[Resurrected] Lol @ Parra
- Thread starter CBreeagles
- Start date
Blucky
Reserve Grader
Seconded ! It should be on every page, not just the lol@para thread.
HappilyManly
Journey Man
POWERHOUSE Parramatta forward Junior Paulo is in hot water after breaching his NRL contract by playing a game of park rugby union.
Inquiries from The Daily Telegraph prompted Parramatta to investigate Paulo after the Eels giant played a third grade rugby union match for the Oatley Rugby Club on April 30, less than 24 hours after an Eels match.
In a code-hopping act of stupidity, Paulo donned headgear to conceal his identity and risked injury by taking to the field for the final 20 minutes of Oatley’s 17-10 win over Beecroft at HV Evatt Park at Oatley.
Inquiries from The Daily Telegraph prompted Parramatta to investigate Paulo after the Eels giant played a third grade rugby union match for the Oatley Rugby Club on April 30, less than 24 hours after an Eels match.
In a code-hopping act of stupidity, Paulo donned headgear to conceal his identity and risked injury by taking to the field for the final 20 minutes of Oatley’s 17-10 win over Beecroft at HV Evatt Park at Oatley.
Maybe he thought at least Oatley has a chance of playing finals this year.
Didn't hoppa do the same thing once ?
HappilyManly
Journey Man
Junior may have just wanted to help Dalai get under the Cap by getting fired 😎
I recall Hoppa doing this a while back - dumb and dumber 😕
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2003-06-18/hopoate-fined-for-playing-rugby-union-match/1872138
I recall Hoppa doing this a while back - dumb and dumber 😕
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2003-06-18/hopoate-fined-for-playing-rugby-union-match/1872138
Last edited:
HappilyManly
Journey Man
So the NRL are fine with a player playing in a rival code now 🙄
Greenturd must just want to feel the love
eagleron
Bencher
I can understand that, it's not like anyone from Parra would intentionally do anything outside the rules is it, must have been an honest mistake !!!
So the NRL are fine with a player playing in a rival code now 🙄
Greenturd must just want to feel the love
That dislike hurt my feelings. I was agreeing with you.
Surely Parra being the bastions of integrity will stand him down.
HappilyManly
Journey Man
The 'dislike' is for the content. NRL bending over for the Dalai, yet again
Remember when Benji asked to play rugby in the off season and Gallop said that league players can not play for Union ?
Last edited:
I gave you a like to balance it up! I don't believe in 'punishing' posters for relaying content! Otherwise how would we get all the 'fair and balanced' news??? 🙂
edit: lol @ parra
Eagleheart
Bencher
Parramatta to ask Todd Greenberg to stand aside on penalties
Parramatta’s legal team are questioning NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg’s relationship with former Eels CEO Scott Seward as the club prepares to respond to its breach notice over the salary cap.
The club believes Greenberg is conflicted due to his relationship with Seward, who he worked with at Canterbury, and want the NRL boss to step away from the case.
The club have until June 3 to defend themselves against allegations they rorted the salary cap to the tune of $3 million over four seasons. But the Eels are digging in their heels about the material arising from both the interview Seward gave to the NRL’s Integrity Unit and any other contact he had with Greenberg over player remuneration.
Greenberg’s relationship with Seward has become a focal point of the Eels’ defence to the cap allegations, their interest piqued by the NRL’s failure to include copies of the former chief executive’s interview transcripts or draft statements in five volumes of evidence provided to the club last week.
It is understood Parramatta’s legal team has begun the process of gaining access to that material as it turns the blowtorch on the relationship between Seward and Greenberg.
It has already emerged that Greenberg provided advice to Seward on third-party deals in 2013. But the Eels want to know the extent of that advice to determine whether the NRL chief’s relationship with Seward amounts to a conflict of interest.
A lengthy statement from Seward was included in information passed onto Parramatta but the Eels want to see a full transcript of that interview as well as any draft statements that were written before the document was finalised.
Seward was able to provide evidence to the NRL only after Parramatta agreed to overlook the confidentiality provision that was part of his settlement with the club when he parted ways with the Eels last June. But it seems the NRL is not keen to release the full Seward transcript.
“We have provided the Eels with all the information we used to determine our preliminary findings,” a spokesman said yesterday.
The four Parramatta board members who are not the subject of deregistration met on Monday night and asked the NRL for help in appointing interim staff such as a CEO and a football manager. These would be able to keep the football club operations moving since current CEO John Boulous and football manager Daniel Anderson are among the five Eels executives in the NRL’s sights.
