What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

More legal Salary Cap Scams

ngap

Juniors
Messages
581
You increase your sponsorship you increase your salary cap.

Contract payments can now be defered to overcome Salary cap overpayment. Not a new contract just agreement to pay next year. (Basically the same old scam)


From
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/16/1095320901267.html

Fallout from scandals hits Dogs in pocket
By Steve Mascord
September 17, 2004

Four Bulldogs players have been asked to forgo payments totalling about $100,000 until next year as the club continues to feel the pinch of its last two controversies.

Chief executive Malcolm Noad last night admitted the possibility of deferring incentive payments and wages for salary cap reasons had been discussed in contract talks with the players, whom he declined to name. National Rugby League salary cap auditor Ian Schubert said there was no problem with the arrangement.

Gross salary cap abuses in 2002 and a loss of sponsors caused by sexual assault allegations in Coffs Harbour this year had subjected the Dogs' cap to pressure, which should be resolved in 2005 if the players agree to the restructured contracts.

"We are still doing some juggling," said Noad. "It's very tight this year.

"There's [some] players we are talking to about deferring some payments but there's nothing in that that other clubs don't do. It's nothing untoward and it's certainly nothing we haven't spoken to the salary cap auditor about."

The situation has emerged as the Dogs bid to bounce back from last Saturday's shock loss to North Queensland and stay in the premiership race by beating Melbourne in Sunday's second semi-final at Aussie Stadium.

To avoid the club imploding in the wake of the salary cap scandal two years ago, the League allowed the Dogs to include some payments from that year in their cap for 2003 and 2004.

"You're continually trying to juggle forward," said Noad. "It's something that's been inherited this year but next year we've got quite a bit of clear air.

"Steve Price is going, Dennis Scott's going, Jamie Feeney's going, Johnathan Thurston's going, Hutch Maiava's going. That gives us the opportunity to catch up."

Also NRL clubs can earn up to $200,000 in salary cap concessions if they increase the value of sponsorship from one year to the next.

But the police investigations into the Coffs Harbour incident that scared off backers despite no charges being laid slashed that anticipated allowance.

"We were budgeting in our player payments for a $200,000 benefit in the salary cap and because of what happened earlier this year and the sponsorship dollars we lost, we will only generate about $100,000," said Noad.

"A large amount of what we are trying to make up is that shortfall in marketing."

Schubert said: "It's not unusual for clubs to do this, particularly in relation to the sponsorship servicing allowance.

"If a club has a shortfall, it's permissible when extending a contract to organise the cash-flow situation that suits the club and the player."
 

RainMan

Juniors
Messages
2,034
"Steve Price is going, Dennis Scott's going, Jamie Feeney's going, Johnathan Thurston's going, Hutch Maiava's going. That gives us the opportunity to catch up."

Noad forgot to mention that Ben Harris is leaving as well. Or is that still a secret...
 

ngap

Juniors
Messages
581
Chook said:
It's how Johns can earn his $934,000 a season at Newcastle.

Chook.

Its probably partially the reason but isn't the same old secondary sponsorship. Where if you are doing work for the sposorship it doesn't count.

Now if the Club raises 4 million this year and 3.8m next year you don't have a salary cap increase but if another club raises 3.3m this year and 3.5m next year they have a salary cap increase.

This one I am not going to try to defend. The other one makes sense.
 

Chook

First Grade
Messages
5,655
Shouldn't a club be rewarded for bringing more sponsorship to the game?

Chook.
 

Sea_Eagles_Rock

First Grade
Messages
5,216
They get the cash don't they......

I don't think it's right to spend money you don't even have available under the cap. This is no different to storing up your salary cap and spending it the next year with sign on fees. A practice that has since been closed.

I think all cap money should come out of the one season. No previous, no future... Concessions should not be designed to assist clubs until the year after the windfall.
 

rossy

Juniors
Messages
803
ngap said:
You increase your sponsorship you increase your salary cap.

Contract payments can now be defered to overcome Salary cap overpayment. Not a new contract just agreement to pay next year. (Basically the same old scam)


From
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/16/1095320901267.html

Fallout from scandals hits Dogs in pocket
By Steve Mascord
September 17, 2004

Four Bulldogs players have been asked to forgo payments totalling about $100,000 until next year as the club continues to feel the pinch of its last two controversies.

Chief executive Malcolm Noad last night admitted the possibility of deferring incentive payments and wages for salary cap reasons had been discussed in contract talks with the players, whom he declined to name. National Rugby League salary cap auditor Ian Schubert said there was no problem with the arrangement.

Gross salary cap abuses in 2002 and a loss of sponsors caused by sexual assault allegations in Coffs Harbour this year had subjected the Dogs' cap to pressure, which should be resolved in 2005 if the players agree to the restructured contracts.

"We are still doing some juggling," said Noad. "It's very tight this year.

"There's [some] players we are talking to about deferring some payments but there's nothing in that that other clubs don't do. It's nothing untoward and it's certainly nothing we haven't spoken to the salary cap auditor about."

The situation has emerged as the Dogs bid to bounce back from last Saturday's shock loss to North Queensland and stay in the premiership race by beating Melbourne in Sunday's second semi-final at Aussie Stadium.

