Warriors salary cap investigation

[SpaceMonkey]

So its alright that they cheated in previous seasons? To me there's no difference what so ever and they need to be penalised very harshly indeed.

We arent talking about 50k or even 250k here we are talking about 1 million dollars thats a very serious indescrition and a example needs to be made.

Big fines (and I have no problem with them being well into 6 figures) and altering the record books should be appropriate for past seasons. This season's competition points should only be affected by the team that takes the field this season, not in 04 or 05.

 

[The Colonel]

I think that a loss of points is a must now. The NRL have stated that any serious breaches will results in a deduction of competition points. With 6 points deducted it still doesn't rule them out of the competition entirely, but does ensure that they start at a disadvantage compared to the other clubs that are not in breach of the cap.

I understand your position on it. But if they start the season on an even standing and receive an even larger fine?

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Its gotta be points, the warriors with their backers can laugh off any fine that gets thrown at them.

A serious example must be set so that this BS doesnt surface again.

And as stated 6 points doesnt ruin a season but it is a harsh and just punishment and does send a statement that this BS will not to be tolerated.

 

[El Diablo]

The Warriors starting season 2006 under the cap is the same as the Dogs starting 03 under the cap.

 

[Cammo]

Big fines (and I have no problem with them being well into 6 figures) and altering the record books should be appropriate for past seasons. This season's competition points should only be affected by the team that takes the field this season, not in 04 or 05.

The current roster may be/get under the cap, but there is still the same problem The Bulldogs faced which is the perception that the current team may not even look the way it does without the breaches to begin with. A lot of fans of other clubs still believe that our win in 2004 was tainted because of the way the team was initially put togther. This is despite the fact that the 2004 team was not in breach of the salary cap.

Who's to say Steve Price would have signed with The Warriors if they didn't offer him so much money. He is still there for this season and his salary could be a large contributing factor to the breach (poor bloke must be wondering why this keeps happening to him).

The Dogs lost the points in the season they were found out and then had to get under the cap or risk the same penalty. In my mind the same thing should happen to The Warriors. The fact that the season hasn't started I believe is a moot point, the breach has been revealed and the punsihment of being disadvantaged during the season it was revealed should be appropriate.

 

[The Colonel]

Its gotta be points, the warriors with their backers can laugh off any fine that gets thrown at them.

A serious example must be set so that this BS doesnt surface again.

And as stated 6 points doesnt ruin a season but it is a harsh and just punishment and does send a statement that this BS will not to be tolerated.

Would you argue the same if it were the Knights?

You are arguing about a precedent but that precedent was set 20 rounds into a season proper. Not before one has started.....

The Warriors backers may not necessarily be too happy about paying a six or even seven figure fine. I'm sure few club sponsors or owners would.

 

[Cammo]

I understand your position on it. But if they start the season on an even standing and receive an even larger fine?

I don't beleive that a fine is as big as a deterrent than competition points. Clubs could quite easily sign a heap of players before the start of the season, let the NRL know they are over the cap then make those players take pay cuts to get under the cap and use that saved money to pay the fine.

I understand the above is an extreme situation though.

 

[Mr Saab]

i always thought someone weird was happening over there when Wiki and Price were signed to MASSIVE contracts. More than what they were worth given what stage they are in with their careers...i mean its not like they were 25.

 

[douglasallen91]

Was there any evidence the dogs were over in years past?

I think that 6-10 points would be sufficient.

yes their is evidence.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

6 points isn't the end of the world and I won't be too gutted with it although I won't be happy, as simply avoiding the spoon will be an achievement.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Would you argue the same if it were the Knights?

You are arguing about a precedent but that precedent was set 20 rounds into a season proper. Not before one has started.....

The Warriors backers may not necessarily be too happy about paying a six or even seven figure fine. I'm sure few club sponsors or owners would.

Indeed I would as stated in one of my earlier posts in this thread.

 

[Glen]

The Warriors must really suck at cheating. At least the Dogs almost won a comp when they cheated

 

[SpaceMonkey]

The other question is should the fact that the club's new management have brought the issue to light themselves have any bearing on the penalty? I believe it has to, otherwise it sends the wrong signal to other clubs (ie if you find any evidence of past breaches, don't admit to them)

 

[Steelers4eva]

Would you argue the same if it were the Knights?

You are arguing about a precedent but that precedent was set 20 rounds into a season proper. Not before one has started.....

The Warriors backers may not necessarily be too happy about paying a six or even seven figure fine. I'm sure few club sponsors or owners would.

Whether its the knights,dragons or harden hawks. A precedent has been set that has nothing to do with points. The NRL effectively said that the dogs could not win the premiership the year they were caught. Which is exactly what they have to do this year. Imagine by some fluke that the warriors got under the cap, scraped into the finals and miraculously won the comp. How much credibilty would the cap have in future years. You could go out and spend huge at June 30 and buy all the rep players on the market, fess up your over the cap on March 1 the next year after all the clubs have filled thier books, pay a fine get under the cap and if no points were deducted you might very well win a comp.

 

[El Diablo]

Who's to say Steve Price would have signed with The Warriors if they didn't offer him so much money. He is still there for this season and his salary could be a large contributing factor to the breach (poor bloke must be wondering why this keeps happening to him)

After what has happened in the past you'd think Steve Price would check that what the Warriors told the NRL he was getting is what he was actually getting.

 

[douglasallen91]

The fact that the season hasn't started I believe is a moot point, the breach has been revealed and the punsihment of being disadvantaged during the season it was revealed should be appropriate.

can you tell me the reason why the bulldogs lost 37 points man was it a huge coincendence that it was the points that the doggies was on (bar the bye).

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

The other question is should the fact that the club's new management have brought the issue to light themselves have any bearing on the penalty? I believe it has to, otherwise it sends the wrong signal to other clubs (ie if you find any evidence of past breaches, don't admit to them)

I think that were just about to be audited anyway to be honest so that should have zero bearing.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

i always thought someone weird was happening over there when Wiki and Price were signed to MASSIVE contracts. More than what they were worth given what stage they are in with their careers...i mean its not like they were 25.

Given how many players we'd cut in the season leading up to their signing it wasn't that unbelievable, Lauitiiti, PJ Marsh, Vinnie Anderson and Jerry Seu Seu's contracts should have pretty much paid for Price and Wiki.

 

[El Diablo]

Whether its the knights,dragons or harden hawks. A precedent has been set that has nothing to do with points. The NRL effectively said that the dogs could not win the premiership the year they were caught. Which is exactly what they have to do this year.

this year hasn't started yet

 

[Cammo]

The other question is should the fact that the club's new management have brought the issue to light themselves have any bearing on the penalty? I believe it has to, otherwise it sends the wrong signal to other clubs (ie if you find any evidence of past breaches, don't admit to them)

That's a tough one to rule on if you ask me. On one hand you want to encourage anyone to speak out over breaches, but it sets a bad precedent if you offer amnesty to those that may do so.