Playing for ZERO points?

[Frailty]

The problem if we let them cut loose $700,000 dollars worth of player talent to earn points is two fold:

- It is unfair to players who are cut, and let's be realistic here - it won't be the big names, so all the young players will be cut loose and it will be extremely difficult for them to find clubs.
- It unbalances the competitions. The sides that face Melbourne before the shed still have to face a side that is $700,000 over the cap, whereas sides that face them after have a greater chance to win. So a side who misses out on the 8 because they lost to the storm in round 3 is disadvantaged because the team above them played them when they were on a level playing field.

As sad as it is for fans, and the players themselves, the NRL had to act this way.

 

[Frailty]

Definitely not. Inglis could then have his contract paid out by the Storm and then play for say the Dragons on match payments?

If they are cut by the Storm then they would have to agree to have their contract terminated and sign a fresh contract with another club. That way the player has the choice to either collect the cash and not play for a premiership, or play for another club and shore up their future (but take a hit potentially this year).

Not to mention Melbourne paying out the contract gets included in the cap, just like any other side.

 

[nqcowboy87]

i dare say the higher piad players would be the ones to leave

 

[Scarves]

Rubbish decision and a dangerous decision this play for no points for the entire year. So many issues.

How about in Round 9 where hidden on Saturday night a day after the Test match we'll see the two now shortest priced favourites Manly vs St.George play out in a backwater timeslot on pay TV but on the match of the round the Sunday channel 9 game is Brisbane vs Melbourne.

Can't wait for that giant clash.

There would have been so many other better options than play for pointless games. Yeah I understand them not making the semi finals, cool there are 52 points on offer during a season, too easy, deduct 26 points from them, if you consider they've already lost two matches... bang the maximum they can score is 22 season points... no team has made the semi finals with such a low season tally. It's an easy and consistent blanket outcome for any cheating team.

This zero points for the season is crap. Too bad if every team is found to be cheating, then everyone is on zero, that's the basic premise, how much limited thinking has gone into this?

I can see a Melbourne player during the season inadvertently giving 98% instead of 100% without thinking and thus suffering serious injury. All the remaining matches under this decision are now simply trial matches for the Storm, while the opposition is going the hammer... The potential for disaster is massive deluxe plus tax.

 

[Frailty]

i dare say the higher piad players would be the ones to leave

The club will force players of about about $150,000 to max $300,000 out.

You will still see Inglis, Cronk, Slater, and Smith.

 

[Frailty]

Rubbish decision and a dangerous decision this play for no points for the entire year. So many issues.

How about in Round 9 where hidden on Saturday night a day after the Test match we'll see the two now shortest priced favourites Manly vs St.George play out in a backwater timeslot on pay TV but on the match of the round the Sunday channel 9 game is Brisbane vs Melbourne.

Can't wait for that giant clash.

There would have been so many other better options than play for pointless games. Yeah I understand them not making the semi finals, cool there are 52 points on offer during a season, too easy, deduct 26 points from them, if you consider they've already lost two matches... bang the maximum they can score is 22 season points... no team has made the semi finals with such a low season tally. It's an easy and consistent blanket outcome for any cheating team.

This zero points for the season is crap. Too bad if every team is found to be cheating, then everyone is on zero, that's the basic premise, how much limited thinking has gone into this?

I can see a Melbourne player during the season inadvertently giving 98% instead of 100% without thinking and thus suffering serious injury. All the remaining matches under this decision are now simply trial matches for the Storm, while the opposition is going the hammer... The potential for disaster is massive deluxe plus tax.

So it is fair for a side with effectively $700,000 to spend on player talent to finish above a side that kept to the Salary Cap?

 

[Brutus]

So frigging what!!! The game is dead in Melbourne already. It was a waste of time in the first place.

Just like the Swans have been a waste of time?

 

[ibeme]

Stripping the premierships and minor premierships, forcing the club to pay back prize money, $500k fine, and lost sponsorships punishes the club. Not allowing them to accrue points this year punishes everyone else because it duds the Storm fans. It duds the teams that they have to play. It may even impact on the game's next TV contract.

The better option would have been to clean the Storm's administration out. Make the Storm salary cap compliant for the rest of the season by forcing them to offload players that must be rep players. By basically stripping them back to bare bones to remove the stench, they could start on the path to redemption a lot quicker. Give Cronulla and other struggling clubs first option of trying to recruit the offloaded players.

It's a joke to line sides up against a team that has nothing to gain, while the sides they are playing have everything to lose.

It would be a joke for the rep sides to be dominated by players from a team that is effectively disqualified.

And like it or not, everyone will be watching where the storm would be on the ladder if they were accumulating points. What if at the end of the season, they would have accrued enough points to be minor premiers. That would be a pretty hollow minor premiership for the official minor premiers.

I'd rather a stripped back Storm be able to play for a premiership than a star studded storm play for nothing.

 

[Frailty]

Stripping the premierships and minor premierships, forcing the club to pay back prize money, $500k fine, and lost sponsorships punishes the club. Not allowing them to accrue points this year punishes everyone else because it duds the Storm fans. It duds the teams that they have to play. It may even impact on the game's next TV contract.

The better option would have been to clean the Storm's administration out. Make the Storm salary cap compliant for the rest of the season by forcing them to offload players that must be rep players. By basically stripping them back to bare bones to remove the stench, they could start on the path to redemption a lot quicker. Give Cronulla and other struggling clubs first option of trying to recruit the offloaded players.

It's a joke to line sides up against a team that has nothing to gain, while the sides they are playing have everything to lose.

It would be a joke for the rep sides to be dominated by players from a team that is effectively disqualified.

And like it or not, everyone will be watching where the storm would be on the ladder if they were accumulating points. What if at the end of the season, they would have accrued enough points to be minor premiers. That would be a pretty hollow minor premiership for the official minor premiers.

I'd rather a stripped back Storm be able to play for a premiership than a star studded storm play for nothing.

Hardly. The Minor Premierships Melbourne earned are the hollow ones.

It is completely unfair for any side that Melbourne finished higher on the ladder if they let them accumulate points. Even after shedding $700,000 worth of playing talent for the reasons I mentioned previously.

 

[mickdo]

Just like the Swans have been a waste of time?

How are the TV ratings for the Swans and Lions north of the Murray?

 

[ibeme]

Hardly. The Minor Premierships Melbourne earned are the hollow ones.

Of course they are. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't also be a hollow victory if the minor premiers this year were lapped by the Storm in wins vs losses.

It is completely unfair for any side that Melbourne finished higher on the ladder if they let them accumulate points. Even after shedding $700,000 worth of playing talent for the reasons I mentioned previously.

I don't see how it's unfair to have a side that is under the salary cap competing in the competition providing those responsible for the cheating were gone.

I think the NRL is cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. They needed to make the Storm pay the price. The NRL will pay the ultimate price if the Storm don't survive. The Storm are important strategically and financially for the NRL.

 

[Frailty]

Of course they are. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't also be a hollow victory if the minor premiers this year were lapped by the Storm in wins vs losses.

It wouldn't be. I don't know about you, but considering every other club knows the Storm cheated, and had been cheating this year too - the clubs wouldn't worry about them. Do you think the Warriors consider their minor premiership in 2002 hollow? I doubt it.

I don't see how it's unfair to have a side that is under the salary cap competing in the competition providing those responsible for the cheating were gone.

Well, it is unfair on the teams that have already faced the Storm side that is over the cap. Unless they are compensated with 2 competition points, it is an issue. And let's not forget the players whose contract will be torn up and will struggle to find clubs. These will not be the big name players, but a lot of the lesser known players.

I think the NRL is cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. They needed to make the Storm pay the price. The NRL will pay the ultimate price if the Storm don't survive. The Storm are important strategically and financially for the NRL.

