the good name of league. I see it all now, it is all a plot by news limited to ruin our game to force the price of the next tv deal down. If we look closely enough I bet the AFL is behind all this in some shape or form. Hell, Magnay has had it in for Zappia since day one, this is more agenda driven bullsh*t that quite frankly I and many other league fans are getting sick of.

Come on El, Brutus and anyone else who wants a crack at it, I am counting on you all to put all the pieces together and somehow deflect the blame away from league and shift it elsewhere. :lol:

Exactly, maybe its not the media running an AFL agenda to destroy our game!, maybe we have bad apples that need to be removed, on and off the field.

 

[Frailty]

Am I missing something? They're buying off the plan and selling for a profit. I don't see where this can be classed as salary cap rorting. They're not being given additional money. Unless they're purchasing the properties at artificially low prices to begin with, it's nothing more than good investment advice.

From what I am getting from the article is that the players are given as part of a contract units, etc. on a very low price, and before the units are opening they are selling them back for a much inflated price - up to $100,000 I believe they report...

Essentially they are being paid an extra $100,000 from what is being declared.

 

[Green Machine]

There would be some fine print. I remember the infamous "salary cap rorting to come second last" back in 1992 that Fitzy presided over. There was also the time when a players missus (think it was Dallas Weston) was employed at the club - and they got done for the salary cap rort because of that.

I'm worried that 30 years of Fitzy has left a "bad apple" syndrome - and it will take a lot more han removing him to clean the club out.

I'm also wondering if Brian Smith will be implicated - since he did the hiring and firing at the time - depends on who did the negotiations.

Still, as ibeme said -it all seems legal, but may still be a salary cap breach. We will see.....

I think you can feel safe that the SMH will not tip Fitzgerald or Brian Smith in it. If you look at it from an agenda point, the SMH would be looking to it as points scoring opportunity to get back at the Telegraph who backed the Roy Spagnolo ticket to oust Fitzgerald

 

[IanG]

Yeah I heard Kate McClymont on the radio this afternoon. The scary thing is there's less than 6 degrees of separation between those involved that the one of those in the money launderer for the Griffith dope growers.

 

[roboshark]

This magnay bloke is supposed to be a league supporter. All she is doing is bringing more and more attention onto the game for the wrong reasons
She is absolutely gutter trash

 

[myanonymoususername]

From what I am getting from the article is that the players are given as part of a contract units, etc. on a very low price, and before the units are opening they are selling them back for a much inflated price - up to $100,000 I believe they report...

Essentially they are being paid an extra $100,000 from what is being declared.

It probably works something like this. Developer (who is an indirect associate of the club) says to player, "I've got this fantastic deal, join us and you've just got to be part of it.", sells player share in development. Sweetens the deal by his company lending player the stake for the investment. Sweetens it further by providing player with (most likely unwritten) guarantee to sell his share to a 3rd party or buy it back himself, for at least the amount of the player's investment, or even a guaranteed repurchase price including profit. Developer sells property or at least player's share, extinguishes company's loan that covers player's investment, with profit over and above that paid to player.

Simple, no risk proposition for the player. No cash needs to be outlaid, no risk carried by them on the investment. It is all just book entries in the developer's company books except the profit paid to the player in the end.

 

[Alex28]

When buying off the plan you usually only need to put a small deposit down and then pay the formal 10% deposit close to (or on completion) of the unit and then the formal 30 day (or shorter depending on negotiation) sale contract comes in to play. Quite often people buy off the plan in the view of selling prior to completion to take advantage of an increasing property market.

This may have been what the players have been able to do - property markets were certainly increasing during the period, but $100K increases between the start of the development and the end? It is certainly doubtful. You would think that Spagnolo has sold the player the unit at a pretty low price (under the going rate for other units) knowing the players were going to make a profit. If the developer had nothing to do with the club financially there probably isn't anything the NRL could do.

I find it hard to think that Spagnolo had nothing financial to do with the club during this time though...

 

[El Diablo]

I find it hard to think that Spagnolo had nothing financial to do with the club during this time though...

seems he has been a sponsor http://www.parra3p.com/roy.spagnolo.asp?Pid=3

In 1986, Roy resigned from Mitre 10 and commenced a Public Accounting Practice which is still in operation under the Business name "Roy Spagnolo and Associates". In addition to his accounting practice, in 1996 Roy also started his own property development company, Brenex, which has since grown to become his main focus over the past 10 years. Brenex has sponsored the Parramatta Eels for the past six years. In addition to this, during Roy's association with the Eels, he has also introduced several new sponsors to the Club.

 

[Whats Doing]

It probably works something like this. Developer (who is an indirect associate of the club) says to player, "I've got this fantastic deal, join us and you've just got to be part of it.", sells player share in development. Sweetens the deal by his company lending player the stake for the investment. Sweetens it further by providing player with (most likely unwritten) guarantee to sell his share to a 3rd party or buy it back himself, for at least the amount of the player's investment, or even a guaranteed repurchase price including profit. Developer sells property or at least player's share, extinguishes company's loan that covers player's investment, with profit over and above that paid to player.

Simple, no risk proposition for the player. No cash needs to be outlaid, no risk carried by them on the investment. It is all just book entries in the developer's company books except the profit paid to the player in the end.

 

[mightybears]

no one from, or anyone in any way associated with the Manly club will be commenting on this developer/salary cap issue.