Bye Bye Sharks
- Thread starter Dave Eagle
- Start date
Did I imagine that 7.30 report?
There's only one man I can think of who can keep a story like this quiet.
There's only one man I can think of who can keep a story like this quiet.
Rex
Bencher
A challenge to the cap would have to prove BOTH that the cap restrains trade (likely to succeed) and that it was unreasonable (unlikely to succeed).
Without the cap the entire financial foundations on which the competition is run may crumble leaving the players in a financially worse off position. The NRL needs all/most clubs to survive to flourish and elimination of the cap would likely cause many clubs to collapse.
Very different to the Dennis Tutty challenge, where he was restrained from negotiating with any club except for Balmain. Tutty's successful challenge immediately led to Manly (and Easts) signing Souths players who were handcuffed to the club on low pay. Souths fans, as a group, still haven't gotten over them not being able to effectively handcuff their players on pittances for life.
With low intelligence comes low flexibility. It's not their fault. 🙂
Without the cap the entire financial foundations on which the competition is run may crumble leaving the players in a financially worse off position. The NRL needs all/most clubs to survive to flourish and elimination of the cap would likely cause many clubs to collapse.
Very different to the Dennis Tutty challenge, where he was restrained from negotiating with any club except for Balmain. Tutty's successful challenge immediately led to Manly (and Easts) signing Souths players who were handcuffed to the club on low pay. Souths fans, as a group, still haven't gotten over them not being able to effectively handcuff their players on pittances for life.
With low intelligence comes low flexibility. It's not their fault. 🙂
voicefromthehill
Bencher
??SeaEagleRock8 said:
Masked Eagle
Bencher
I'm a bit confused. Sharks were fined $150,000 back in early July for failing to declare third party payments. If the claims tonight relate to those third party payments than its no real story at all. HOWEVER, I'm not sure if Cullen is lifting the lid on something entirely different. At the very least it doesn't appear to be Storm level proportions so it might just mean another fine. I'm so over bad news league stories, regardless of the club concerned.
TokyoEagle
Bencher
The Sharks took bail out money from the ARL then were one of the 1st to sign up to Super League, leave them to squirm on the hook IMO.
The report asked some pretty tough questions re Flanagan and the accounts
1. There were no recorded payments to Dank
2. The chemist dank used to make the peptides was discredited
3. There was a secret bank account with Westpac ( ironically the club banks with st George ) that Cullen did not know about . This was called the high performance account
4. The issue sounded like the failure to properly declare the 3rd party payments rather than what was bring paid
Was a pretty interesting story and shoes that, despite many claims, maybe we are not as dysfunctional as some
1. There were no recorded payments to Dank
2. The chemist dank used to make the peptides was discredited
3. There was a secret bank account with Westpac ( ironically the club banks with st George ) that Cullen did not know about . This was called the high performance account
4. The issue sounded like the failure to properly declare the 3rd party payments rather than what was bring paid
Was a pretty interesting story and shoes that, despite many claims, maybe we are not as dysfunctional as some
Hamster Huey
Space Invader
Rex said:
On the 'unreasonable' point, this is where the support for the Cap by the RLPA is invaluable. In effect, the playing group recognise the importance of it and thus support playing under this restraint.
This support then denies any individual the basis in which to raise their own challenge independently (a'la Hill for the draft).
It would be an interesting time if the RLPA no longer wants it, but given the negative fallout for most clubs if payments escalated out of control, this is extemely unlikely to occur.
Cullen is a well-credentialed administrator with a lot of credibility who was appointed as interim CEO of the Sharks in March – by the NRL.voicefromthehill said:
Remember? The NRL had to step in, as the Sharks were a basket case and imploding under the pressure of the drugs revelations.
3 weeks ago he quit in protest at continuing mismanagement, which he refused to be associated with. Talk about alarm bells ringing.
It was over 3 hours from the airing of the 7.30 Report on ABC before Foxsports news first referred to the allegations on that program. Josh Massoud of the Tele was the journo interviewed on Fox, and he had already spoken to 'the League' about them.
His interview began with 5 minutes of nudge nudge wink wink innuendo to the effect that of course Cullen was probably upset about his 'unhappy' exit from the Sharks. In other words, whatever the allegations, it should be seen in the context of coming from a disgruntled former employee. In other words, storm in a teacup, nothing to see here folks.
Quite brilliant deflection, of course. So who would Massoud have spoken to at 'the League' about all this? Obviously one T Greenberg.
I am not someone who wants to death-ride the Sharks, however their future looks highly shaky to me right now. However, the damage control exercise by the spin doctor maestro makes me suspect it's the whole NRL, or at least certainly more than just the poor old Sharkies, who are about to be exposed for shonkiness.