But if the NRL went out of the way to ensure that the Storm got let off softly, then the credibility of the game would have gone - and you can bet the clubs would be very quick to argue. Had this discovery been later in the year and Melbourne stripped of all points, would you be as concerned? You're argument is based on favouritism, because say the Manly Sea Eagles breached would you suggest the NRL would pay 'the ultimate price' because the Sea Eagles aren't 'important strategically an financially for the NRL'. The point of sport is competition on a level playing field. Melbourne, already has the advantage of being the lone Rugby League team in a city, meaning they have a greater ability to get 3rd party sponsors for their players - Legally.

The only people responsible here are Melbourne.

 

[bmwpower]

How would you turn up to match day. What would you be thinking when your in the sheds prior to the game. What about training during the week, would you be interested in the sessions, or even turn up.

thoughts..

 

[Johns Magic]

I think it will be one extreme or the other in terms of motivation.

The players will either stop caring at all or they'll develop an "us against the world" attitude.

 

[nqcowboy87]

I think the NRL is cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. They needed to make the Storm pay the price. The NRL will pay the ultimate price if the Storm don't survive. The Storm are important strategically and financially for the NRL.

agreed

 

[adamkungl]

There already is one. It's the punishment they received and rightfully so.

How does the punishment solve anything? If they don't get rid of $700,000 worth of talent, they will be over the cap again next year, probably by even more.

Whether now or at the end of the season, Melbourne need to lose a few players. Imo if they do it now, they should be eligible to play for points.

I'm not suggesting random sackings, I worded it wrong. Obviously Melbourne would need to negotiate a transfer with another club. There are a few clubs well under the cap who I'm sure would be glad to take a player off Melbourne's hands.

 

[Iafeta]

It's simple.

Let Melbourne start accruing points again when they fit under the cap. That way they no longer have an illegal squad of players can earn points for wins.

Players who are punted would still have the rest of their contract paid out by Melbourne and could play for anyone (ie: another club offers them match payments, fitting them under their cap)

I think that one very large part of the whole jigsaw is being missed here. Yes, Melbourne are currently $700,000 over. BUT, perhaps just as importantly, it's the webs of deceit and deception used to create this super squad in the first place that renders them without hope this year. You have to remember that certain executives signed statutory declarations, which are binding legal documents basically in part similar to oath in court and therefore basically perjury which is of course a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment. It's not just that they are so far over, it's the mirage of lies that they have used to perform this.


As far as renegotiating their squad contracts, lets play hypothetical here. Let's assume two years Greg Inglis and Billy Slater resigned for 4-5 year terms with the Storm. As it stands, under the anti-tampering regulations, no other club can negotiate with Inglis or Slater at present. So, Melbourne effectively have no opportunity to lose them. Their first contract is still a legally binding document, the only way really to void it is if Melbourne agree to pay the players out (no one in their right mind can afford to do that). Anyhow, let's assume 2 years ago when those contracts were up that in the case of Slater for instance, the Sharks went after him and offered him $500,000. Let's say the Tigers did too and offered $550,000. Let's say under the constraints of the cap Melbourne could really only offer him $400,000, but using deception they nonetheless offered him $600,000 and kept him. How is that fair on those two clubs hypothetically that Slater should be allowed to now just drop his pay a bit and play for the Storm? Let alone, how is that fair on Slater that effectively he is ambushed into a compromising position by the club to drop his pay?

I have heard other suggestions going around that they should drop $700,000 of their current cap. I would suggest the RLPA, and rightfully so, would be outraged if $700,000 of playing talent was either dropped from the club or dropped to the second tier category. That's not reasonable on the players. As it stands, we believe none of the players have done anything wrong. Why should they be out of pocket? Why should they be out of a position where they can advertise themselves to other clubs by good performances in first grade?

There is no tenable way for Melbourne to get under their cap this year. It is unreasonable for players to be forced to take pay cuts, not only for the top enders but it's going to be the guys in the middle and the lower end who will be forced moreso in my opinion because the top end guys have the marketing bargaining power to do that.

