Storm 09/12?

[The EELiminator]

Finally a topic to unite us all.

one topic to rule them all
one topic to find them
one topic to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them

 

[Kornstar]

:thumb

one topic to rule them all
one topic to find them
one topic to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them

:thumb

 

[strider]

sometimes i think the real reason the eels haven't won a comp since 86 is that we are too honest to cheat

no - we just don't know how to do that either

 

[oldmancraigy]

no - we just don't know how to do that either

We gave it our best shot - we went to the Storm to get a cheater in, but looks like we signed the wrong guy! We got the dumb, honest one instead of the clever cheating one!


Oh wait, I forgot, Craig "Klink" Bellamy "knows naaaathing"

 

[The Colonel]

We gave it our best shot - we went to the Storm to get a cheater in, but looks like we signed the wrong guy! We got the dumb, honest one instead of the clever cheating one!


Oh wait, I forgot, Craig "Klink" Bellamy "knows naaaathing"

'Klink' Waldron ran the show. Sargent Craig 'Schultz' Bellamy knew nothing.

 

[Sphagnum]

2012 Wooden Spoon - Parramatta Eels

(No * required, you earned it fair and square)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it was the former assistant coach at your filthy club who earnt the spoon before he pissed off like the useless, incompetent cheating f@ckwit that he is.

Bunch of cheating f@#ken w@nkstain merkins. Piss off back to your own forum

 

[oldmancraigy]

'Klink' Waldron ran the show. Sargent Craig 'Schultz' Bellamy knew nothing.

Oh!

I never watched the show anyway....

 

[oldmancraigy]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it was the former assistant coach at your filthy club who earnt the spoon before he pissed off like the useless, incompetent cheating f@ckwit that he is.

Bunch of cheating f@#ken w@nkstain merkins. Piss off back to your own forum

Nah - the more they come in here and bump it, the more they keep the whole thing on the agenda.


Oh no - now they're torn! Should they post denying their cheatery, or let it slide and hope everyone forgets about it.

To post or not to post, that is the question.


(Colonel, can you help me out with the quote source please?)

 

[The EELiminator]

Nah - the more they come in here and bump it, the more they keep the whole thing on the agenda.


Oh no - now they're torn! Should they post denying their cheatery, or let it slide and hope everyone forgets about it.

To post or not to post, that is the question.


(Colonel, can you help me out with the quote source please?)

this thread is going nowhere neither side is ever going to convince the other they are wrong so it just goes round and round in circles

 

[The Engineers Room]

Storm won. No asterisk. It's not their fault the NRL punishment wasn't enough. The NRL should have insisted that any player that received the payments could no longer play for the Storm.

 

[The EELiminator]

Storm won. No asterisk. It's not their fault the NRL punishment wasn't enough. The NRL should have insisted that any player that received the payments could no longer play for the Storm.

what if they all received the payments do the storm just forfeit every match?
and even if players didnt receive payments directly the storm were able to buy players they wouldnt be able to without the slush fund covering the others so its still an indirect benefit

 

[oldmancraigy]

Storm won. No asterisk. It's not their fault the NRL punishment wasn't enough. The NRL should have insisted that any player that received the payments could no longer play for the Storm.

It's irrelevant if it's their fault or not. The squad was undeniably BUILT through cheating. That's what this thread is reminding people of.

You might not care - that's cool. But to say the premiership isn't a bit suss (ala Bulldogs 2004) is silly.

 

[oldmancraigy]

what if they all received the payments do the storm just forfeit every match?
and even if players didnt receive payments directly the storm were able to buy players they wouldnt be able to without the slush fund covering the others so its still an indirect benefit

Should've just forced the Storm to pay them the illegal amounts and have that as their 'cap relevant number'. Keep cutting and adding minimum contract guys until they had a 'top 25'.
Anyone who gets cut still gets paid, and is banned from ever playing for the Storm again.

Hypothetical examples: Hoffman gets cut, (let's say he was illegally on $300k?). Gold Coast sign him for $55k. The Hoff makes $355k, mostly at the Storms expense, and the other teams in the comp have the chance to purchase the players they were previously illegally denied.
But that's not the NRL's solution (I DID speak to them at the time and suggest such a punishment).

 

[oldmancraigy]

this thread is going nowhere neither side is ever going to convince the other they are wrong so it just goes round and round in circles

Nah - the only people who think they aren't cheats are Storm fans. So we have consensus minus the interested parties!!!!!

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Should've just forced the Storm to pay them the illegal amounts and have that as their 'cap relevant number'. Keep cutting and adding minimum contract guys until they had a 'top 25'.
Anyone who gets cut still gets paid, and is banned from ever playing for the Storm again.

Hypothetical examples: Hoffman gets cut, (let's say he was illegally on $300k?). Gold Coast sign him for $55k. The Hoff makes $355k, mostly at the Storms expense, and the other teams in the comp have the chance to purchase the players they were previously illegally denied.
But that's not the NRL's solution (I DID speak to them at the time and suggest such a punishment).

Mate, AFAIK the contracts themselves were not in any sense 'illegal'.....the problem was the failure of the Storm to report the existence/amount of all of them to the NRL. Other than cases where you can establish that the player knowingly participated in a sham, the player has every right to demand that the Storm observe the terms of their existing contract. So if, Hoffmann didn't want to play for Gold Coast, he can't be forced to. As I said in an earlier post, the NRL's response had to be consistent with Australia's legal regime. They could fine their arse off, penalise points for 100 years etc, but they cannot unilaterally terminate an existing contract which in itself is a valid agreement b/w 2 parties. All they can do is say, "OK that contract is now part of your cap, and you are $X over etc".....the Storm may then choose to get under the cap by terminating (paying out) contracts according the provisions therein / not re-signing players etc / negotiating for the release and transfer of big $$ players to Souths etc.

 

[Parra Pride]

Mate, AFAIK the contracts themselves were not in any sense 'illegal'.....the problem was the failure of the Storm to report the existence/amount of all of them to the NRL. Other than cases where you can establish that the player knowingly participated in a sham, the player has every right to demand that the Storm observe the terms of their existing contract. So if, Hoffmann didn't want to play for Gold Coast, he can't be forced to. As I said in an earlier post, the NRL's response had to be consistent with Australia's legal regime. They could fine their arse off, penalise points for 100 years etc, but they cannot unilaterally terminate an existing contract which in itself is a valid agreement b/w 2 parties. All they can do is say, "OK that contract is now part of your cap, and you are $X over etc".....the Storm may then choose to get under the cap by terminating (paying out) contracts according the provisions therein / not re-signing players etc / negotiating for the release and transfer of big $$ players to Souths etc.

What about Cameron Smith, that merkin is his own manager and he apparently had no knowledge of his own contract(s)?

#Bullshit

 

[oldmancraigy]

Mate, AFAIK the contracts themselves were not in any sense 'illegal'.....the problem was the failure of the Storm to report the existence/amount of all of them to the NRL. Other than cases where you can establish that the player knowingly participated in a sham, the player has every right to demand that the Storm observe the terms of their existing contract. So if, Hoffmann didn't want to play for Gold Coast, he can't be forced to. As I said in an earlier post, the NRL's response had to be consistent with Australia's legal regime. They could fine their arse off, penalise points for 100 years etc, but they cannot unilaterally terminate an existing contract which in itself is a valid agreement b/w 2 parties. All they can do is say, "OK that contract is now part of your cap, and you are $X over etc".....the Storm may then choose to get under the cap by terminating (paying out) contracts according the provisions therein / not re-signing players etc / negotiating for the release and transfer of big $$ players to Souths etc.

They signed 2 contracts. One for the NRL, one for them.
Which one do you think they were told to acknowledge to "the Schu" if he came asking?



In my hypothetical example, Hoffman would've chosen to play for the GC (out of the 15 teams available).
In your argument, you've said they need to operate within Australian contract law (the collective bargaining agreement of the NRL being the first port of call). I never suggested the NRL had the right to terminate [they do have the right to refuse registration, effectively nullifying any contract!], but what I was getting at was actually pretty much what you said! The point being that they should've said "no" to the Storm renegotiating, any player cut/released is forbidden from playing for them again. And the player managers would then hold the Storm "on the hook" for the balance of the contract.
Moot point since they didn't do it. It's just a system that works regardless of how far over the cap a team is - so it'd be consistent.

 

[The EELiminator]

Nah - the only people who think they aren't cheats are Storm fans. So we have consensus minus the interested parties!!!!!

you'll never convince them they are wrong and they will never convince you they are right

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

What about Cameron Smith, that merkin is his own manager and he apparently had no knowledge of his own contract(s)?

#Bullshit

Did you read the part of my post where i said "other than in cases where you can establish that the player knowingly participated in a sham"? Smith is the extreme case, and is one that would likely be treated very differently to the non-superstars deals (for the reason you highlight).

The majority of Storm players (as far as we know) did not have two substitutable contracts, but many had multiple contracts. Lots of players at many clubs have multiple contracts (when 3rd party deals are considered). There's nothing necessarily wrong with a player signing agreements additional to their base contract....it's how they subsequently reported / registered that counts.

 

[oldmancraigy]

Did you read the part of my post where i said "other than in cases where you can establish that the player knowingly participated in a sham"? Smith is the extreme case, and is one that would likely be treated very differently to the non-superstars deals (for the reason you highlight).

The majority of Storm players (as far as we know) did not have two substitutable contracts, but many had multiple contracts. Lots of players at many clubs have multiple contracts (when 3rd party deals are considered). There's nothing necessarily wrong with a player signing agreements additional to their base contract....it's how they subsequently reported / registered that counts.

Well to be fair we don't know how many of them had substitute contracts do we? The whole thing was promptly blamed on Waldron and swept under the carpet. All we do know is that there were 4 'false contracts' intercepted (Slater, Smith, Inglis and a 4th unnamed player) - and the NRL investigation found a 'well organised dual contract system'. This is something the Storm officials admitted to on 22nd April 2010.


So, what we DO know here is that the Storm officials admitted to a well organised dual contract system, but only 3 players have ever been named, and 1 bloke was the 'mystery man (worth noting that the amount of their illegal deals was much less than the $1.1mill the Storm were forced to chop in payroll to be allowed to compete in 2011).
I'd suggest that the evidence pointed to more than 4 blokes having dual contracts....