Gary Gutful
Post Whore
- Messages
- 53,206
"Boys you did such a kickarse job reviewing your good governance and stuff, we are giving you two points".
I don't think the NRL would use the term "kickarse". The rest is correct though.
"Boys you did such a kickarse job reviewing your good governance and stuff, we are giving you two points".
Parramatta face four-point deduction unless they budge on opposition to election reform
Date
January 20, 2016 - 10:43PM
Chris Barrett
Sports Writer
The aquisition of Kieran Foran and Michael Jennings makes them genuine top-eight contenders but Parramatta are staring at beginning the 2016 season on negative four points if they refuse to bend from their opposition to reforming the way their board is elected.
The postscript to the blue-and-golds' salary-cap breaches last year is still playing out in Sydney's west as the Eels absorb 119 recommendations delivered by a governance review carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Having already handed Parramatta a $465,000 fine, the NRL is demanding the club commits to implementing 52 of the reforms by February 29 or have a suspended penalty of four competition points imposed.
The Eels' opposition centres around several key proposals, principally a recommendation that they switch from a two-year election cycle to a triennial system, whereby directors serve three-year terms but a third of the board is up for re-election every year on a rotating basis.
The NRL is insistent that Parramatta adopt the framework suggested by PWC, believing it would improve stability by diluting the factional bloodletting that has beset the club in recent years and would minimise the influence of all-powerful and heavily campaigning "tickets". The Eels, however, are standing firm in their resistance.
"I don't think it's a great environment for our club to be involved in annual elections given the recent history while we're trying to sort the direction of the club out. Our view is that we'll stay where we are at the moment," Parramatta chairman Steve Sharp said.
"I think it's totally unfair and unrealistic if anyone expected the club to adhere to [all the] recommendations, and that's all they are - recommendations based on a short turnaround review. We're committed to do as many as we can and we believe that by February 29 we'll have all but a handful of the primary recommendations completed and done. By the end of the year we'll have something like 110 of the 119 recommendations implemented.
"But there are a handful of ones that we don't agree with and we've notified the NRL that we don't agree with those particular items and I don't think we should have a gun held to our head."
It's a position that could well see the Eels start four points behind other teams in March, a scenario that would take the gloss entirely off the off-season signing of Jennings. Negotiations with the NRL are continuing but it is understood League Central is not willing to compromise.
"We're still working with the club and are hopeful they will meet the February 29 deadline," an NRL spokesman said on Wednesday.
The Eels became the first club to overspend in all four salary caps in 2014 and there is a belief at League Central, forged by the findings of the PWC review, that the unsettled nature of the board contributed to the consistent mismanagement of the cap between 2010 and 2013.
Parramatta elections have been as ugly as any in Australian sport, with allegations of membership tampering, bullying and harassment investigated in the past two years. Before last year's poll the director leading the opposition ticket ended up heading to Supreme Court to contest disciplinary charges brought against him.
Cronulla have also recently adopted a triennial election system and while such a change to the constitution of the Parramatta Leagues Club, which owns the Eels, would have to be approved by members, they may not take much convincing with a four-point penalty hanging over their heads. Another more simple alternative is to change the constitution of the Parramatta National Rugby League Club, the board of which runs the NRL team and in its personnel mirrors that of its sole shareholder, the PLC.
Sharp has urged the NRL not to be a "dictator" when it comes to the reforms, saying the club had been implementing changes for 15 months, including a "triple check" line of communication between their salary cap audit and compliance committee and their recruitment and retention committee. They landed Jennings, but he maintains there has been far more prudence in general when it comes to their cap position.
"We don't get involved in bidding wars," Sharp said. "The recruitment chase for Peta Hiku - we dropped out when it got past our level of means."
Try telling Avenger and that other merkin this. They think it's the same as starting on -10, or even better, playing for zero points a la Melbourne 2010. Geniuses.
If it were -10 it might be worth not cheating. At -4 the bad clubs are encouraged to cheat. Sacrifice 4 points in 1 year to set foundations for 10.
The points penalty is ridiculous. Needs tonbe an enforcing of salary and a cap penalty.
http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/pa...ition-to-election-reform-20160119-gm90i3.html
-4 points .... It's good governance!!! Cheers Sharpy!!
By CHRIS BARRETT
The aquisition of Kieran Foran and Michael Jennings makes them genuine top-eight contenders but Parramatta are staring at beginning the 2016 season on negative four points if they refuse to bend from their opposition to reforming the way their board is elected.
The postscript to the blue-and-golds' salary-cap breaches last year is still playing out in Sydney's west as the Eels absorb 119 recommendations delivered by a governance review carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Having already handed Parramatta a $465,000 fine, the NRL is demanding the club commits to implementing 52 of the reforms by February 29 or have a suspended penalty of four competition points imposed.
The Eels' opposition centres around several key proposals, principally a recommendation that they switch from a two-year election cycle to a triennial system, whereby directors serve three-year terms but a third of the board is up for re-election every year on a rotating basis.
The NRL is insistent that Parramatta adopt the framework suggested by PWC, believing it would improve stability by diluting the factional bloodletting that has beset the club in recent years and would minimise the influence of all-powerful and heavily campaigning "tickets". The Eels, however, are standing firm in their resistance.
"I don't think it's a great environment for our club to be involved in annual elections given the recent history while we're trying to sort the direction of the club out. Our view is that we'll stay where we are at the moment," Parramatta chairman Steve Sharp said.
"I think it's totally unfair and unrealistic if anyone expected the club to adhere to [all the] recommendations, and that's all they are - recommendations based on a short turnaround review. We're committed to do as many as we can and we believe that by February 29 we'll have all but a handful of the primary recommendations completed and done. By the end of the year we'll have something like 110 of the 119 recommendations implemented.
"But there are a handful of ones that we don't agree with and we've notified the NRL that we don't agree with those particular items and I don't think we should have a gun held to our head."
It's a position that could well see the Eels start four points behind other teams in March, a scenario that would take the gloss entirely off the off-season signing of Jennings. Negotiations with the NRL are continuing but it is understood League Central is not willing to compromise.
"We're still working with the club and are hopeful they will meet the February 29 deadline," an NRL spokesman said on Wednesday.
The Eels became the first club to overspend in all four salary caps in 2014 and there is a belief at League Central, forged by the findings of the PWC review, that the unsettled nature of the board contributed to the consistent mismanagement of the cap between 2010 and 2013.
Parramatta elections have been as ugly as any in Australian sport, with allegations of membership tampering, bullying and harassment investigated in the past two years. Before last year's poll the director leading the opposition ticket ended up heading to Supreme Court to contest disciplinary charges brought against him.
Cronulla have also recently adopted a triennial election system and while such a change to the constitution of the Parramatta Leagues Club, which owns the Eels, would have to be approved by members, they may not take much convincing with a four-point penalty hanging over their heads. Another more simple alternative is to change the constitution of the Parramatta National Rugby League Club, the board of which runs the NRL team and in its personnel mirrors that of its sole shareholder, the PLC.
Sharp has urged the NRL not to be a "dictator" when it comes to the reforms, saying the club had been implementing changes for 15 months, including a "triple check" line of communication between their salary cap audit and compliance committee and their recruitment and retention committee. They landed Jennings, but he maintains there has been far more prudence in general when it comes to their cap position.
"We don't get involved in bidding wars," Sharp said. "The recruitment chase for Peta Hiku - we dropped out when it got past our level of means."
I don't get our management:
We fought the NRL to get PWC an independent auditor to make the recommendations for change and the NRL Relented.
Now we are telling the NRL we won't be implementing the recommendations that our auditor has recommended ??
IMO all recommendations that the PWC have found should be available to the members. We need to know what the hell is going on!! It seems a little secretive from the board tbh.
IMO it should be put to the members by vote to decide if they accept change to the constitution and therefore starting on -4 points or not.
By rejecting the auditors recommendations and Not communicating with members, it seems as though this board is not immune to the lures of being power hungry.
I don't get our management:
We fought the NRL to get PWC an independent auditor to make the recommendations for change and the NRL Relented.
Now we are telling the NRL we won't be implementing the recommendations that our auditor has recommended ??
IMO all recommendations that the PWC have found should be available to the members. We need to know what the hell is going on!! It seems a little secretive from the board tbh.
IMO it should be put to the members by vote to decide if they accept change to the constitution and therefore starting on -4 points or not.
By rejecting the auditors recommendations and Not communicating with members, it seems as though this board is not immune to the lures of being power hungry.
If it were -10 it might be worth not cheating. At -4 the bad clubs are encouraged to cheat. Sacrifice 4 points in 1 year to set foundations for 10.
The points penalty is ridiculous. Needs to be an enforcing of salary and a cap penalty.
If it were -10 it might be worth not cheating. At -4 the bad clubs are encouraged to cheat. Sacrifice 4 points in 1 year to set foundations for 10.
The points penalty is ridiculous. Needs tonbe an enforcing of salary and a cap penalty.
As if dickhead members will make the right decision when voting...
Well, it depends on how flagrant the breach is. Clubs breach the cap by moderate amounts every year, generally without the obvious intention to do so. In those cases a fine and the potential docking of points seems reasonable to me. Quite different to clubs having 2 sets of books.