Salary Cap Witch Hunt. **Appeal unsuccessful**

Never had time for Kent, rarely like his comments that certainly never seem too kind to Manly....but the bloke tore in and spoke his mind, unlike these other fence sitters who report the story as though it has legs. More commentators need to flex their muscles when this type of BS rears its head....Kent just earned a fair bit of respect in my books.
 
Not inferring anything here, but I find the claims by Manly that the fact they are privately owned is a defence against salary cap rorting. If any ownership model is ripe for making cash payments and off the books deals it is a single private owner one.

A publicly listed company or a traditional leagues club model requires collusion at board level and dodgy circumventing of accounting practices designed to track income and expenditure. If a private owner wants to sling some cash at a key player or two how does that ever get discovered unless the player rolls over ??
 
Chip and Chase said:
Not inferring anything here, but I find the claims by Manly that the fact they are privately owned is a defence against salary cap rorting. If any ownership model is ripe for making cash payments and off the books deals it is a single private owner one.

A publicly listed company or a traditional leagues club model requires collusion at board level and dodgy circumventing of accounting practices designed to track income and expenditure. If a private owner wants to sling some cash at a key player or two how does that ever get discovered unless the player rolls over ??
Click to expand...
Which players you reckon? I can think of a few who has less than excellent final season with the club.
 
Now its my turn .....

The NRL Salary cap Investigation unit have as much credibility as the NRL Bunker
nrl-bunker-24-cameras-still-needs-glasses.jpg
 
Chip and Chase said:
Not inferring anything here, but I find the claims by Manly that the fact they are privately owned is a defence against salary cap rorting. If any ownership model is ripe for making cash payments and off the books deals it is a single private owner one.

A publicly listed company or a traditional leagues club model requires collusion at board level and dodgy circumventing of accounting practices designed to track income and expenditure. If a private owner wants to sling some cash at a key player or two how does that ever get discovered unless the player rolls over ??
Click to expand...
Not sure penn was going down that track with that comment I think the angle was more like as a private owner we are putting enough in already and doing dodgy deals and exposing the business to fines, loss of sponsorship etc would only mean they would be required to pour more money in. Therefor they cannot afford to take the risk?
 
Turbo1 said:
Will they take all the points or only 12 like eels. I feel it coming as well. Parra was in the exact same situation denying everything.
Click to expand...
Smart clubs pay in cash which cannot be traced whereas dumb clubs like Parra use inflated invoices or invoices for goods that don't exist and then write it up in the board minutes Doh!
 
"One police witness, a businessman, has told investigators he made undisclosed cash payments to help a small number of clubs retain valuable players. Manly was not one of these clubs."

Why would this one businessman be the go to man for several clubs to take care of illegal 'cash payments? Its BS.

Sounds to me that if this 'businessman' was busted making payments to players then he and/or the NRL decided that using the salary cap rort excuse was more palatable with less repercussions than the truth. The truth being the money was probably for providing inside information or match fixing.

This would also be a better excuse for any player to use who was caught accepting cash from this businessman. Match fixing would be the end of their career. Whereas, accepting cash as a third party payment has no personal consequences.
 
The Wheel said:
Not sure penn was going down that track with that comment I think the angle was more like as a private owner we are putting enough in already and doing dodgy deals and exposing the business to fines, loss of sponsorship etc would only mean they would be required to pour more money in. Therefor they cannot afford to take the risk?
Click to expand...
Possibly, but one way of ensuring you don't need really deep pockets as a private owner is to make sure you have a successful club that brings in sponsors, merch sales, and gate takings. How do you have a successful club ? by having good players that can win you games. A few judicious brown paper bags here and there will reap benefits "on the books".

Anyway I suspect that this will go the way of our supposed doping scandal and match fixing racket.
 
Christol74 said:
"One police witness, a businessman, has told investigators he made undisclosed cash payments to help a small number of clubs retain valuable players. Manly was not one of these clubs."

Why would this one businessman be the go to man for several clubs to take care of illegal 'cash payments? Its BS.

Sounds to me that if this 'businessman' was busted making payments to players then he and/or the NRL decided that using the salary cap rort excuse was more palatable with less repercussions than the truth. The truth being the money was probably for providing inside information or match fixing.

This would also be a better excuse for any player to use who was caught accepting cash from this businessman. Match fixing would be the end of their career. Whereas, accepting cash as a third party payment has no personal consequences.
Click to expand...
I wonder if it's the business man that owns that shoe store
 
maxta said:
Never had time for Kent, rarely like his comments that certainly never seem too kind to Manly....but the bloke tore in and spoke his mind, unlike these other fence sitters who report the story as though it has legs. More commentators need to flex their muscles when this type of BS rears its head....Kent just earned a fair bit of respect in my books.
Click to expand...
Mate Paul Kent does this week in, week out. He is quality. I have been watching him on 360 since it started a few years ago, he has always been excellent. His opinions are great but when he explains why he thinks certain things, you realise his angle and his reasoning - he is always sound, seems to have more integrity than other journos. I know he got it wrong re Snake a few years ago but besides that, his opinion is always based in fairness and what is right in the game. Class journo imo
 
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...s/news-story/900b31f856bab1d2bcdcb011ea634f2e

.....
Penn is disappointed Manly have been compared to previous cap breaches from Parramatta (2016) and Melbourne (2010). He said the Sea Eagles did not have the finances to pay players outside the salary cap.

“It’s incredibly frustrating,” he said.

“But the important thing is that we are not aware of anything and we continue to be dragged into the systemic third-party agreement issues of the Eels and Storm, which we couldn’t be further away from.

“We do not have many third-party agreements and as a club we have strong financial backing from the owners, but we don’t have the financial resources to be paying people outside the cap.

“It’s a very different environment.

“I think our frustration is that we continue to get mislabelled in an environment where we don’t get a significant contribution from our leagues club, we don’t have a development fund or other things that is seemingly how people have got around these things in the past.”

Penn also claims allegations of breaching the salary cap could be the result of confusion around third-party agreements and the marquee player allowance.

Third-party agreements are payments made by companies directly to players, but they must be registered and approved to avoid clubs or players using sponsors to undermine the salary cap.

“There seems to also be significant confusion around MPAs and TPAs,” he said.

“MPAs a club is allowed to guarantee and we have some of those and every club is allowed to guarantee up to $600,000 in MPAs.

“So it could merely be a terminology issue that someone has used the wrong terminology when they’ve been talking to someone else.

“So if there is someone who has given information to the NRL, it would literally be as a simple as a missed definition.

“That’s the other thing that we just don’t know and it’s why we will comply with the investigation.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 419 (members: 3, guests: 416)

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

Online statistics

Members online
3
Guests online
416
Total visitors
419
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom