|
BobTheDestroyer posted:Also mentions of returning to the Eels, must be planning to play for free or something The US team has a player that is taking a break from the NFL to compete at the Olympics, nothing like this was mentioned. Saul Goode posted:Why? We were already under the cap this year until we had to pay back previous year's indiscretions, and we've since offloaded three high value players. Next year we should be easily able to get both Hayne and Norman. I thought the point of offloading Peats, Morgan and Watmough was to get under the cap for 2016.
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 04:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
Saul Goode posted:Why? We were already under the cap this year what?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
I was triggered by the Roosters under pressure on their goal line deliberately conceding a penalty then jawing away with the ref for about 2 minutes until the Titans had no real choice but to shoot for goal. gently caress's sake how are these refs so dumb?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 10:27
|
|
|
Roosters are pretty good at ref manipulation
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 10:56
|
|
|
Not great at defence, though.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
Get hosed Roosters.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 11:46
|
|
|
Smorgasbord posted:what? Our 25 man roster for 2016 was salary cap compliant - we had to pay arrears of ~$600K due to unreported historic illegal payments, so that penalty wasn't actually related to current contractual payments. Shedding Watmough, Peats and Morgan was the only way to make up the $600K halfway through the season, but it should have freed up plenty of cap space for 2017 - especially if we also don't renew Michael Gordon to make way for Hayne.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 11:47
|
|
|
Saul Goode posted:Our 25 man roster for 2016 was salary cap compliant - we had to pay arrears of ~$600K due to unreported historic illegal payments, so that penalty wasn't actually related to current contractual payments. Shedding Watmough, Peats and Morgan was the only way to make up the $600K halfway through the season, but it should have freed up plenty of cap space for 2017 - especially if we also don't renew Michael Gordon to make way for Hayne. I'm almost certain that's incorrect, do you have a link for them being under cap if not for a carryover penalty this year?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
Smorgasbord posted:Get hosed Cunts.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 12:20
|
|
|
Smorgasbord posted:I'm almost certain that's incorrect, do you have a link for them being under cap if not for a carryover penalty this year? None of the media reports have been entirely clear, and most of them throw speculation into the middle of real numbers, but this statement has been repeated a few times over the past couple of weeks: quote:The Eels won't be able to begin accruing points until they are salary cap compliant, with the NRL adding $700,000 worth of third party agreements from the past three seasons into their salary cap for this year, leaving the Eels with $570,000 to shave off in four days. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rug...509-goproj.html And then there's this with regards to freeing up space for 2017: quote:Parramatta are set to retain star playmaker Corey Norman on a $2 million three-year deal after clearing more than a $1 million in their salary cap for next season with the departures of Anthony Watmough, Nathan Peats and Ryan Morgan. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rug...513-goumhe.html
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
The sentences in bold indicate that the NRL ruled that the Eels were in breach of the 2016 cap. http://www.nrl.com/parramatta-salary-cap-preliminary-findings/tabid/10871/newsid/95530/default.aspx quote:An investigation by the NRL's Integrity Unit has made preliminary findings that since at least 2013 the Parramatta Rugby League Club has been operating a system designed to enable it to exceed the salary cap without detection and give its team an unfair advantage.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
None of that contradicts the statement about why they were over the cap for 2016 though?quote:...since at least 2013... a series of payments were either hidden from the NRL or misrepresented as suitable for exclusion from the salary cap But anyway, the point I was making is that we have freed up over $1M for 2017 and if you add Michael Gordon's contract to the mix then there should be enough to bump Norman's deal up as well as get Hayne on ~$800K without the need for any conspiracy theories.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Are you taking into account that Norman wants 800K and has rejected the first eels offer or that you guys take on Jennings entire contract next year.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
I don't know what the value of Jennings' contract disparity is so yeah, that could kill my dreams. But Norman should be OK, I think we offered him up to $600K (from his current $500K) while Watmough was still around, but we should be right to bump that up to $800K now.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
He would want to play for the eels so you have that in your favour. Like everything it just comes down to money.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 06:34
|
|
|
Saul Goode posted:I don't know what the value of Jennings' contract disparity is so yeah, that could kill my dreams. But Norman should be OK, I think we offered him up to $600K (from his current $500K) while Watmough was still around, but we should be right to bump that up to $800K now. Reminder that Mitchell loving Moses is looking for $1mil + (yeah I know looking is one thing, finding is another), while his slightly better version Luke Brooks is also on the market. Norman is easily the better player now and in the future so good luck even at $800k. Interesting that Parra seem to have had a cap penalty applied to them this year for past breaches, why the gently caress wasn't that applied to Melbourne - spread over a few years to at least allow them to field a team? Melbourne still the only team to go unpunished for a serious cap breach.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
