Salary Cap

[Johnny88]

Watching Sportsline tonight they said there are 58 pages of salary cap problems. Also Hayne going to Seatle on his own $15,000 trip which the NRL say should be under the cap.

 

[BennyBoy]

Success glosses over things.

Do you think that the 2008/9 board spill would have happened if we had made the finals in 2008? There was a great big storm around the club, the missing the finals, the stupid interview from Fitzy about the future and the growing discontent for his leadership fueled by player managers upset they couldn't be in the rooms to hear what the coach said to their player.

However if we were winning, then yep we will be a united football club. We all were happy going forward from 2009, the problem was after that.

This board and CEO have to put up their hands with their reply to the breach notice, if the reason they didn't follow the NRL's advice due to common law contracts (as alluded to in Seward's presser) we need to spell that out saying that while we would have loved to take the advice from the NRL our lawyers said doing so could cause further issues.

Just spit balling form here on in, but lets say we took the NRL's advice and stopped paying players and of course if we aren't paying them we aren't playing them or they are playing for someone else.

The player takes us to court for breach of contract and wins. Will the players value still be added to our cap? Most probably, and would you think their costs might also be awarded and then added to the salary cap, yeah probably in my opinion.

Would we get fined if we Wenty didn't field a side in the NSWRL? Or we forfeit an NYC game because we are over the cap if we play ?

In 2008 I spoke about caution when changing leadership, I sang a Kylie Minogue song! But hey this is where we are, no use looking back we have to start looking forward.

Agree with you on most points. If we followed the NRL advice there would not have been any breach of contract, we just wouldn't have been able to select 2nd tier players in 1st grade as that was the extent of the advice they gave. NRL advice had nothing to do with contracts only use of 2nd tier players.

It will all come out over the next few days as the blame and counter blame game heats up.

 

[emjaycee]

You seem like a pretty level headed poster on here and I definitely would take your word over most, but that comment makes you sould like a total tool.

Who is my source because yours is closer to anyone I can name?? Get off your high horse.

You'd also notice I said 'apparently', which is far from me stating or claiming fact.



Brad Walter article in SMH tomorrow.

Mate I sound like a total tool cause I am one.
Most on here know this about me already :crazy:

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Agree with you on most points. If we followed the NRL advice there would not have been any breach of contract, we just wouldn't have been able to select 2nd tier players in 1st grade as that was the extent of the advice they gave. NRL advice had nothing to do with contracts only use of 2nd tier players.

So your saying the advice would have been to not select a player to play 1st. Okay so are you saying other 1st tier players were available. Because if they weren't we are talking about forfeiting NRL games because we couldn't field a full side.

If that is the advice we ignored, then I will be honest, I am pretty f**king sanguine with it.

 

[BennyBoy]

I may have my timeline wrong, but weren't all these sackings under the previous board? From what I've read from people with a better understanding of the timeline than myself, Sharp was there but the rest were not yet? Certainly not Seward, Edwards was still CEO

I would have thought the second bolded statement is in regards to the advice not to play certain players, which I'm not upset they ignored personally.

No, Sharp's board came in at the April elections and Sharpie fronted with Stuart in July for the whiteboard show. All Sharps board was in place although the dopey GM from the last mob was still there but it was a board decision.

Shit position to be in after 4 months in the job but it was his decision. Not politicking just sticking to the facts. In reality I'm not very fussed about it cause we needed to clean that crap out and we can afford the fine so what the heck. Like you said it draws a line in the sand and hopefully fixes our governance so we can move forward and leave the past behind, may end up being a blessing in disguise.

Just hate the constant deflection that goes on at this club.

 

[BennyBoy]

So your saying the advice would have been to not select a player to play 1st. Okay so are you saying other 1st tier players were available. Because if they weren't we are talking about forfeiting NRL games because we couldn't field a full side.

If that is the advice we ignored, then I will be honest, I am pretty f**king sanguine with it.

That's just being silly, you know damn well the NRL would never advise forfeit! Apparently the only advice they gave us was telling us that certain players should not be picked in 1st grade else it would blow our cap. My point to you was that such advice has nothing to do with incurring breach of contract and if they gave such breach advice then they would be responsible for the consequences and not us which was the premise you were running with.

 

[Bazal]

No, Sharp's board came in at the April elections and Sharpie fronted with Stuart in July for the whiteboard show. All Sharps board was in place although the dopey GM from the last mob was still there but it was a board decision.

Shit position to be in after 4 months in the job but it was his decision. Not politicking just sticking to the facts. In reality I'm not very fussed about it cause we needed to clean that crap out and we can afford the fine so what the heck. Like you said it draws a line in the sand and hopefully fixes our governance so we can move forward and leave the past behind, may end up being a blessing in disguise.

Just hate the constant deflection that goes on at this club.

