Salary Cap Witch Hunt. **Appeal unsuccessful**

[MissKate]

There is no price that is too high in the quest to prove greenturd is a corrupt sack of ****

Maybe the money would be better spent digging up some dirt on greenturd

 

[MissKate]

Will there be a full publication of what we did to cheat the cap. All previous cap breaches have been laid out in the media down to the smallest detail, which players, which external companies, what was provided etc etc. I still have no idea what we have actually done, or did I miss that memo?

 

[Ranga]

I want to read the judgement to form my own view of how egregious the breaches really are - then I will be in a position to know how much our administration is really to blame for all this mess. The NRL cannot be trusted, so give the fans all the facts and let us come to our own conclusion. (Personal details can be redacted so that no privacy laws are breached.)

And remember guys and girls (and gender neutrals), we are the first club to have a multi-year salary cap penalty for salary cap breaches. Other clubs were allowed to compete on an equal footing once they were salary cap compliant.

 

[The '47ers]

Lmfao - 3 days out from a Roosters v Storm GF. Yeah everyone believes that's a squeaky clean game to pin our game on *massive eyeroll*

 

[HappilyManly]

Will there be a full publication of what we did to cheat the cap. All previous cap breaches have been laid out in the media down to the smallest detail, which players, which external companies, what was provided etc etc. I still have no idea what we have actually done, or did I miss that memo?

https://www.seaeagles.com.au/news/2018/09/27/salary-cap-statement/


the Club contravened Rule 26 of the PCR rules by making commitments to procure TPAs that it wrongly failed to disclose in the playing contracts and those TPA's that were disclosed were not at arm's length.

 

[HappilyManly]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...d/news-story/7ab2faf6e75394bc5dc5a6e7e74a7c93

The club was found to have offered to facilitate third party agreements which were subsequently not disclosed in their contracts, or included in the club’s salary caps.

Under NRL rules, all third party agreements between players and sponsors must be made at arm’s length from the club.

The appeals committee found that it had offered TPAs to 11 players over a five- year period.

However, it found there was insufficient evidence to support the NRL’s finding that one player had been offered a TPA worth $25,000 over two years.

 

[wombatgc]

They can use our fine to pay for the new logo.

As long as it doesn't offend anyone, or spark outrage.

Oh well, lets move on and look forward to the next soul-sapping announcement - the appointment of Cartwright as Head coach.

Where's the heavy sigh (can't take anymore ) emoji?

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...d/news-story/7ab2faf6e75394bc5dc5a6e7e74a7c93

The club was found to have offered to facilitate third party agreements which were subsequently not disclosed in their contracts, or included in the club’s salary caps.

Under NRL rules, all third party agreements between players and sponsors must be made at arm’s length from the club.

The appeals committee found that it had offered TPAs to 11 players over a five- year period.

However, it found there was insufficient evidence to support the NRL’s finding that one player had been offered a TPA worth $25,000 over two years.

So we are caned $660k for what was a 50k stuff up????

That’s seems fair doesn’t it!

 

[Bearfax]

That's where this entire issue is a farce. As if other clubs don't facilitate TPAs. What of that Moroney issue at Penrith that was quickly swept under the carpet. This is a joke and an indictment on the travesty of how the TPAs are arranged. Of course teams arrange for TPAs. Canvassing for financial support from local companies. Otherwise how could a company know that a certain player is being pursued by a club. Really I find this judgement is even worse than I thought. The NRL couldn't stoop lower to get the dirt on a club. Shame on you Greenberg. Shame.

 

[HappilyManly]

So we are caned $660k for what was a 50k stuff up????

That’s seems fair doesn’t it!

...
NRL CEO Todd Greenberg revealed on Monday that 13 players' contracts with the club were deemed to be non-compliant at Manly going back five years and totalling around $1.5 million.
---
Manly fcked up by only 1,450,000 as the 50k was cleared on the appeal

Dumb, dumb, dumb

 

[master blaster]

Well, I for one wont be watching the Grand Final with the 2 teams involved always getting away with murder. Yes Melbourne got done in 2008, but they have done everything they can to make it up for them since. They have bent over backwards to accomodate them to get them back to the top. The other team, they just keep signing players without giving a rats to what other clubs think and throw it in our faces, and nothing is said. Its a complete joke

 

[conanu]

Ahh the good old NRL, the team that comes 2nd last with 20 kids on the panel gets done for Cap rorting. Whilst the 2 teams with an absolute star studded line up, who have just as big names coming to add to that next year, fight it out in the GF. A complete joke.

 

[Fibro Eagle]

I didn’t expect anything to really come of the appeal
The Nrl had there agenda and nothing was going to change
They rarely admit they get it wrong or they just put there heads in the sand
All the club can do is to try and rally sort there S#*,T out and stick it up the Nrl by making the finals next year

 

[MissKate]

And the nrl came to this conclusion without interviewing any of our sponsors - seems about right

 

[Eagles2nv]

Well that sucks.

I really wished the club would continue to fight if they believe they are innocent, but the NRL vendetta against Manly is tiresome.

My only hope out of this is:

1. other clubs cop an audit and get pinned under the same precedent (although they have all burned their books by now).
2. We make the top 4 next year with a smaller cap and less TPAs, to give the NRL admin a big up yours.

 

[Frogz]

I wonder how Bozo's defamation proceedings are going ?? Wasn't the allegation levelled directly at him as the architect of this mess ??

Only defamation if your not guilty

 

[bones]

So we are caned $660k for what was a 50k stuff up????

That’s seems fair doesn’t it!

Fine $500,000
Salary cap deduction over two years
totalling $660,000

Penns would normally pay the full amount of the cap. Over the next two years they’re paying $660k less, while paying a $500k fine. The Penns are $160k better off

 

[Woodsie]

Fine $500,000
Salary cap deduction over two years
totalling $660,000

Penns would normally pay the full amount of the cap. Over the next two years they’re paying $660k less, while paying a $500k fine. The Penns are $160k better off

Wouldn't the grant from the NRL be reduced by the $660k ??

The NRL are incompetent but surely not that dumb ... are they ?

 

[HappilyManly]

Wouldn't the grant from the NRL be reduced by the $660k ??

The NRL are incompetent but surely not that dumb ... are they ?

Never got the Kent conspiracy of Manly being 'ahead'

The fine does not come out of the Salary Cap but is retained from the NRL grant of 13 million.

So we need the next coach to work with a 500k reduced budget plus a roster that is 330k less than the 15 other Clubs 😕

 

[Sue]

I thought he full grant is paid regardless Happily .The penalty works in their mind because the club is clearly at a disadvantage in not being able to spend the full amount on its playing roster and is therefore adversely effected in a roster sense, which is the purpose of the penalty. Even if the fine is deducted prior to the grant as you say ( which seems logical) Penn still has to spend 660k less on players so either way he’s better off if we assume he was going to fully utilise the cap.

The fact that the owners benefit in a non roster sense to the tune of 160k does not come into it and would not really worry them as it actually helps keep struggling clubs ( which is most of them) more solvent in regards to non player expenses if they so choose.


Kent on NRL 360 covered this quite well earlier in the year.

Clubs are required to spend at least 95 per cent of the cap in a situation where no penalty is in play.

But I may be wrong and probably am .