miguel de cervantes
First Grade
- Messages
- 7,471
Surely when the punishments for the breach were being written up around the table, the News faction were well aware that there is every chance this would kill off their club, one that they have invested countless millions into over the years and finally looked like it might be making some ground.
The question is why would they do this?
The fact of the matter is they probably could have manufactured more leniant punishments, especially if it was in their interests to do so. When you are dealing with an organisation such as News this is what you would come to expect, no?
Is this one last swipe at league before they leave?
Is the Storm (News owned) not liable to be sued by the NRL (50% News) for loss of income and damages, which will surely be quite significant? Or does the fact that the Storm were running at a loss null this possibility, ie. what loss of income?
It just seems like a huge paradox that the NRL are effectively hacking off their feet, which admitedly league has a tendency to do, but this time it is so blatant that it begs belief.
PS. The real winners will be, once again, the lawyers.
The question is why would they do this?
The fact of the matter is they probably could have manufactured more leniant punishments, especially if it was in their interests to do so. When you are dealing with an organisation such as News this is what you would come to expect, no?
Is this one last swipe at league before they leave?
Is the Storm (News owned) not liable to be sued by the NRL (50% News) for loss of income and damages, which will surely be quite significant? Or does the fact that the Storm were running at a loss null this possibility, ie. what loss of income?
It just seems like a huge paradox that the NRL are effectively hacking off their feet, which admitedly league has a tendency to do, but this time it is so blatant that it begs belief.
PS. The real winners will be, once again, the lawyers.