The others are chairman Steve Sharp, deputy chairman Tom Issa, and director Peter Serrao.
Yesterday the NRL said it was prepared to help the Parramatta club with any appointments they were looking to fill. “If the Eels come forward with possible candidates for senior roles, we will help them in the recruitment process,” a spokesman said. But so far no names have been put forward from either side.
Former North Queensland CEO Peter Jourdain is one man the club could turn to for his expertise in governance. He finished at the Cowboys in November 2014 after four years at the helm.
Former Sydney Roosters boss Bernie Gurr is another and has already been given the stamp of approval from Eels legend and premiership-winning halfback Peter Sterling.
The NRL is unlikely to have any issues if either of those men were asked to take the Eels’ reins.
The “Gang of Five” must keep an arm’s length from the club while under suspension.
A NSW Supreme Court injunction was lifted on Monday after Parramatta’s lawyers and the NRL agreed the five could help prepare their own, and the club’s, response to the salary cap allegations.
It also emerged yesterday that star off-season signing Kieran Foran would not be available for Parramatta’s next match against South Sydney at Pirtek Stadium on Friday night.
Foran was given indefinite personal leave three weeks ago to sort out issues with his family and a dependence on painkillers.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/nrl/parramatta-to-ask-todd-gr...
Parramatta’s legal team are questioning NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg’s relationship with former Eels CEO Scott Seward as the club prepares to respond to its breach notice over the salary cap.
The club believes Greenberg is conflicted due to his relationship with Seward, who he worked with at Canterbury, and want the NRL boss to step away from the case.
The club have until June 3 to defend themselves against allegations they rorted the salary cap to the tune of $3 million over four seasons. But the Eels are digging in their heels about the material arising from both the interview Seward gave to the NRL’s Integrity Unit and any other contact he had with Greenberg over player remuneration.
Greenberg’s relationship with Seward has become a focal point of the Eels’ defence to the cap allegations, their interest piqued by the NRL’s failure to include copies of the former chief executive’s interview transcripts or draft statements in five volumes of evidence provided to the club last week.
It is understood Parramatta’s legal team has begun the process of gaining access to that material as it turns the blowtorch on the relationship between Seward and Greenberg.
It has already emerged that Greenberg provided advice to Seward on third-party deals in 2013. But the Eels want to know the extent of that advice to determine whether the NRL chief’s relationship with Seward amounts to a conflict of interest.
A lengthy statement from Seward was included in information passed onto Parramatta but the Eels want to see a full transcript of that interview as well as any draft statements that were written before the document was finalised.
Seward was able to provide evidence to the NRL only after Parramatta agreed to overlook the confidentiality provision that was part of his settlement with the club when he parted ways with the Eels last June. But it seems the NRL is not keen to release the full Seward transcript.
“We have provided the Eels with all the information we used to determine our preliminary findings,” a spokesman said yesterday.
The four Parramatta board members who are not the subject of deregistration met on Monday night and asked the NRL for help in appointing interim staff such as a CEO and a football manager. These would be able to keep the football club operations moving since current CEO John Boulous and football manager Daniel Anderson are among the five Eels executives in the NRL’s sights.
The others are chairman Steve Sharp, deputy chairman Tom Issa, and director Peter Serrao.
Yesterday the NRL said it was prepared to help the Parramatta club with any appointments they were looking to fill. “If the Eels come forward with possible candidates for senior roles, we will help them in the recruitment process,” a spokesman said. But so far no names have been put forward from either side.
Former North Queensland CEO Peter Jourdain is one man the club could turn to for his expertise in governance. He finished at the Cowboys in November 2014 after four years at the helm.
Former Sydney Roosters boss Bernie Gurr is another and has already been given the stamp of approval from Eels legend and premiership-winning halfback Peter Sterling.
The NRL is unlikely to have any issues if either of those men were asked to take the Eels’ reins.
The “Gang of Five” must keep an arm’s length from the club while under suspension.
A NSW Supreme Court injunction was lifted on Monday after Parramatta’s lawyers and the NRL agreed the five could help prepare their own, and the club’s, response to the salary cap allegations.
It also emerged yesterday that star off-season signing Kieran Foran would not be available for Parramatta’s next match against South Sydney at Pirtek Stadium on Friday night.
Foran was given indefinite personal leave three weeks ago to sort out issues with his family and a dependence on painkillers.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/nrl/parramatta-to-ask-todd-gr...
^ wow.
There were less denials at the Nuremberg trials than with this Parra mob!
There were less denials at the Nuremberg trials than with this Parra mob!
They were only following orders. From the Dalai.
Eagleheart
Bencher
Why AFL clubs live in fear of cheating the salary cap
To be gobsmacked is to be surprised beyond belief. Yet when The Australian asked a well-placed boffin at the league headquarters why AFL clubs, once notorious rorters of the salary cap, had become model AFL citizens the league heavy spluttered his disbelief that the subject was even brought up.
“They wouldn’t dare. They know the consequence. They know the risk is far too great to even risk breaching the cap,” he said fighting back the bile that was climbing up his throat.
After retreating to another room to rid himself of the last drop of flabbergast, the official suggested that the penalties delivered to Carlton in 2002 were so severe that the risk and reward of salary cheating could not be justified.
Following a lengthy AFL Commission meeting that went past midnight in November 2002, Carlton was fined almost $1 million for breaches of the salary cap and disqualified from their top two national draft selections in successive years. Here was a famous line-in-the-sand moment. It made sense then that when in 2002 the Canterbury Bulldogs were fined $500,000 and had the 37 points accrued that season ripped away a line in the sand had turned to a ditch in the gravel for the league clubs. Not at all. In 2010 Melbourne Storm’s salary cap cheating was exposed. The club had two premierships deleted from history and copped a $1.6m fine to boot.
Surely the gully had turned into a gorge. Not so. We give you the Parramatta Dills, the dumbest sporting club in Australia. They have had all 12 premiership points deleted, fined $1m and ruled ineligible to earn points for the rest of the season unless they can find a $570,000 cut in their salary outlays.
The question is why are the NRL clubs so reckless and corrupt in their administration of the salary cap compared to the AFL choir boys who have had only one major breach since Carlton was neutered 14 years ago. When the AFL Commission brought hell down on Carlton the then commission chairman, the late Ron Evans, said: “Carlton’s latest salary cap breaches were a deliberate, elaborate and sophisticated scheme to break the player payment rules. Carlton members and supports ought to feel betrayed by the actions of their club.” And as a consequence club administrators were spooked, according to a survey taken of clubs this week by The Australian. Clubs who had previously flaunted the rules, used cash and other incentives to recruit or retain players outside the player-payment rules were terrified. The biggest salary cap penalties for one club turned everyone legitimate.
So why did not the Canterbury penalties in the same year not shock the NRL clubs into a bout of honesty? And if the Canterbury horror failed to correct the corrupt practice of cap rorting why didn’t Storm’s humiliation and loss of precious premierships?
The Australian’s investigation has found the answers to be myriad but the single most important factor is draft picks.
The penalties to the Blues, then under the guidance of John Elliott, set the club back a decade and more. In 2002 the club had finished 16th and last — hardly clever cheating — and in the 13 seasons since reached the finals just four times and never completed a season higher than fifth. It was not the fine that hurled Carlton into mediocrity and a nation’s ridicule but the withdrawal of their draft picks. The money can be found with a whip-around of the coterie groups and a kind benefactor or two but without entry to the top end of the draft for two years Carlton had their future ripped away. The club’s recruiters had to stand by and watch the likes of Brendon Goddard, Daniel Wells, Jared Brennan, Jarrad McVeigh, Stephen Gilham and Tom Lonergan picked up by their opposition. And that was just 2002. In 2003 Carlton were spectators as Adam Cooney, Andrew Walker, Colin Sylvia, Farren Ray, Brent Stanton, David Mundy and Jed Adock become opposition players. Because rugby league does not have a draft the ARL Commission that runs the NRL does not have the crippling power of draft sanctions as a punishment and deterrent.
Since Carlton’s castration only one club has breached the rules in a significant way. Adelaide was fined $300,000 and barred from the first two rounds and from taking any father-son selections in the 2013 national draft after they were discovered to have broken player rules with Kurt Tippett. The league uncovered unauthorised payments of $170,000 and an illegal agreement to trade Tippett to a club of his choice (Sydney) for a second-round draft pick when his contract expired at the end of 2012. Tippett was suspended for the Swans’ first 11 home-and-away games and fined $50,000 for accepting the conditions. Adelaide officials were also fined and suspended as was Tippett’s agent.
The NRL appears vulnerable to salary cap cheating because it does not have as sophisticated rules and education system in place. Indeed NRL has sent officials to AFL headquarters to draw from the league’s experiences. In 2001, the AFL employed one investigations manager. It now has an integrity unit of eight, within its legal, integrity and compliance group. As one club chief executive told The Australian yesterday: “The AFL, by agreement with the clubs for better scrutiny of the rules, has more power than the Australian Tax Office”.
He said: “It gets down to governance of the AFL, and club administrators have to be extremely diligent. The ramifications for not complying are huge and far reaching for everyone. Clubs have agreed to be monitored down to bank statements, money transfers and phone records.” Such heavy scrutiny also applies to players and player agents.
The AFL also made legal what clubs were doing illegally. They increased the cap significantly and then gave cap relief to clubs through veterans’ payments, travel allowances, third-party agreements and other measures clubs were dealing with outside the rules.
There are only three ways players can be paid — under the cap by normal player payments (wages), by the additional services agreement (marketing component) which is about $1 million annually per club, and by third-party arrangements which are independent of the clubs. The only other anomaly is when a player is employed by the AFL in an ambassadorial role, such as Gary Ablett’s first Gold Coast contract to promote the code in Queensland.
Third-party agreements have changed drastically since Chris Judd’s original Visy agreement with Carlton. The qualification rules are more rigid and employment agreements have changed. There are no limits to earnings outside the cap, but the earning capacity must be justified and endorsed by the AFL. The AFL now demands ongoing regular compliance from clubs with up-to-date data supplied to the league. Over the past decade this has been ramped up with heavy penalties for lapses by clubs who fail to meet deadlines. Three other things have changed over the past decade. Clubs have more people and more quality personnel in areas of governance. Their systems and processes are better, and player managers are accredited and have been made more accountable for their clients.
So with new and tighter measures in place and a beefed up integrity operation at headquarters, it is no coincidence that since Carlton’s massive whack for systematic rorting, only one club — Adelaide — has taken a big fall.
Under the NRL protocols punishment is immediate. Under the AFL and its national draft punishments are both immediate and long-term. After the Bulldogs transgressed in 2002 they won the premiership two years later. As for the Blues they have just started to play catch-up now.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...p/news-story/785bb52bda55765022d784ed463e6dda
Interesting article, shows yet again how incredibly incompetent the NRL is.
- Greg Denham, Patrick Smith
- The Australian
- May 11, 2016 12:00AM
To be gobsmacked is to be surprised beyond belief. Yet when The Australian asked a well-placed boffin at the league headquarters why AFL clubs, once notorious rorters of the salary cap, had become model AFL citizens the league heavy spluttered his disbelief that the subject was even brought up.
“They wouldn’t dare. They know the consequence. They know the risk is far too great to even risk breaching the cap,” he said fighting back the bile that was climbing up his throat.
After retreating to another room to rid himself of the last drop of flabbergast, the official suggested that the penalties delivered to Carlton in 2002 were so severe that the risk and reward of salary cheating could not be justified.
Following a lengthy AFL Commission meeting that went past midnight in November 2002, Carlton was fined almost $1 million for breaches of the salary cap and disqualified from their top two national draft selections in successive years. Here was a famous line-in-the-sand moment. It made sense then that when in 2002 the Canterbury Bulldogs were fined $500,000 and had the 37 points accrued that season ripped away a line in the sand had turned to a ditch in the gravel for the league clubs. Not at all. In 2010 Melbourne Storm’s salary cap cheating was exposed. The club had two premierships deleted from history and copped a $1.6m fine to boot.
Surely the gully had turned into a gorge. Not so. We give you the Parramatta Dills, the dumbest sporting club in Australia. They have had all 12 premiership points deleted, fined $1m and ruled ineligible to earn points for the rest of the season unless they can find a $570,000 cut in their salary outlays.
The question is why are the NRL clubs so reckless and corrupt in their administration of the salary cap compared to the AFL choir boys who have had only one major breach since Carlton was neutered 14 years ago. When the AFL Commission brought hell down on Carlton the then commission chairman, the late Ron Evans, said: “Carlton’s latest salary cap breaches were a deliberate, elaborate and sophisticated scheme to break the player payment rules. Carlton members and supports ought to feel betrayed by the actions of their club.” And as a consequence club administrators were spooked, according to a survey taken of clubs this week by The Australian. Clubs who had previously flaunted the rules, used cash and other incentives to recruit or retain players outside the player-payment rules were terrified. The biggest salary cap penalties for one club turned everyone legitimate.
So why did not the Canterbury penalties in the same year not shock the NRL clubs into a bout of honesty? And if the Canterbury horror failed to correct the corrupt practice of cap rorting why didn’t Storm’s humiliation and loss of precious premierships?
The Australian’s investigation has found the answers to be myriad but the single most important factor is draft picks.
The penalties to the Blues, then under the guidance of John Elliott, set the club back a decade and more. In 2002 the club had finished 16th and last — hardly clever cheating — and in the 13 seasons since reached the finals just four times and never completed a season higher than fifth. It was not the fine that hurled Carlton into mediocrity and a nation’s ridicule but the withdrawal of their draft picks. The money can be found with a whip-around of the coterie groups and a kind benefactor or two but without entry to the top end of the draft for two years Carlton had their future ripped away. The club’s recruiters had to stand by and watch the likes of Brendon Goddard, Daniel Wells, Jared Brennan, Jarrad McVeigh, Stephen Gilham and Tom Lonergan picked up by their opposition. And that was just 2002. In 2003 Carlton were spectators as Adam Cooney, Andrew Walker, Colin Sylvia, Farren Ray, Brent Stanton, David Mundy and Jed Adock become opposition players. Because rugby league does not have a draft the ARL Commission that runs the NRL does not have the crippling power of draft sanctions as a punishment and deterrent.
Since Carlton’s castration only one club has breached the rules in a significant way. Adelaide was fined $300,000 and barred from the first two rounds and from taking any father-son selections in the 2013 national draft after they were discovered to have broken player rules with Kurt Tippett. The league uncovered unauthorised payments of $170,000 and an illegal agreement to trade Tippett to a club of his choice (Sydney) for a second-round draft pick when his contract expired at the end of 2012. Tippett was suspended for the Swans’ first 11 home-and-away games and fined $50,000 for accepting the conditions. Adelaide officials were also fined and suspended as was Tippett’s agent.
The NRL appears vulnerable to salary cap cheating because it does not have as sophisticated rules and education system in place. Indeed NRL has sent officials to AFL headquarters to draw from the league’s experiences. In 2001, the AFL employed one investigations manager. It now has an integrity unit of eight, within its legal, integrity and compliance group. As one club chief executive told The Australian yesterday: “The AFL, by agreement with the clubs for better scrutiny of the rules, has more power than the Australian Tax Office”.
He said: “It gets down to governance of the AFL, and club administrators have to be extremely diligent. The ramifications for not complying are huge and far reaching for everyone. Clubs have agreed to be monitored down to bank statements, money transfers and phone records.” Such heavy scrutiny also applies to players and player agents.
The AFL also made legal what clubs were doing illegally. They increased the cap significantly and then gave cap relief to clubs through veterans’ payments, travel allowances, third-party agreements and other measures clubs were dealing with outside the rules.
There are only three ways players can be paid — under the cap by normal player payments (wages), by the additional services agreement (marketing component) which is about $1 million annually per club, and by third-party arrangements which are independent of the clubs. The only other anomaly is when a player is employed by the AFL in an ambassadorial role, such as Gary Ablett’s first Gold Coast contract to promote the code in Queensland.
Third-party agreements have changed drastically since Chris Judd’s original Visy agreement with Carlton. The qualification rules are more rigid and employment agreements have changed. There are no limits to earnings outside the cap, but the earning capacity must be justified and endorsed by the AFL. The AFL now demands ongoing regular compliance from clubs with up-to-date data supplied to the league. Over the past decade this has been ramped up with heavy penalties for lapses by clubs who fail to meet deadlines. Three other things have changed over the past decade. Clubs have more people and more quality personnel in areas of governance. Their systems and processes are better, and player managers are accredited and have been made more accountable for their clients.
So with new and tighter measures in place and a beefed up integrity operation at headquarters, it is no coincidence that since Carlton’s massive whack for systematic rorting, only one club — Adelaide — has taken a big fall.
Under the NRL protocols punishment is immediate. Under the AFL and its national draft punishments are both immediate and long-term. After the Bulldogs transgressed in 2002 they won the premiership two years later. As for the Blues they have just started to play catch-up now.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...p/news-story/785bb52bda55765022d784ed463e6dda
Interesting article, shows yet again how incredibly incompetent the NRL is.
Talk about poking a bear. Seriously how dumb are this mob. Shake my head.
HappilyManly
Journey Man
Greenturd just ratified the penalty, it's Weekes who carried out the investigation
Kent reckons the legal costs to Parra to disprove the Weekes' findings are 50k per day. They have 28 days to respond, so there is another $1.5m wasted 😱
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
