Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Proof the Roosters are not rorting the salary cap

manly al

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 17, 2017
Messages
2,066
No doubt Greeberg and Beatie and Co will just choose to be oblivious of such reports . Probably just pass it off as part of their narrative that consistency being overrated including some semblance of a level playing field for N R L clubs On the other hand , if Manly were implicated , well that could just not be tolerated
 

Terry Zarsoff

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
7,214
How credulous a dolt do you have to be to believe that the Roosters aren’t finding ways around both the salary cap and the TPA situation?

It is not as if Politis wouldn’t be able to find the best tax avoidance accountants in the land.
 

Shoe1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
10,141
I wonder if the definition of a tpa has changed? Those figures look very low.

Like when the definition of “employed” changed and all of a sudden the unemployment rate went down to 5%
 

MissKate

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
2,282
Was this article by the same idiot journo who earlier this year would have us believe Takiaho was on a $250k contract. Sure, we believed that as well
 

Batty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
3,466
I won’t believe any of it until there is complete disclosure and transparency released each year in respect if each club.
The fact they have chosen to leave out the “all of game” sponsorships suggests they don’t want the public knowing these numbers.... why...?
What’s the difference? If you are going to publish money applied to clubs which goes beyond the salary cap, why leave out sponsorships that clearly are designed to accomodate the more wealthy/star players.

Stinks.
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
64
The fact they have chosen to leave out the “all of game” sponsorships suggests they don’t want the public knowing these numbers.... why...?
What’s the difference? If you are going to publish money applied to clubs which goes beyond the salary cap, why leave out sponsorships that clearly are designed to accomodate the more wealthy/star players

Stinks.
I would interpret that the "all of game" sponsorships from large corporations are funds given to the Club as a whole and not individual TPAs payable to star players.

However, probably, the funds go into a pool, from which allocations are made to all players, depending on their "worth" to the Club, based on a pre determined formula.

If they play well, the "all of game" contributions to the Club may increase, as would "all" players share (only some would receive more than others!).

These funds could be channelled into a superannuation fund for the future benefit of the player(s).

In recap, the sponsorships are from third party corporations who support the Club, not the individual player.
 

Shoe1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
10,141
Interesting that Tedesco said he wanted to spend his origin match payments on a really nice watch and then said "a few of the boys at the roosters have really nice watches"...

Yeah, I wonder how they got those?
Money well spent. Large expensive watches tell the time better than normal watches.

I also recommend they buy lots of chunky jewellery and wear it all at once.
 

Shoe1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
10,141
My takes from the article:

1) The storm are getting favored somehow.

2) The amounts at most clubs are so small they are almost pointless.

3) There must be more to it. What isn’t being counted here? Eg the media contracts for some players.
 

Batty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
3,466
I would interpret that the "all of game" sponsorships from large corporations are funds given to the Club as a whole and not individual TPAs payable to star players.

However, probably, the funds go into a pool, from which allocations are made to all players, depending on their "worth" to the Club, based on a pre determined formula.

If they play well, the "all of game" contributions to the Club may increase, as would "all" players share (only some would receive more than others!).

These funds could be channelled into a superannuation fund for the future benefit of the player(s).

In recap, the sponsorships are from third party corporations who support the Club, not the individual player.
Your interpretation may/may not be correct.

My point is more to the fact that the NRL publishing a table showing all the third parties outside of the salary cap isn’t true.

They (certain clubs) clearly have money transferring hands outside of the salary cap that they (the NRL) are refusing to release to the public. Why.

If transparency is the motivator, why hide which clubs are receiving more monetary benefits?....
 

globaleagle

SGF0IHJ1bGVzIGFsbCE=
Staff member
Premium Member
2019 Tipping Competitor
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
22,026
If we keep feeding them the same lie enough times....

Eventually they'll think it's the truth.


- that's been done somewhere else methinks.
 

frank stokes

I discriminate indiscriminately
Joined
Apr 27, 2018
Messages
335
The 'disclosure' doesnt include individual sponsorships (apparently not related to Rorters) which are held by Cronk, Cordner and Teddy (and negotiated by Uncle Nick)...

The whole system is a butt-f@#k - as explained by Matt Ridge previously...
 

Mark from Brisbane

Living the dream
Premium Member
2019 Tipping Competitor
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
28,759
The 'disclosure' doesnt include individual sponsorships (apparently not related to Rorters) which are held by Cronk, Cordner and Teddy (and negotiated by Uncle Nick)...

The whole system is a butt-f@#k - as explained by Matt Ridge previously...
I thought ALL TPA’s were held individually ???

Isn’t that the reason we copped a $660k fine??
 
Last edited:

Staff online

  • lsz
    Well-Known Member

Latest posts

Top Bottom