Salary Cap Rorting | Ideas on a Potential Solution

User avatar
prattenparkchild
Member
Member
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun 07 May, 2017 1:10 pm

Re: Salary Cap Rorting | Ideas on a Potential Solution

Post by prattenparkchild » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:37 am

I'm sick of hearing about the innocent players. In the past- players signing 2 x contracts with one a false one for the front office, underhand payments directly to players in envelopes aside from their regular paid into bank account salaries. PLayer managers signing players names and then later when something blows up the player says thats not my signature. Thats all illegal methods now punishable by courts and tax investigators.

Yes, player managers are under the gun now, but players have to be made accountable now too. Theyre potentially as complicit as the clubs and player managers.


gallagher
Member
Member
Posts: 5690
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm

Post by gallagher » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:39 am

prattenparkchild wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:37 am
I'm sick of hearing about the innocent players. In the past- players signing 2 x contracts with one a false one for the front office, underhand payments directly to players in envelopes aside from their regular paid into bank account salaries. PLayer managers signing players names and then later when something blows up the player says thats not my signature. Thats all illegal methods now punishable by courts and tax investigators.

Yes, player managers are under the gun now, but players have to be made accountable now too. Theyre potentially as complicit as the clubs and player managers.
Absolutely. If one player gets suspended for the duration of their contract for cheating and this all ends straight away.

User avatar
2041
Member
Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: Fri 14 Jan, 2011 12:32 pm

Post by 2041 » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 8:56 am

weststigers wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:17 am
2041 wrote:
Wed 29 Aug, 2018 5:26 pm
weststigers wrote:
Wed 29 Aug, 2018 11:29 am

2. PLAYERS
  • Fines up to $100,000 or up to the breach amount
  • Suspension of up to 3 months
  • Cancellation of contract and must play with another club
I'm not a contract lawyer, but I'm guessing putting financial penalties on players might be hard to do. The clubs are the ones that have the salary cap agreement with the competition, and it would be hard to argue that it's a player's responsibility to ensure that their employer is compliant with that agreement. I'm sure there have been players that "know" their top-up payments are dodgy, especially when you're talking about literal brown envelopes full of cash, but again it's not the players that have the responsibility for the way a club runs its business.

In addition, outside of the cap there's nothing actually illegal about players receiving payments from third parties (assuming they declare them for tax and so forth - and even that would between the player, his accountant and the ATO, nothing to do with the NRL). If Nick Politis's mates want to take James Tedesco golfing and chuck him $20,000 for his time, that's not an issue so far as the law is concerned. That puts the comp in very dubious legal territory when it comes to penalising players because there would be all sorts of issues around restraint of trade, unfair dismissal and so forth.

I'm also guessing the NRL is very cautious about punishing players for this sort of stuff anyway, especially given the big cap-breach scandals started when there was a very live threat from the UK, rugby etc. The threat of losing your livelihood because you've taken a few extra quid here and there would be a pretty big incentive to sign for a rival comp or code.
If that was the case, I’d argue that salary cap rorting is on par with match fixing.

It’s about the integrity of sport in this country and should be covered under the same laws as match fixing laws.

Fines, contract cancellations and criminal proceedings should not be off the table.
You've missed the point.

Match fixing is something a player does for themselves. It breaks a contract with the player's employer, which presumably contains clauses about integrity and appropriate effort.

The difference is that complying with the salary cap is a club's responsibility, not a player's. For one thing, it would be very hard to prove that a player knows that money they take that would otherwise be legal is in fact outside the cap. The NRL doesn't have the right to demand players' tax returns, and even if it did it would struggle to prove that amount X was paid to player Y for playing for club Z rather than just for services rendered unrelated to the game.

Even if the NRL is pretty damn certain a player or players knew they were being paid outside the cap, as I say the player(s) would have a decent case if they sued the NRL, because it's not up to them to ensure clubs are cap compliant.

It's all well and god talking tough about player penalties for cap breaches, but in practice it would be much harder to do than you think. There's a reason why the NRL has never gone after players.

User avatar
2041
Member
Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: Fri 14 Jan, 2011 12:32 pm

Post by 2041 » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 9:04 am

weststigers wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:21 am
Elderslie Tiger wrote:
Wed 29 Aug, 2018 4:07 pm
Why cant the NRL introduce a system along the lines of Super Coach or a points rated system if a players value increases during the year he stays on his original value until his contract expires if he wishes to opt out of his contract the present value kicks in could stop the current situation were players are kept on book figures proped up by TPA s a committee could be formed to assess player values with no input from the players club.
I think what would flush out the hidden payments is if the NRL enforced a rule where:

* Players must go to the highest bidding club.

Loyalty would be dead, but the rorting would stop.

Perhaps put salary cap concessions in place for each year a player stays with the club to avoid a merry-go-round each year.
Also impossible; this would be a clear restraint of trade. The NRL doesn't have absolute power to ignore employment law. If I want to take less money to live and work in Bondi because the extra $5,000 I'v been offered doesn't seem enough to compensate for having to live in Canberra that should be up to me.

