Salary Cap Witch Hunt. **Appeal unsuccessful**

TokyoEagle said:
By allowing that to happen it would seem that the NRL was in the wrong. Ain't going to happen.
Click to expand...

Of course not, disallow and then if Penn wants to spend $500k of his OWN money to get back $660k of THEIR money facing a possible bill of maybe a million of HIS money if he loses.

You’d want to be very very very sure that you could win before taking this on.
 
I am still a bit vague on the general details of the "alleged cap offence ' claimed by the N R L but at least on one of the issues in that some supposed guarantee [ or best endeavour clause ] on a couple of player"s third party deals then prevented other clubs from continued negotiations was just a ridiculous notion . This public claim by Greenberg is of course again just nonsense and lacking all credibility but this is how baseless at least one of his public claims against Manly actually was and just could not be defended in any legal or technical sense . Again i am just not aware of any other issues that may be in the N R L "s show cause notice. No doubt again the Penns would have received some initial legal advice regarding their position and prospects of the club"s appeal and the other unknown of course is how independent and impartial the three man appeal"s tribunal actually is . Whatever or any set time limits on the length of any the appeal"s process also naturally at this stage seems to be an unknown .
 
Seems like Buzz Rothfield was asked today during his blog, if there was any update on the Manly SC appeal, given it has dragged on. His response:

"They are a million to one of succeeding in their appeal"
 
Mitch said:
Seems like Buzz Rothfield was asked today during his blog, if there was any update on the Manly SC appeal, given it has dragged on. His response:

"They are a million to one of succeeding in their appeal"
Click to expand...

If tossfield was a credible journalist I'd believe him.
 
I'd say we are heading to court then, they just can't ignore or disregard all evidence placed in front of them. Wonder if the club would first go to the Court of Arbitration before Federal Court? If we are a million to one, then it might be the NRL might have to spend a few on defending a damages case. After all has been said and done I reckon we will call the NRL's bluff.

Their threat maybe they won't renew our licence? Now that would throw the cat amongst the pigeons! How long would that be in the courtroom. Injunctions on the NRL from starting the 2019 season? I salivate at the prospects of stuffing up the NRL as whole, for what they have done to us.
 
Supreme Leader said:
I'd say we are heading to court then, they just can't ignore or disregard all evidence placed in front of them. Wonder if the club would first go to the Court of Arbitration before Federal Court? If we are a million to one, then it might be the NRL might have to spend a few on defending a damages case. After all has been said and done I reckon we will call the NRL's bluff.

Their threat maybe they won't renew our licence? Now that would throw the cat amongst the pigeons! How long would that be in the courtroom. Injunctions on the NRL from starting the 2019 season? I salivate at the prospects of stuffing up the NRL as whole, for what they have done to us.
Click to expand...
I doubt that they would be able to cancel our licence as we are part of the teams in the current TV deal
 
Anyone notice the same fan who was named in the Foran third party grannygate is also representing Dylan walkers “sister” on her murder charge.
 
MadMarcus said:
Don’t sound like it’s legally binding yet to me...

The ARLC and clubs will now sign a Memorandum of Understanding while the agreement is formalised.

The final package will include agreement on other non-commercial issues and will form the basis for each club to hold a perpetual licence to play in the NRL competition.
Click to expand...
Well an MOU got Dez his millions :nod:
 
Interesting, got to admit didn't know about the impact of the MOU, having said that, what happens if we do this expansion thing, and then the NRL wants to cull some Sydney teams? How does the NRL get rid of them? Do they get rid of them during the MOU period, because it would be hard to after?
 
HappilyManly said:
Well an MOU got Dez his millions :nod:
Click to expand...
A perpetual licence is all good and well but with it comes minimum obligations the club needs to meet to fulfil its side of the bargain.

For example the Knights and Titans could have been vanquished even under a perpetual licence because they did not meet the minimum requirements. The only thing that saved them was the NRL funding.

Going forward the only way I can see a club being funded is to tide it over to the end of a TV deal whereupon it would be replaced by an expansion club which would fit with the NRLs plans nicely.

There are two sides to every contract and a perpetual licence only matters while the club honours it’s side. Otherwise you could have 16 bankrupt teams being funded by the NRL going around.

In other words you can have a perpetual licence if you can pay the bills.Doesnt change much really .
 
Last edited:
Ahh, but if a privately owned Club through a Shelf Company goes under, the Broadcaster will insist that the NRL fix the issue.

The 2 billion dollar broadcast deal is with the NRL and not the individual Clubs.

:wait:
 
I see a day where the NRL will make a decision based purely on what’s best for them!!

And based purely on what’s best for TV audiences.

If that means two more Queensland sides and two less Sydney teams they’ll do it!
 
Last edited:
Mark from Brisbane said:
I see a day where the NRL will make a decision based purely on what’s best for them!!

And based purely on what’s best for TV audiences.

If that means two more Queensland sides and two less Sydney teams they’ll do it!
Click to expand...

Is there really enough interest up north to be able to support another 2 teams, given the South Qld Crushers failed & the Gold Coast seems to have been a revived corpse so many times over the years that is still struggling?
 
47MVEagle said:
Is there really enough interest up north to be able to support another 2 teams, given the South Qld Crushers failed & the Gold Coast seems to have been a revived corpse so many times over the years that is still struggling?
Click to expand...


The demise of the Crushers was not because Brisbane could not sustain 2 teams. It was because they were cut after the SuperLeague War to bring the number of sides back from 22 to 14 in 2000. Actually the Crushers would have succeeded had they started better instead of being cellar dwellers in their second and third years. Their average crowds in their first year when they won 6 and drew one out of 22 games was 21,000 at Lang Park. It dropped appreciably over the next two years because of their poor performances and because the Murdock media gave them little press recognition. The interest was there but poor performances and the SuperLaegue War destroyed them prematurely
 
HappilyManly said:
Ahh, but if a privately owned Club through a Shelf Company goes under, the Broadcaster will insist that the NRL fix the issue.

The 2 billion dollar broadcast deal is with the NRL and not the individual Clubs.

:wait:
Click to expand...
Yep. As I said. Fix it by funding it till next TV deal then bye bye unless a new benefactor appears. If they don’t appear the word perpetual is not a great description of the licence. Enter expansion side and it’s goodbye baby 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 599 (members: 38, guests: 561)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
1 1 0 36 2
1 1 0 30 2
1 1 0 22 2
1 1 0 8 2
1 1 0 6 2
1 1 0 2 2
1 1 0 2 2
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 -2 0
1 0 1 -2 0
1 0 1 -6 0
1 0 1 -8 0
1 0 1 -22 0
1 0 1 -30 0
1 0 1 -36 0

Online statistics

Members online
38
Guests online
561
Total visitors
599
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom