Sharks cheating the Salary Cap?

[whall15]

I think this will be a non-issue tbh.

Truth be told they'll probably be under still even with this added on.

 

[firechild]

It's a head scratcher more than anything. Chances are they would have still been under the cap. If the payments were declared, they would have simply fallen under the cap and it wouldn't have been an issue. Why would the club fail to declare payments that would have been allowed when they did not cause breaches in relation to exceeding the cap?

 

[Frailty]

It's a head scratcher more than anything. Chances are they would have still been under the cap. If the payments were declared, they would have simply fallen under the cap and it wouldn't have been an issue. Why would the club fail to declare payments that would have been allowed when they did not cause breaches in relation to exceeding the cap?

Clerical oversight/Paperwork error...

You know, like their statement says.

 

[firechild]

Fair enough, I have to admit I haven't read everything that has been written about this case because I don't really see it as being a huge deal, especially when put alongside the ASADA inquiry and the sacking/standing down of staff.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I have a feeling they will get away with it.

The NRL yesterday confirmed that Schubert was investigating the payments.

Unless someone shows him where the secret filing cabinet is, or the brown paper bags, and then reads the documents to him and highlights the pertinent points I don't reckon he'll discover anything.

 

[Frailty]

I have a feeling they will get away with it.

Unless someone shows him where the secret filing cabinet is, or the brown paper bags, and then reads the documents to him and highlights the pertinent points I don't reckon he'll discover anything.

Get away with it?

Our club came to the NRL FFS.

 

[whall15]

I have a feeling they will get away with it.

Unless someone shows him where the secret filing cabinet is, or the brown paper bags, and then reads the documents to him and highlights the pertinent points I don't reckon he'll discover anything.

:lol: Not that I think the Sharks have done anything but Schubert is useless.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Get away with it?

Our club came to the NRL FFS.

Way to miss the point... point misser.

 

[StormHi]

Just like the drug allegations much ado about nothing...... Who gives a crap. Focus on the footy!!

Sharks will be fine.

 

[Frailty]

Way to miss the point... point misser.

Didn't miss your point... But if you want to have a go at anyone, don't make stupid statements.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Didn't miss your point... But if you want to have a go at anyone, don't make stupid statements.

It was a joke f**kwit. But it wouldn't be a stupid statement to call the Sharkls cheats.

 

[RWB]

It's not going over the cap. The problem is allegedly the player got payments from the security mob that weren't declared to the NRL.

Not a massive breach, would be just a fine from the NRL

Well it depends.

These payments will be counted as third party deals arranged by the club. In 2011 & 2012 (off the top of my head) clubs were allowed 150k per year to give to players on club arranged 3rd party deals. May have even been less in 2011.

Just because the Sharks played under the cap doesn't mean that they didn't use their entitled 150k on 3rd party deals.

If it's just a case on not being disclosed then you're right it'll just be a fine like we see every year when the NRL announces salary cap minor breaches. However if they had already spent their full 3rd party entitlement then this could be a lot more serious.

It most likely is the former but unfortunately for the Sharks they're an easy target at the moment and something that usually would result in just a statement from the NRL along with numerous other clubs and their breaches is now blown up.

There's been similar instances in the past

2004 (Roosters) - Undisclosed TPA - car provided to player by Associated Entity
2004 (Storm) - Breaches relating to undisclosed TPA's from 2001 - 2004 Subsequently disclosed by new management

2006 (Broncos) - Unapproved TPA

2007 (Broncos) - Unapproved TPA
2007 (Rabbitohs) - Undisclosed payments - Guarantee of TPA to player.

Source: http://www.nrl.com/tabid/10874/newsId/58361/Default.aspx

 

[Miller was a legend]

Well it depends.

These payments will be counted as third party deals arranged by the club. In 2011 & 2012 (off the top of my head) clubs were allowed 150k per year to give to players on club arranged 3rd party deals. May have even been less in 2011.

Just because the Sharks played under the cap doesn't mean that they didn't use their entitled 150k on 3rd party deals.

If it's just a case on not being disclosed then you're right it'll just be a fine like we see every year when the NRL announces salary cap minor breaches. However if they had already spent their full 3rd party entitlement then this could be a lot more serious.

It most likely is the former but unfortunately for the Sharks they're an easy target at the moment and something that usually would result in just a statement from the NRL along with numerous other clubs and their breaches is now blown up.

There's been similar instances in the past

2004 (Roosters) - Undisclosed TPA - car provided to player by Associated Entity
2004 (Storm) - Breaches relating to undisclosed TPA's from 2001 - 2004 Subsequently disclosed by new management

2006 (Broncos) - Unapproved TPA

2007 (Broncos) - Unapproved TPA
2007 (Rabbitohs) - Undisclosed payments - Guarantee of TPA to player.

Source: http://www.nrl.com/tabid/10874/newsId/58361/Default.aspx

I understand your point, but the Sharks...third party deals...over $150,000. Seriously?

Cant even keep sponsors. We ain't the Broncos

The only blow up is media and in this joint!