The punishment is just, Melbourne should not accrue any points in 2010.

 

[Iafeta]

How does the punishment solve anything? If they don't get rid of $700,000 worth of talent, they will be over the cap again next year, probably by even more.

Whether now or at the end of the season, Melbourne need to lose a few players. Imo if they do it now, they should be eligible to play for points.

I'm not suggesting random sackings, I worded it wrong. Obviously Melbourne would need to negotiate a transfer with another club. There are a few clubs well under the cap who I'm sure would be glad to take a player off Melbourne's hands.

It's solved it by being reasonable, just, and fair to all clubs in the competition. As per my previous post, how do Melbourne 'lose a few players'? What about the players rights?

 

[Iafeta]

The problem if we let them cut loose $700,000 dollars worth of player talent to earn points is two fold:

- It is unfair to players who are cut, and let's be realistic here - it won't be the big names, so all the young players will be cut loose and it will be extremely difficult for them to find clubs.
- It unbalances the competitions. The sides that face Melbourne before the shed still have to face a side that is $700,000 over the cap, whereas sides that face them after have a greater chance to win. So a side who misses out on the 8 because they lost to the storm in round 3 is disadvantaged because the team above them played them when they were on a level playing field.

As sad as it is for fans, and the players themselves, the NRL had to act this way.

Spot on. Your second point is key. Even if everyone willingly renegotiated their contracts to get under the cap, all it has done is create a falsity, a mirage. Melbourne would still have a squad that took $4.8m to build, whereas other teams would still have squads that takes $4.1m to build. Voiding their punishment through contractual wrangling is not an equitable way to go.

 

[Iafeta]

Rubbish decision and a dangerous decision this play for no points for the entire year. So many issues.

How about in Round 9 where hidden on Saturday night a day after the Test match we'll see the two now shortest priced favourites Manly vs St.George play out in a backwater timeslot on pay TV but on the match of the round the Sunday channel 9 game is Brisbane vs Melbourne.

So we should alter the rules of the competition to suit the bookies?

Can't wait for that giant clash.

They will still be fielding a good team.

There would have been so many other better options than play for pointless games. Yeah I understand them not making the semi finals, cool there are 52 points on offer during a season, too easy, deduct 26 points from them, if you consider they've already lost two matches... bang the maximum they can score is 22 season points... no team has made the semi finals with such a low season tally. It's an easy and consistent blanket outcome for any cheating team.

So you want to resolve the fact they can't make the finals due to the points penalty by imposing a penalty whereby they can't make the finals? Clueless at best.

This zero points for the season is crap. Too bad if every team is found to be cheating, then everyone is on zero, that's the basic premise, how much limited thinking has gone into this?

It's been accepted by the Melbourne Storm board, the NRL board, the News Limited board, people of far greater business intelligence than yourself I would imagine.

I can see a Melbourne player during the season inadvertently giving 98% instead of 100% without thinking and thus suffering serious injury. All the remaining matches under this decision are now simply trial matches for the Storm, while the opposition is going the hammer... The potential for disaster is massive deluxe plus tax.

Players are still playing for contracts for next year, State of Origin, Test matches.

One part in all this, you are implying that numbers for the crowds, TV viewership and most comically of all, betting monies are going to be down.

How far worse do you think it would get ACROSS THE COMPETITION if the NRL did nothing, and allowed an unethical, corrupt practice to fester? Forget the crowds, the TV viewership et al, the biggest loss Melbourne have faced is the loss of their sponsors which really discredits their long term sustainability. That would have happened with or without the points deductions once the findings came about. The problem is, if the NRL did nothing to punish them for this season, I am sure you would find sponsors of other clubs and the NRL itself questioning the integrity of the brand they are associating with, driving down the sponsorship dollar in the game. Imagine if Telstra pulled the pin on their NRL sponsorship contract if their brand value was being diminished by a lenient decision? Where does that leave our game, let alone Melbourne's 2010 season.