What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Warriors salary cap investigation

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
Sir Knight82 said:
By god! Are you stupid?

Why would they punish them when a punishment has already been inflicted.

it appears you are the stupid one. i am comparing what i think are two identical situations.

the Dogs side of 03 are no different than the Warriors of 06. neither will be breaching the cap although both sides would have been assembled illegaly.

i'm assuming the Warriors alleged rorts would've continued into this season.

Sir Knight82 said:
One hasnt for the warriors has it?

well duh

Sir Knight82 said:
That is why they are being punished in 06.

they shouldn't be punished points in 06 if they haven't breached the cap in 06. that is my opinion anyway.

Sir Knight82 said:
Rules where broken punishment must be dealt out simple as that. If they where caught when they were doing they would have been punished then end of story, they werent so they are justly being punished now.

and it should be in the form of a fine.

Schubert should have done the full audit when he first suspected something and it may have been dealt with last year.
 

Cammo

Bench
Messages
2,539
El Diablo said:
The punishment should be a fine. The Dogs were only deducted bulk points as they were discovered during the season.
I don't think a fine is enough of a deterrent. Richer clubs will have no problems with fines. Competition points deductions are far more effective.



El Diablo said:
The dogs weren't disadvantaged in 03 with an illegaly assembled side.
But they were in 02. The Warriors have never been disadvantaged any season despite the same crime.



El Diablo said:
and points shouldn't be taken off if your side is under the cap. See Dogs in 03.
It should if it has not been done yet. The punishment should not be changed just because of the time you were caught. Seems like mid-season is like double demerits for speeding, if you are caught mid-season you lose points, if you are caught in the off-season you don't. I don't agree.

El Diablo said:
i can't see how you can take points off a side that isn't breaching the cap. see Dogs in 03.
As per my notes above.

El Diablo said:
I would be too, but in this case i wouldn't see it as right. if it was the same management then i would.
Understandable that it sucks that the new management will have to suffer because of previous mismanagment, but that's business.
 

ozbash

Referee
Messages
27,004
Cammo said:
I understand that a points loss would be tough on the game in NZ, but I also think that you have to take emotion out of the equation when making a judgement such as this.

You can't have rules for one and not the other just because of what it might do the area.

It must be tough being a Warriors supporter with this going on, I know how I felt in 02 and it isn't good at all.

it is tough, as it must have been for the dogs fans, but for me it comes as no real surprise.
anyone with half a brain saw a hint of what was going on when watson was promoted to sports manager of cullen investments and spiro tsarvos (sp) took over as warriors ceo.
the team then started the downhill slide that saw a multitude of star players leave, the coach who got us to a g/final left and finally a completes management reshuffle late last season.

its cool for dean lonergan to say its not all watsons fault but i can tell you there was a feeling of relief last year when we heard he was leaving.

its tough, the team will tough it out and will live to fight another day.
i still have a lot of faith in wayne scarrah and hopefully Maurice Kidd will do the same as watson and f**k off. :cool:
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
Cammo said:
I don't think a fine is enough of a deterrent. Richer clubs will have no problems with fines. Competition points deductions are far more effective.

i said earlier if it was the same management it would be a different case. if this management had been responsible for the rorts then points should be deducted.

Cammo said:
But they were in 02. The Warriors have never been disadvantaged any season despite the same crime.

and they weren't in 01.

as of yet the Warriors haven't breached the 06 cap so therefore they are the same as the Dogs of 03. i've said this a few times.


Cammo said:
It should if it has not been done yet. The punishment should not be changed just because of the time you were caught. Seems like mid-season is like double demerits for speeding, if you are caught mid-season you lose points, if you are caught in the off-season you don't. I don't agree.

well if you are busted like the Dogs were then you have breached the cap for that year. this year hasn't even begun so how can they be punished for it?

when was the last time a team was punished for a salary cap breach in a season before it had even begun?


Cammo said:
As per my notes above.

which i disagree with. especially when trying to compare it to season 02.


Cammo said:
Understandable that it sucks that the new management will have to suffer because of previous mismanagment, but that's business.

they should suffer but with a fine only as this is an entirely differnt case and should be treated as such


we are never going to agree on this lol
 

Cammo

Bench
Messages
2,539
El Diablo said:
we are never going to agree on this lol

No I don't think we will lol

Oh well, if everyone agreed on everything then there would be no need for internet forums :)
 

Iafeta

Referee
Messages
24,357
As a Warriors fan, it's galling and a bit traumatic to see the events that have transpired. All us on here (Warriors fans) have a deep love for the club, and the game in New Zealand and this is a big backwards step for that.

I find it interesting considering I would have thought retaining players in their own country, and bringing players to a country with lower living costs would have been highly achievable if marketed right to the players. I mean you can buy a mansion with $300,000 in NZL, in AUS you can barely buy a shoebox in Alice Springs with that. That'd be something I'd find enticing in terms of long term financially managing my career. From a Kiwi players perspective, its not always easy leaving home - particularly good to tap into when there's such a huge yet raw pool of players back home. Coupling those two factors together, a decent core squad of players should be attainable under the salary cap for the Warriors. Perhaps I'm underestimating the added cost of luring Australian based players to New Zealand?

I'd suggest some players have been significantly over paid far above and beyond their value. A lot of players have hit highs in contract years, and then mysteriously troughed out at a low output. Players such as Richard Villasanti and Clinton Toopi spring to mind. Past players such as Francis Meli is another.

However, justice needs to prevail. If the NRL deem 6 points is the accepted level of punishment, then so be it. We as fans of the Warriors need to know whats good for the goose is good for the gander, we flaunted it, so be it. I'd hate to see player cuts, and I say this because I've yet to meet an A-hole Warriors player off field - as a fan they've always been more than accomodating, I'd like some to take cuts and build some unity, honour in trust in the jumper but understand thats not necessarily going to happen. It'd be disappointing to see the family again be forced to shatter.

The other thing that bugs me is, the culling/early releases of Jones, Vinnie Anderson, Fa'afili, Murphy, Tookey, Motu Tony, Vince Mellars, Matt Jobson, Danny Sullivan, Monty Betham, PJ Marsh - was their contract releases a cover up to try and avoid Mick Watson and Spiro Tsiros being caught out earlier? How with all those 'releases' have the Warriors not been able to stay under the cap, its bewildering. There's half a good first grade squad right there that have not seen the end of their contracts.

All in all, a big kick in the seat of the pants for the game back home, especially disappointing on the back of the Kiwis success and the interest that attracted back home. I seriously hope Wayne Scurrah is more transparent and honest in his managing of this club than his predecessor was. There are values that can drive this, and any club to success. There's no reason for us to take short cuts, and we should be duly punished as such.
 

Robster

Bench
Messages
3,950
the Warriors won't have a chance if they are -6 points at the start of the season, the fans will be basically watching and cheering for pride unless a miracle happens.
 

Chachi

Bench
Messages
3,068
I feel sorry for the fans but the penalty for the cheatin' bastards should be to have to give us Wiki back.
 

Manu Vatuvei

Coach
Messages
17,946
Bulldogs cheated in 2002 and before. Hence:

They lost all competition points for 2002 only, and were fined.

They started 2003 under the cap and were not punished in this year.

Warriors cheated in 2005 and before. Hence:


they should lose all competition points from 2005 only, and be fined.

If they start 2006 under the cap they should not be punished for this year.

It's exactly the same punishment.
 

freeridermx

Juniors
Messages
395
i tend to agree take all point off for the years that they were over which is probs 05 and maybe 04 so two spoons for there trouble and a fine a big one .
if they start the under the cap this year then thats cool. dont need to punish them if there is no crime .
 

Johns Magic

Referee
Messages
21,654
Thierry Henry said:
Bulldogs cheated in 2002 and before. Hence:

They lost all competition points for 2002 only, and were fined.

They started 2003 under the cap and were not punished in this year.

Warriors cheated in 2005 and before. Hence:

they should lose all competition points from 2005 only, and be fined.

If they start 2006 under the cap they should not be punished for this year.

It's exactly the same punishment.

The difference is that Canterbury were well on their way to a premiership and that was shattered.

The Warriors finished 11th. It hardly affects them.

Plus I'm sure the Warriors couldn't really give a toss about last season anymore. They would hardly experience the pain and suffering that the Dogs did.
 

wittyfan

Immortal
Messages
30,169
You can't have retrospective wooden spoons.

They must be deducted points for 2006 if the NRL are serious about policing the salary cap.
 

aids

Bench
Messages
3,994
so Thierry.

you recon they'll roll back the spoon and give correct the records and give it to the warriors?
 

Manu Vatuvei

Coach
Messages
17,946
Johns Magic said:
The difference is that Canterbury were well on their way to a premiership and that was shattered.

The Warriors finished 11th. It hardly affects them.

Plus I'm sure the Warriors couldn't really give a toss about last season anymore. They would hardly experience the pain and suffering that the Dogs did.

How is it in any way important that one team of cheats played better than the other?
 

wittyfan

Immortal
Messages
30,169
Thierry Henry said:
You'll have to explain that one to me. As far as I can see it's extremely easy and convenient.

It would be akin to the NRL bashing the club with a feather to just declare them wooden spooners for 2005.

Tough medicine is required in this case if blatant cheating is proven.
 

Manu Vatuvei

Coach
Messages
17,946
wittyfan said:
It would be akin to the NRL bashing the club with a feather to just declare them wooden spooners for 2005.

Nope, it would be exactly the same as the punishment meted out to the Bulldogs. Loss of all points earned while cheating.
 

Latest posts

Top