Well I wasn't aware of that tbh. However, I don't see that Sharp himself, or the board members in general, would have had much to do with salary cap issues. That would surely fall to the coach and CEO (Edwards), given I don't think we had a GM of Footy operations (ie DA) at that stage?

That said, I'm pretty ambivalent towards Sharp himself in general tbh. I don't follow the politics as closely as some (despite my dislike of the previous mob), but I do like what his board has done for the most part, and I like what I've seen of Seward as a CEO. Which is also not politicking because I hate that stuff....just a fans view

 

[MarkInTheStands]

No, Sharp's board came in at the April elections and Sharpie fronted with Stuart in July for the whiteboard show. All Sharps board was in place although the dopey GM from the last mob was still there but it was a board decision.

Shit position to be in after 4 months in the job but it was his decision. Not politicking just sticking to the facts. In reality I'm not very fussed about it cause we needed to clean that crap out and we can afford the fine so what the heck. Like you said it draws a line in the sand and hopefully fixes our governance so we can move forward and leave the past behind, may end up being a blessing in disguise.

Just hate the constant deflection that goes on at this club.

The elections were held leading up to the AGM, they were delcared at the AGM as per the minutes here. http://www.parraleagues.com.au/ContentFiles/ParraLeagues/Documents/Minutes of AGM 2013.pdf AGM was on the 13th of May.

Ricky sacked people on the 2nd of June.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...ramatta-cleanout/story-fnca0von-1226657891062


That by my count is 19 days.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

That's just being silly, you know damn well the NRL would never advise forfeit! Apparently the only advice they gave us was telling us that certain players should not be picked in 1st grade else it would blow our cap.

So you can confirm we had players on the 1st tier cap, in the desired positions, fit and ready to play?

My point to you was that such advice has nothing to do with incurring breach of contract and if they gave such breach advice then they would be responsible for the consequences and not us which was the premise you were running with.

Which might be what Scott Seward is going with, that the NRL is equally culpable.

 

[BennyBoy]

The elections were held leading up to the AGM, they were delcared at the AGM as per the minutes here. http://www.parraleagues.com.au/ContentFiles/ParraLeagues/Documents/Minutes of AGM 2013.pdf AGM was on the 13th of May.

Ricky sacked people on the 2nd of June.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...ramatta-cleanout/story-fnca0von-1226657891062


That by my count is 19 days.

OK, he was there 19 days before making the decision to back Stuart, which he did publicly in the media. Or are you claiming it was not his board that made the decision to punt those players which in turn caused the salary breach?

 

[MarkInTheStands]

The elections were held leading up to the AGM, they were delcared at the AGM as per the minutes here. http://www.parraleagues.com.au/ContentFiles/ParraLeagues/Documents/Minutes of AGM 2013.pdf AGM was on the 13th of May.

Ricky sacked people on the 2nd of June.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...ramatta-cleanout/story-fnca0von-1226657891062


That by my count is 19 days.

Also the count of the election was

Sharp 794
Shepherd 790
Serrao 731
Sassen 715
Issa 711
Grothe Snr 702
Lim 690
Kelly 663
Wallace 651
Spagnoio 647
Esber 633
Libertini 592
Lombardo 559
Saad 328
Belford 37

I believe that Sharp and Sassan and Grothe Snr had the special qualification, and were on the FC board. Then Mr Sassan resigned from the PDRL board before the AGM, which meant Mr Lim could not be elected, because they need the next person to have the special qualification which was Mr Kelly but that the PDRL had to meet to nominate a candidate to get onto the LC board, which meant the LC could not have a meeting before the FC board did. The LC board normally has a meeting that night to appoint a chair and deputy and discuss other initial business. Cutting the time the LC directors had to discuss this issue with Stuart to less than 19 days.

 

[BennyBoy]

So you can confirm we had players on the 1st tier cap, in the desired positions, fit and ready to play?

Just like you I rely on what is being reported and what was in the NRL statement. Can you confirm that what the NRL said is incorrect?

Which might be what Scott Seward is going with, that the NRL is equally culpable.

We'll just have to watch and see how that plays out then, I'm sure there will be much more come to light over the coming days.

 

[BennyBoy]

Also the count of the election was

Sharp 794
Shepherd 790
Serrao 731
Sassen 715
Issa 711
Grothe Snr 702
Lim 690
Kelly 663
Wallace 651
Spagnoio 647
Esber 633
Libertini 592
Lombardo 559
Saad 328
Belford 37

I believe that Sharp and Sassan and Grothe Snr had the special qualification, and were on the FC board. Then Mr Sassan resigned from the PDRL board before the AGM, which meant Mr Lim could not be elected, because they need the next person to have the special qualification which was Mr Kelly but that the PDRL had to meet to nominate a candidate to get onto the LC board, which meant the LC could not have a meeting before the FC board did. The LC board normally has a meeting that night to appoint a chair and deputy and discuss other initial business. Cutting the time the LC directors had to discuss this issue with Stuart to less than 19 days.