That's just my take. I'm not a very trusting person.
eagles2win
Bencher
It was a mess prior to Cullen getting there so can't really see why people are going to blame Cullen for it.
Wonder if he knows Cronulla's 5 year plan? 😀
CAMBO said:
Wonder if he knows Cronulla's 5 year plan? 😀
As much as I'd like to see the Sharks fold I don't think this will be the death of them. The NRL have too much invested in them.
The payments to Gallen have been aired before, it's just the ramblings of a disgruntled former sponsor. From Gallen's point of view it's just a 3rd party payment deal arranged by the club, the sponsor is trying to make it sound shady by using the word "cash".
As far as I know there is no salary cap on what a club spends on performance and development of players so the only issue here is a governance one in terms of "separate" bank accounts. It remains to be seen what that HPU account was spent on, the inference by the media being that Flanagan was finding the illegal supplement program with it.
They obviously have issues with management and how the club is run, but that isn't necessarily grounds to terminate them if their is no breach of the NRL contract.
The payments to Gallen have been aired before, it's just the ramblings of a disgruntled former sponsor. From Gallen's point of view it's just a 3rd party payment deal arranged by the club, the sponsor is trying to make it sound shady by using the word "cash".
As far as I know there is no salary cap on what a club spends on performance and development of players so the only issue here is a governance one in terms of "separate" bank accounts. It remains to be seen what that HPU account was spent on, the inference by the media being that Flanagan was finding the illegal supplement program with it.
They obviously have issues with management and how the club is run, but that isn't necessarily grounds to terminate them if their is no breach of the NRL contract.
Daddycool08
Reserve Grader
MadMarcus said:
Imagine the media frenzy if it was Manly.
Overall Manly has breached the cap by $85K last year only because TRex's payments were to be included in last year's payment. At Schubert's direction to my understanding.
I remember reading in the past on more than one occasion, that the coach and others did in fact raise monies off there own back to pay for a gym and equipment, to allow them to compete with other teams and with player retention and recruitment
This could quite easily explain the extra account, and cullens lack of knowledge of such. Lets be honest his tenure was brief
Fair to say while the evidence did sound damning, I didnt find cullen all that convincing and the timing was dubious at best
I also find it difficult to believe he would release any new information in what could become a tangled and involved legal matter. He is way to seasoned to place himself in harms way,
His involvement with the NRL also indicates he would be highly unlikely to release sensitive information prior to an official investigation and findings. Nothing but a weidler style wind up as far as Im concerned.
This could quite easily explain the extra account, and cullens lack of knowledge of such. Lets be honest his tenure was brief
Fair to say while the evidence did sound damning, I didnt find cullen all that convincing and the timing was dubious at best
I also find it difficult to believe he would release any new information in what could become a tangled and involved legal matter. He is way to seasoned to place himself in harms way,
His involvement with the NRL also indicates he would be highly unlikely to release sensitive information prior to an official investigation and findings. Nothing but a weidler style wind up as far as Im concerned.
I took it that the main threat to the club's survival would be legal action against the club by players. I suppose until the drug investigations have run their course no-one can say with certainty what will transpire ... but if the Shark players can keep their heads on with all this going on, and actually mount a finals campaign, it will be some sort of effort.Chip and Chase said:
Maybe. Except it wasn't Weidler, jbb/james, it was the 7.30 Report.jbb/james said:
How about this explanation: some bloke who actually values his good name can see the **** about to hit the fan, and wants to put a very large distance between himself and said fan …
But very different culture. Matthew Johns? Tony Zappia? The trophy cabinet...The Who said:
Users who are viewing this thread
2020 Ladder
| Team | P | W | D | L | PD | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bulldogs | 7 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 74 | 14 |
| 2 | Storm | 7 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 78 | 12 |
| 3 | Raiders | 8 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 58 | 12 |
| 4 | Warriors | 7 | 5 | 0 | 2 | -4 | 12 |
| 5 | Broncos | 8 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 78 | 10 |
| 6 | Cowboys | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | -10 | 10 |
| 7 | Sharks | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 39 | 8 |
| 8 | Sea Eagles | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 36 | 8 |
| 9 | Tigers | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 14 | 8 |
| 10 | Dragons | 7 | 3 | 0 | 4 | -8 | 8 |
| 11 | Rabbitohs | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | -44 | 8 |
| 12 | Dolphins | 8 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 6 |
| 13 | Roosters | 8 | 3 | 0 | 5 | -52 | 6 |
| 14 | Titans | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -68 | 6 |
| 15 | Knights | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -74 | 6 |
| 16 | Eels | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -107 | 6 |
| 17 | Panthers | 8 | 2 | 0 | 6 | -26 | 4 |
