Samantha in strife (and medical retirement rorts)

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.


As reported.

Accepting the case of it's no ones business, it'd be interesting to see how this one plays out.

Good for Todd as Sam has retired so he doesn't need to take any actions against his good friend and ornament to the grub, I mean game.

Souths will 'probably' get some salary cap relief for a 'non' pre existing condition even though it definitely is. Todd can use the "don't punish souths for the alleged sins of Sam" and the media and souths fans will swallow that whole even though it's not the point.

Them personally - lawyers here can explain but I just wonder if the "Dad is on his daughters side and now has it in for Sam", Sam goes over, Dad says go away, Sam says don't get between me and my kids or else and dad goes um ahhhhhh thats a threaaaaat, I'm dobbing and this will get back at you for being a douche.

Or

He really did some intimidating.

I guess that's why there are courts.

Fairly accurate summation of how that intimidation charge works @globaleagle - in my case, it was telling a deviant that if he came near me or any of his victims again, I’d shoot him. Intimidation is basically what they charge you with when you haven’t actually done anything.
 
Intimidation is basically what they charge you with when you haven’t actually done anything.
Not really, you definitely have done something (well, not you, just saying as an example!!) you just haven't followed through with the actual violence. As discussed here previously, intimidation is nowadays acknowledged as one of the most damaging kinds of domestic violence (and carries a higher maximum penalty than assault for example)
 
Not really, you definitely have done something (well, not you, just saying as an example!!) you just haven't followed through with the actual violence. As discussed here previously, intimidation is nowadays acknowledged as one of the most damaging kinds of domestic violence (and carries a higher maximum penalty than assault for example)

True, and I wasn’t intending to minimise the damage actual intimidation can do. It’s just unfortunate that the charge also gets thrown around for situations like the one I was in, or the kind of scenario @globaleagle mentioned.
 
With a further three years on his contract, Matt Gillett has retired from rugby league.

The Broncos are expected to ask for relief on the salary cap for Gillett. The 31-year-old has been plagued by injuries in recent years but the club will argue it is the shoulder injury sustained this season, described by Gillett as leaving the joint “beyond repair”, has forced his early retirement.

-----
Same scam as Sambo's :swear:
 
The Broncos are expected to ask for relief on the salary cap for Gillett
Surely a joke? Or else the NRL is. So his retirement is nothing to do with his serious neck injury, just a new shoulder injury, hahaha how dumb do they think we are?

This is straight off the Broncos own site from when he signed last year:

broncos.com.au
Thu 26 Jul 2018, 10:19 AM

IT was the news the [HASHTAG]#Bronxnation[/HASHTAG] has been waiting to hear from the man himself.
Matt Gillett announced this morning he has re-signed with the Brisbane Broncos for another four years.
And he chose to do it on the club's own webshow Broncos Live at 7.30am this morning.
Always the joker, Gillett - who has missed most of the season with a serious neck injury - made some cracks about people thinking he was going to announce his retirement.
 
The Gillett case, along with Burgess, will be another test for the NRL to showcase its bias.
Having ruled against Snake and Matai because their injuries weren't "new" you would expect it to have created a precedence.
It should be a simple matter of the NRL informing Souffs and the Donkeys "You are dreamin'..."
If, however, they rule that both players have retired because of a "new" injury then it is yet more proof that the NRL is anti-Manly. Such a ruling would also mean that the NRL may as well remove the salary cap because it has more holes in it than a Wetex.
Just like in life those with the money wield most of the power. Trying to "even-out" the competition will never happen. Easts have proved that you can buy premierships.
 
The Gillett case, along with Burgess, will be another test for the NRL to showcase its bias.
Having ruled against Snake and Matai because their injuries weren't "new" you would expect it to have created a precedence.
It should be a simple matter of the NRL informing Souffs and the Donkeys "You are dreamin'..."
If, however, they rule that both players have retired because of a "new" injury then it is yet more proof that the NRL is anti-Manly. Such a ruling would also mean that the NRL may as well remove the salary cap because it has more holes in it than a Wetex.
Just like in life those with the money wield most of the power. Trying to "even-out" the competition will never happen. Easts have proved that you can buy premierships.

The haves and the have nots , just like in life I guess.

But agree, if they are both medically retired and the clubs can use their full salary caps then we will truly know the game is as corrupt as it can be.
 
Brad Fittler doesn't believe Samantha is actually retiring. Kinda hinting that he might not play in Australia, but don't be surprised to see him pop up somewhere else (e.g. Super League) sometime after the NRL sign off on his "medical retirement".

The medically retired rort is getting into full swing. Sign a long term deal knowing there are injuries, then get medically retired and salary cap relief when they can't see out the contract. And the worst part is that the NRL are going to allow it to continue.

 
Just wondering when these ‘new’ injuries surface, is it the club doctor/NRL affiliated doctor/an independent doctor or all three that make the call? Surely they can’t just leave it to a club affiliated specialist. Look how the HIA rort was going , until they brought in the side line NRL doctor. (Still gets rorted), but at least they took the club doctor out of the final call.
 
Just wondering when these ‘new’ injuries surface, is it the club doctor/NRL affiliated doctor/an independent doctor or all three that make the call? Surely they can’t just leave it to a club affiliated specialist. Look how the HIA rort was going , until they brought in the side line NRL doctor. (Still gets rorted), but at least they took the club doctor out of the final call.
Rule needs to be that only whatever the Insurer pays is Cap exempt.
With a maximum exemption amount being the contract amount in the case of catastrophic injuries like Alex's.

Then it's fair for every player and Club :nerd:
 
Rule needs to be that only whatever the Insurer pays is Cap exempt.
With a maximum exemption amount being the contract amount in the case of catastrophic injuries like Alex's.

Then it's fair for every player and Club :nerd:

I can't believe the NRL (Greenburg) overruled the insurer's decision not to pay out Watmough's injury & decreed Parramatta could him pay him out & be exempt from their salary cap.

How blatant is that?
 
I can't believe the NRL (Greenburg) overruled the insurer's decision not to pay out Watmough's injury & decreed Parramatta could him pay him out & be exempt from their salary cap.

How blatant is that?

Then refused to allow Snake and Skivvy to be medically retired.

Then allowed 1nglis to be. And probably Samantha, Gillett and Mutalino as well.
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom