- Messages
- 153,363
fixed now
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!
The most obvious thing to understand of the punishment handed down to the club was for a) past indiscretions and b) not advising the NRL when the Board acted in removing the CEO held responsible for them
The club appears to be under the cap for 2016, and was punished for this season by adding $700k from disallowed TPAs , seeming from 2012 to 2014, apart from the Watmough problem
So the hurdle we have to jump over is to comply with past "outside strict TPA rules " , as they could not punish the club for those years as we won nothing, and are financially stable so a fine alone would not be enough
The strident crap about releasing Jennings as he was last signed ignores the position for 2016 that we were presumably cap compliant. That seems to be borne out by the fact that the NRL added $700k and we were then $570k over, so they judged that as an additional punishment that we should get inside the cap, then made it even more difficult by not allowing Watmough's retirement to be dated to the beginning of the season , forcing the release of a player on I guess +$450k pa
Geoff Gerard's article in the today's Terrorgraph was pretty spot on,I can understand th Go5 wanting to get some reduction in their sentence as they apparently did not break the rules, but rather did not expose them to the games hierarchy when discovered. For that they were undoubtedly stupid and deserve some suspension
For that they need to be held accountable, but now we need to get behind the club in what should be an emotional night on Friday, if anyone can link Gerrard's article I think that would be of interest.
Still the media are happy to run with stories that do not suggest we were cap compliant this year, that's to be understood given the frenzy they reported the past problems. Perhaps they can also link the past CEO with his mentor at the NRL , but then that won't be a headline for clickbait
Still have my theory on who is should be held accountable for the majority of the reporting issue, then again I am not the smartest person in the room
That last sentence is enough room for Big Fella, Hineyrules and Jake to jump all over
Unless you die or lose a body part, you get jack shit from sports insurance for park level