So you're confirming the decision was made by a board under Sharp's chairmanship?

 

[MarkInTheStands]

OK, he was there 19 days before making the decision to back Stuart, which he did publicly in the media. Or are you claiming it was not his board that made the decision to punt those players which in turn caused the salary breach?

Just saying it was less than 19 days not 4 months like was stated.

Also as has been stated, people like Ken Edwards and others would have advised the board on what the wanted to do, did the board at the time ask the right questions, maybe they did and were mis-informed by the previous CEO? Maybe they didn't.

But as an incoming Board, you would give yourself time to settle in, and trust those appointed to help manage the club during this time of transition, that to my mind might have been Sharpe and co's failing on the day, but still says more about our clubs administration before that day than it does for the administration after it.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

So you're confirming the decision was made by a board under Sharp's chairmanship?

Can't confirm that because I am unsure of when Sharp was elected Chair. But it was under a majority ParraFirst board as far as I can see. 4 ParraFirst (Sharp, Sheppard, Serrao, Issa) vs 2 known 3P aligned candidates (Sassan and Kelly) with Grothe Snr resigning on the 29th of May being replaced by Libertini in September. Kelly Resigned on the 29th of July and was replaced in March by Geoff Gerard.

 

[BennyBoy]

Just saying it was less than 19 days not 4 months like was stated.

Also as has been stated, people like Ken Edwards and others would have advised the board on what the wanted to do, did the board at the time ask the right questions, maybe they did and were mis-informed by the previous CEO? Maybe they didn't.

But as an incoming Board, you would give yourself time to settle in, and trust those appointed to help manage the club during this time of transition, that to my mind might have been Sharpe and co's failing on the day, but still says more about our clubs administration before that day than it does for the administration after it.

Actually if we are going to be specific the article which mentions that mornings events was dated JUNE 05 which would mean it was 22 days :lol: Sorry, just being a little flippant

Look I am not actually having a go at Sharp about this decision as it doesn't particularly upset me, we needed a clean out and if this is a consequence of it and it gets rid of all the f##ked up contracts then I'm all for it. I am simply making the point that the decision to cut those contracts which led to the current breach was made under Sharp's board, which even you have now confirmed, because the constant misrepresentation annoys me.

You will never read anything from me defending the crooks from the previous board so don't waste your time trying to bait me on that one, I despise them.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

I am simply making the point that the decision to cut those contracts which led to the current breach was made under Sharp's board, which even you have now confirmed, because the constant misrepresentation annoys me.

Under the board yes, by the board, I can't confirm.

 

[hineyrulz]

Hard to do something about the past.

Thanks Ricky/Spags, and all who came before.

what are you talking about you dribbler???? This was all last year. Yes we know Spag's and Ricky blew the cap out but they were warned last year and didn't heed the warnings. Just because the clowns before made mistakes doesn't absolve the present mob f**king up as well.

 

[hineyrulz]

Yes it mainly was the 2nd tier cap which was by $233,036, NRL being 100k, but as I understand it that was due to picking 2nd tier players in top grade which increases their nominal worth ala the problem we had with Kingston and our 2nd tier cap being already inflated by the salary we were subsidising for players we booted end of 2013. We did not have to break those contracts or pick 2nd tier players in 1st grade last year but even though the NRL warned us not to we chose to do so.

Now without getting all hysterical and wanting people sacked over a mistake, which I certainly don't, I would feel much more confident about our future if our management would ever accept some accountability for what they do which has never happened at Parra by any of them. It is what it is, stiff shit pay the fine and move on.

Ive said it before and I'll say it again you speak too much sense on here.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

From Today's SMH:

"A host of current and former Eels players have been caught up in the cap mess through no fault of their own but the NRL honed in particularly on Parramatta's actions in fielding Junior Paulo, Taniela Lasalo and David Gower last year.

All three were not in the top-25 players but Parramatta, in such a hole at one point head coach Brad Arthur had only 16 players at his disposal, were elevated into the top grade against NRL warnings of a pending second-tier breach.

The Eels believe the Lasalo case deserves revisiting because of its circumstances. His $60,000 salary was automatically added to their bursting second-tier cap when he featured for four minutes against North Queensland in round eight. He was called in at the last minute when Mitchell Allgood, having suffered concussion the previous round, complained of a headache before kick-off. Parramatta claim that because they were in Townsville they had no other alternative and were looking after Allgood's welfare."

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/parramatta-eels/parramatta-eels-say-they-can-still-afford-kieran-foran-despite-salary-cap-drama-20150521-gh6rm1.html