Smorgasbord posted:Melbourne still the only team to go unpunished for a serious cap breach. do you mean in 2016, or in general?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
Because, like Brisbane, the NRL doesn't really want to punish them so will do their utmost to avoid doing so.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
Abalone Malone posted:do you mean in 2016, or in general? In terms of the proven large scale breaches in the salary cap era - Dogs, Warriors, Storm and now Eels. Does not include non addressed breaches like Roosters, Brisbane etc.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Smorgasbord posted:In terms of the proven large scale breaches in the salary cap era - Dogs, Warriors, Storm and now Eels. Does not include non addressed breaches like Roosters, Brisbane etc. you know they had their premierships stripped from them, right? there is no way the Broncos are under the cap, but no one seems to care.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
Abalone Malone posted:you know they had their premierships stripped from them, right? A kid not being allowed to keep the lollies they stole is not a punishment.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
Everyone in the football media still acts like Melbourne win a premiership that year as well
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Smorgasbord posted:A kid not being allowed to keep the lollies they stole is not a punishment. What do you mean? They had their premierships stripped, played the whole season for no points and unlike Canterbury were not allowed to renegotiate players' deals to get them back under the cap - they actually had to lose players. They lost Inglis and quite a few others and since then have made a team out of the big three who stayed and whatever unwanted journeymen Bellamy could shout into decent form. Don't get me wrong, I don't feel sorry for Melbourne but just for the life of me can't work out how you'd think they got off lightly. Abalone Malone posted:there is no way the Broncos are under the cap, but no one seems to care. Really? I thought the 100 million in dodgy TPAs Alfie cooks up every Friday night with the luxury of a 7 day turnaround would mean we're miles under the cap. Seriously though there are a couple of teams which I reckon would have to be worth more than the Broncos on paper. Cowboys for a start. ili fucked around with this message at 12:11 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
Based on the scale of the cheating, Melbourne should have been kicked out of the competition. But because they're in a battleground city/state, the game couldn't afford to do that.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Perhaps they should have forced then to wear a ridiculous colour scheme and a dumb name. Wait a minute
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:19
|
|
|
Jono C posted:Based on the scale of the cheating, Melbourne should have been kicked out of the competition. But because they're in a battleground city/state, the game couldn't afford to do that. The Raiders breached the cap and won a premiership with an illegal team. The Warriors went over by more than 1 million, as did the Storm, with the Bulldogs cheating the cap by more than 2 million. Is it only the Storm who should have been kicked out?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:34
|
|
|
ili posted:The Raiders breached the cap and won a premiership with an illegal team. The Warriors went over by more than 1 million, as did the Storm, with the Bulldogs cheating the cap by more than 2 million. Is it only the Storm who should have been kicked out? Yeah,I'm not averse to giving extra penalties to a team that's a systematic cheat when they win several premierships as a direct result. Seems pretty fair.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
ili posted:What do you mean? They had their premierships stripped, played the whole season for no points and unlike Canterbury were not allowed to renegotiate players' deals to get them back under the cap - they actually had to lose players. They lost Inglis and quite a few others and since then have made a team out of the big three who stayed and whatever unwanted journeymen Bellamy could shout into decent form. The premierships gained from cheating were vacated - not a punishment just a nullification of the cheating. The players and fans still got those grand final wins and that's what really matters to them. This was just symbolic and most still gives them the credit for the wins regardless. They were not allowed to earn points with an illegally formed roster. Again this is not a punishment, it's simply not allowing them to continue prospering from cheating. Renegotiating player deals midseason because you got caught cheating should never be allowed for both competitive reasons, and protection of players from unfair coercion. They had to lose players? Cry me a river, they only managed to retain all those players because they were outrageously breaching the cap for years on end. Most other clubs had to make those hard calls years earlier in a player's development and they frequently get it wrong. Melbourne got to keep all the guys they wanted for those years without deciding between say Cronk & Inglis, ar 19 year old kid X or Y - they got to keep both and decide later. Look at what happened to Manly when they axed Glenn Stewart, basically ripped the players apart - Melbourne never had to do that. What this meant is Melbourne were able to keep everyone happy and together. The players loved it - they were all taken care of, they were winning, they settled down in Melbourne and grew families and established themselves in the city. That's why they were all willing to stay even at a discount, they all benefited from that culture that was only able to be built by cheating. They still benefit from that effect today, people go there or stay there on a discount because they're a 'winning club', all built on cheating. The Canterbury situation is a little fuzzy for me, if they were allowed to renegotiate deals then that's bullshit for the same reasons as above in terms of allowing them to leverage the 'winning culture' gained by cheating to keep those players. What I do know is that the Bulldogs had to operate under a reduced cap for multiple seasons after the breach, you know - an actual punishment that wiped away any continuing benefits of their cheating. The Warriors also had cap reductions and points penalties for following years in their punishment - we copped it on the chin but I do think it''s worth noting that the Warriors breach was entirely self reported after the new ownership discovered what the previous regime had been up to. In summary, gently caress Melbourne. They were not punished in any meaningful way, merely a nullification of the fruits of their cheating and a restriction on earning points with a ridiculously illegally constructed roster. After the end of that season they in fact continue to benefit from the legacy of their cheating yet their fans still bleat and moan incessantly.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
