NRL Fantasy Fanatics - A place for discussion of NRL Fantasy / Virtual Sports / Super Coach and other Fantasy Sports
[0%] [25%] [25%] [13%] [13%] [24%] 
Honeysett wrote:Regarding players knowing: Of course the players know, the Storm players knew as well. Easiest way to check is what they're lodging as their tax returns, if they're claiming the extra payments they're aware of the extra money being paid above what they signed for. Who can blame them though, if someone at my work walked up to me and handed be $10k under the table I would smile, nod politely and keep my mouth shut.
filthridden wrote:Honeysett wrote:Regarding players knowing: Of course the players know, the Storm players knew as well. Easiest way to check is what they're lodging as their tax returns, if they're claiming the extra payments they're aware of the extra money being paid above what they signed for. Who can blame them though, if someone at my work walked up to me and handed be $10k under the table I would smile, nod politely and keep my mouth shut.
Unless he was paying you to keep your mouth open.
Early nomination for post of the year.
I was trying to use that angle and had nothing. Well played sirfilthridden wrote:
Unless he was paying you to keep your mouth open.
surmo13 wrote:
That's hardly a for sure tell though, the players probably aren't getting these extra payments in paper bags in back alleys, there's every chance these were being presented to them as legitimate third-party agreements & then swept under the rug by the shady fools running the place.
dasherhalo wrote:Someone alluded to it this morning on radio. If they don't give points penalties, and make it purely a financial penalty, then you'll have fall guys taking the entire blame for deliberate car- manipulation.
And some teams will consider that a risk worth taking.
Sure, points are harsh, but it's the big stick. Without it, things would be much worse IMHO
filthridden wrote:
Unless he was paying you to keep your mouth open.
That doesn't deal with the fact that they are over the cap now though. Would you be happy playing against a team that is known to be over the cap next week?Oz Sport Mad wrote:
I'm no lawyer but isn't a lot of this falsifying company info and fraud, criminal activity?
Surely jail time for the people that have committed the crimes would be a better and more appropriate penalty but also deterrent for any organisations considering whether the risks are worthwhile.
ryno_ wrote:
Youll need 28 points to even be in the conversation. There are 15 games remaining. After getting 4 free points from the bye round, youll have to go 12 from 15 and will still have to rely on F/A.
Parra are done for 2016. See you next year. Come in under the cap next time.
Oz Sport Mad wrote:
I'm no lawyer but isn't a lot of this falsifying company info and fraud, criminal activity?
Surely jail time for the people that have committed the crimes would be a better and more appropriate penalty but also deterrent for any organisations considering whether the risks are worthwhile.
Dip wrote:Of course it's not the player's fault. It's not their job to manage the cap. Funny how people who were saying to suspend Smith, Inglis etc have at this early stage not called for the suspension of Eels players.
On another note, as I understand it, the Eels are still $570K over the cap for 2016 and won't get any points until they are under - meaning they have to shed some players for cheaper players. There are a lot of if's, and perhaps it is too soon, but perhaps the best thing to do (ethics aside) would be to cut Foran. It hasn't really been publicised exactly what has happened to him, bit IF for example he is in hospital due to substance abuse, then theoretically that is probably grounds to terminate his contract. You'd think that would be the $570K sorted right there, and doing it while cutting a player who will be missing anyway for who knows how long.
Drowned any puppies lately? Surely Watbro just retires?Dip wrote:Of course it's not the player's fault. It's not their job to manage the cap. Funny how people who were saying to suspend Smith, Inglis etc have at this early stage not called for the suspension of Eels players.
On another note, as I understand it, the Eels are still $570K over the cap for 2016 and won't get any points until they are under - meaning they have to shed some players for cheaper players. There are a lot of if's, and perhaps it is too soon, but perhaps the best thing to do (ethics aside) would be to cut Foran. It hasn't really been publicised exactly what has happened to him, bit IF for example he is in hospital due to substance abuse, then theoretically that is probably grounds to terminate his contract. You'd think that would be the $570K sorted right there, and doing it while cutting a player who will be missing anyway for who knows how long.
Dip wrote:Of course it's not the player's fault. It's not their job to manage the cap. Funny how people who were saying to suspend Smith, Inglis etc have at this early stage not called for the suspension of Eels players.
On another note, as I understand it, the Eels are still $570K over the cap for 2016 and won't get any points until they are under - meaning they have to shed some players for cheaper players. There are a lot of if's, and perhaps it is too soon, but perhaps the best thing to do (ethics aside) would be to cut Foran. It hasn't really been publicised exactly what has happened to him, bit IF for example he is in hospital due to substance abuse, then theoretically that is probably grounds to terminate his contract. You'd think that would be the $570K sorted right there, and doing it while cutting a player who will be missing anyway for who knows how long.
Krump wrote:
That doesn't deal with the fact that they are over the cap now though. Would you be happy playing against a team that is known to be over the cap next week?
You can hardly account for Mitch Pearce dry humping a dog though. Sorry I couldn't help myself.Oz Sport Mad wrote:
Yeah I guess I come from the perspective that this is an administration issue rather than a performance issue.
You could assemble the highest paid team in the comp (which is still possible under the current TPA rules).....and not be guaranteed a premiership let alone a good team (refer previous Eels teams that have been over the cap).
Yes they should be forced to get their shit in order but (until I hear further details) I am currently comfortable with them being punished off the field rather than on....provided the off field punishment is sufficient.
Honeysett wrote:
There was clear circumstances around the Storm players, boats, home renos and hundreds of thousands in Harvey Norman vouchers. Don't tell me that the players didn't know or is it not their go?
Also as far as terminating Foran's contract let's hope you don't work in PR because you would drive a company into the ground, could you imagine the massive backlash they would get kicking a man while he is down. Especially in such a fragile state of mind. If you were going to get rid of anyone it would be Watmough because he's close to retiring.
Apparently if they can prove he has new injuries forcing him to retire his salary comes off the cap. That's what I'm reading everywhere anyway.Dip wrote:
Haha was expecting a few comments, but my point is that we don't really know what Foran has done. Would the outrage be less if hypothetically he also beat up his ex on a drug induced rage. I don't remember too much backlash when Dylan Walker was released.
Personally I'd keep Foran if it is something like depression. They fought hard to keep him last when when he was apparently entitled to do a DCE style backflip, and I don't think anything has changed. I would think the Eels see Norman and Foran as the foundation they can build a team around.
Re Watmough, would they save anything though? Without him having breached his contract they would have to pay out his contract unless someone else signs him, and I doubt there are any or many clubs willing to sign him, so you're not actually saving anything.
Home