To avoid the club imploding in the wake of the salary cap scandal two years ago, the League allowed the Dogs to include some payments from that year in their cap for 2003 and 2004.

"You're continually trying to juggle forward," said Noad. "It's something that's been inherited this year but next year we've got quite a bit of clear air.

"Steve Price is going, Dennis Scott's going, Jamie Feeney's going, Johnathan Thurston's going, Hutch Maiava's going. That gives us the opportunity to catch up."

Also NRL clubs can earn up to $200,000 in salary cap concessions if they increase the value of sponsorship from one year to the next.

But the police investigations into the Coffs Harbour incident that scared off backers despite no charges being laid slashed that anticipated allowance.

"We were budgeting in our player payments for a $200,000 benefit in the salary cap and because of what happened earlier this year and the sponsorship dollars we lost, we will only generate about $100,000," said Noad.

"A large amount of what we are trying to make up is that shortfall in marketing."

Schubert said: "It's not unusual for clubs to do this, particularly in relation to the sponsorship servicing allowance.

"If a club has a shortfall, it's permissible when extending a contract to organise the cash-flow situation that suits the club and the player."

Maybe DJ1 will be able to give us his views on this one. I mean, as the self-appointed forum salary cap expert, I would LOVE to hear his views on this one.
 

Southernsaint

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
20,228
Peter Doust raised a point recently that Saints are one of only two clubs to never have had a Cap Breach Notice but it's probably only a matter of time.

There are so many grey areas, especially as far as third-party sponsorship goes. The NRL should set it all out in black & white so there's less speculation & heresay...
 

KFC

Juniors
Messages
995
Whilst I agree with you SS I don't think the salary cap is black and white. You will never be able to stop 3rd party sponsorships.

If a player raises his profile throught league surely he's entitled to cash in on that profile.
 
Messages
544
I thought the Cap's primary (not the only) purpose is to stop clubs from going broke. I would think that it should also work for clubs who bring in new revenue streams, e.g. sponsorships. I mean whats the point in raising funds if you can't use it?!?!? It doesn't make sense calling it a "Scam". If it is considered a Scam does it then encourage mediocrity?

Maybe I'm missing something :?
 

Dog-E

Juniors
Messages
2,396
All this article means is what the Bulldogs have done for the last 2 years - perfectly within the laws of the cap - we now have to do next year as well, due to 'feeling the pinch'....it's hardly breaking news!

And if we let Ben Harris go - we deserve everything we get!

Having said that, the kid's treading the line between first & reserve grade right now, and has been ever since he got back into the side...He would currently be head of the queue of ANY Dogs 1st grader to be dropped - so if he's on BIG bucks (Which i really dont think he is!?) - we may well find it prudent to let him go!?

He showses glimpses - but generally has just NOT looked the same devastating player as he was last year! ...But good players don't just turn bad overnight!...He had off-season surgery & was behind the 8-ball from day 1 of this season - he WILL come good again!...But whether or not we can afford to let that be with us....or soemone else... don't currently know!?
 

Dog-E

Juniors
Messages
2,396
Youll have to fight off the other half dozen clubs i've been told round here that he has DEFINITELY signed for in top secret first!!! :lol:
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
65,715
Second year Syndrome. He'll probably stay at the Dogs and we'll be stuck with a Moule/Nuffy Centres pairing...
 

Dog-E

Juniors
Messages
2,396
As your sig pic file suggests...in 2 seasons' time I am next to CERTAIN that one J.Lyon will be lining up for you in 2007!

But what to do for the intervening 2 years???....harris may well go - I don't know what the official club stance is on benny - but he could end up ANYWHERE really, if he goes!...But from a fan's perspective - we'd like him to stay JUST where he is, and FIGHT for his place....along with everyone else!

Because there is NO ROOM for passengers at the Bulldogs! It's simple - Put in, or get out!!!! :evil:

If he wants the easy way out though...We WON'T let the door hit his backside on the waty out - he could always play inside Chris Walkwer at the Roosters!! :clap:

But I really & honestly think the kid is made of STERNER stuff than that!...I DO hope he'll be a Dog for some time to come yet!! 8)

And if he's not - Well he's not the player I believed he was, and he sure ain't Bulldog material then anyway!
 

ngap

Juniors
Messages
581
Chook said:
Shouldn't a club be rewarded for bringing more sponsorship to the game?

Chook.

But its not about who brings in more sponsorship. It is ncreasing your sponsorship.

A club with 4 mil sponsorship may have a cap less than that of a club with 3 mil because the second has increased but the first hasn't.

A tiered system makes sense but I can't see how this one does. All it does is encourage creative accounting so you spend sponsorship so you receive more each year not an even amount.
 

Sea_Eagles_Rock

First Grade
Messages
5,216
Manly desperately needs centres. Harris would be a good prospect if he did get a release. As Dog E stated he has had a disrupted season. He easily could still be a part of Premiership team though.

BTW... There is nothing really to suggest Jamie Lyons is any more likely to sign with Manly in two years time then any other club except Parramatta. I guess I don't have the huge raps on Lyon that everyone else does. Especially after 2 years in England. We need centres now at Manly. 2 years is 2 years too far away.

Manly could be top 4 material if they could tackle effectively for 80 minutes and found another good centre and a spare 5/8/Half. There is nothing wrong with the forward engine for next season.
 
Top