go storm go forever injured billy slater, 2x australia's greatest athlete
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
ili posted:Really? I thought the 100 million in dodgy TPAs Alfie cooks up every Friday night with the luxury of a 7 day turnaround would mean we're miles under the cap. Seriously though there are a couple of teams which I reckon would have to be worth more than the Broncos on paper. Cowboys for a start. I would have thought the Warriors would have been suspect at the start of the season tbh, luckily they are very good at transforming star representative level players into garbage ones
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
cpaf posted:I would have thought the Warriors would have been suspect at the start of the season tbh, luckily they are very good at transforming star representative level players into garbage ones I think they're in a similar situation as us - they've got a bunch of locals who've come through their juniors and would rather stay for less than move away along with a high profile recruit in Luke who'd prefer to be with his family and play for a team he likes instead of being worked to death by a bonehead coach for a team on the slide.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
ili posted:The Raiders breached the cap and won a premiership with an illegal team. The Warriors went over by more than 1 million, as did the Storm, with the Bulldogs cheating the cap by more than 2 million. Is it only the Storm who should have been kicked out? The Warriors breach was $1m over two seasons, and was self reported. The Storm were $1m over the year before and the year in which they got busted, with two years of breaches before that and a forecast of another $1m+ breach the following season. None of the rorts before or after are anywhere the same scale, although the Dogs might have had a chance if allowed to continue for longer. Parramatta's is a combination of incompetence and arrogance- even when presented when a get out of jail free card they still hosed up. ili posted:I think they're in a similar situation as us - they've got a bunch of locals who've come through their juniors and would rather stay for less than move away along with a high profile recruit in Luke who'd prefer to be with his family and play for a team he likes instead of being worked to death by a bonehead coach for a team on the slide. We definitely have a few guys taking hometown discounts- Johnson, Mannering and Matulino are in that category, plus Luke took a discount to come home. Given that we have to pay overs to get good Australian talent (and I use that term loosely), I have no problem with this. The other thing to consider is that we have only been spending up to the cap in the past two or three seasons, before then we were well under the cap.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
The salary cap means gently caress all when a team like the Roosters can get 2.5million in TPA's
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 10:58
|
|
|
Jono C posted:The Warriors breach was $1m over two seasons, and was self reported. The Storm were $1m over the year before and the year in which they got busted, with two years of breaches before that and a forecast of another $1m+ breach the following season. None of the rorts before or after are anywhere the same scale, although the Dogs might have had a chance if allowed to continue for longer. Parramatta's is a combination of incompetence and arrogance- even when presented when a get out of jail free card they still hosed up. Parra's is on the same scale as the Storm, $3m over 4 years according to this fox sports article, and the transcripts make it sound like they started pretty small in the first year and then really ramped things up. It's well worth a click, as you say the combination of incompetence and arrogance is just staggering. No wonder the NRL wants these guys banned for life, no way would I want anyone stupid enough to tape themselves discussing details of their fraud schemes and then document them in board meeting minutes anywhere near my organisation. They even mention that they shouldn't be discussing these things on tape as it's all meant to be at arm's length and could get them all into serious trouble, then continue on anyway. It's jaw-droppingly dumb even by rugby league's pathetically low standards. ili fucked around with this message at 12:36 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 12:33
|
|
|
http://nrlrookie.com/ I am completely confident this will end well quote:As the show progresses the number of Rookies will be reduced on a weekly basis and will culminate with the winning Rookie being awarded a professional contract with an NRL Club. aejix fucked around with this message at 14:52 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
*a guaranteed contact with whatever nrl team has the most space under the cap
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
iajanus posted:*a guaranteed contact with whatever nrl team has the most space under the cap My guess is Easts
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
Channel 7 posted a leaked (?) lineup for NSW: Team 1 Matt Moylan 2 Josh Mansour 3 Michael Jennings 4 Josh Dugan 5 Blake Ferguson 6 James Maloney 7 Adam Reynolds/Mitchell Pearce 8 Paul Gallen 9 Robbie Farah 10 Aaron Woods 11 Boyd Cordner 12 Josh Jackson 13 Greg Bird 14 Jack Bird/Tyrone Peachey 15 David Klemmer 16 James Tamou 17 Bryce Cartwright/Tyson Frizell Better than last year (which isn't saying a lot) but the cruiser edge is demonstrably poo poo and will get trod on for 80 minutes by Inglis/Oates. Josh Jackson is not an origin level player, no Fifita or Roberts, Moylan is a poor mans Coote (but still good), Pearce is still somehow in there?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
I like it
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 23:54
|
|