It also doesn't account for TPAs, which are legal according to the rules of the game. If a company wants to give a player $300,000 a year but says it's only worthwhile to them if the player is, say, a Rabbitoh rather than a Cowboy should that count towards the blanket rule of "go to whoever offers most money"? If the Cowboys are offering $500,000 a year and Souths are offering $400,000 a year, surely the player should be able to consider what additional value he might get from signing the lesser contract?

User avatar
2041
Member
Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: Fri 14 Jan, 2011 12:32 pm

Post by 2041 » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 9:13 am

prattenparkchild wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:37 am
I'm sick of hearing about the innocent players. In the past- players signing 2 x contracts with one a false one for the front office, underhand payments directly to players in envelopes aside from their regular paid into bank account salaries. PLayer managers signing players names and then later when something blows up the player says thats not my signature. Thats all illegal methods now punishable by courts and tax investigators.

Yes, player managers are under the gun now, but players have to be made accountable now too. Theyre potentially as complicit as the clubs and player managers.
Again, this is all well and good but not so simple in practice. I'll take the extreme example of the Storm situation where players literally had two different contracts. Once the NRL finds multiple contracts it has the club bang to rights. But the players can just say "Oh yeah, they came back to me after I'd signed the first contract and said they'd managed to restructure the deal slightly in my favour, I thought that was a bit odd but it seemed like good news to me so of course I signed. I had no idea they were still going to file the first contract with the NRL."

It sounds dodgy as anything but, as I've said before, it's not a player's responsibility to ensure their club is cap compliant. I guess the NRL could ask players to sign a document confirming that the contract as filed with the comp is the same one they signed - this would add an obligation directly with the NRL itself. But it would only stop one particular kind of cap cheating which I suspect no-one is doing any more anyway since the Storm fiasco.


Newtown
Member
Member
Posts: 5704
Joined: Fri 28 Sep, 2012 8:40 am

Post by Newtown » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 9:22 am

The NRL under Greenberg is a rort.

User avatar
Blackpearl
Member
Member
Posts: 1395
Joined: Thu 20 Aug, 2009 12:01 pm
Location: The burbs

Post by Blackpearl » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 10:22 am

Newtown wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 9:22 am
The NRL under Greenberg is a rort.
Corruption, surely not.
Perhaps an internal audit may be interesting. :?
I dislike sowfs immensely

Elderslie Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri 28 Apr, 2017 4:09 pm

Post by Elderslie Tiger » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 10:30 am

Its only a rort if your not in on it
NRL should clean up TPAs
All providers of TPAs should be made known to the public.
They should have to provide cash up front which would be held in trust by the NRL or provide a Bank Guarantee both these measures would insure the players would receive what they are due at present anyone can say they'll provide a TPA when it comes time to pay up normally end of season sorry dont have the resources to pay player left high and dry and disgruntled.I think if these measures were introduced you would see a lot less TPAs and players values would even out.

Silentio
Member
Member
Posts: 198
Joined: Mon 01 Jun, 2015 1:21 pm

Post by Silentio » Thu 30 Aug, 2018 1:23 pm

weststigers wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:11 am
Silentio wrote:
Wed 29 Aug, 2018 1:30 pm
From the NRL's website:

What players can earn outside the salary cap:

Unlimited - Players can earn unlimited amounts from corporate sponsors who are not associated with the club and who do not use the game's intellectual property (no club logos, jerseys or emblems) provided these are pre-approved by both a Player’s Club and the NRL. These agreements may not be negotiated by the club as an incentive for a player to sign a contract, nor can they be guaranteed by the club.

It's common knowledge that the clubs doing well have corporate "friends" that will top up a player's salary. No amount of policing or penalties will level the playing field as long as this happens.

The best we could hope for is a draft, but Terry Hill ruined the chances of that back in the 90s.
Wow...

Club says “no room on the jersey for sponsorship, but why not have a chat with x player. They might be interested and you’ll get your brand up on the big screen every time they run into the field”

The sponsor isn’t associated with the club, so it’s a free reign!

Smaller sponsers with no naming rights would lap this up.
This is outdated, but seemingly the best connected clubs indirectly have a few million extra spent on their roster:

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/why-it ... nhhi5.html

User avatar
weststigers
Member
Member
Posts: 765
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 6:25 pm

Post by weststigers » Sat 01 Sep, 2018 8:43 pm

2041 wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 8:56 am
weststigers wrote:
Thu 30 Aug, 2018 12:17 am
2041 wrote:
Wed 29 Aug, 2018 5:26 pm
weststigers wrote:
Wed 29 Aug, 2018 11:29 am

2. PLAYERS
  • Fines up to $100,000 or up to the breach amount
  • Suspension of up to 3 months
  • Cancellation of contract and must play with another club
I'm not a contract lawyer, but I'm guessing putting financial penalties on players might be hard to do. The clubs are the ones that have the salary cap agreement with the competition, and it would be hard to argue that it's a player's responsibility to ensure that their employer is compliant with that agreement. I'm sure there have been players that "know" their top-up payments are dodgy, especially when you're talking about literal brown envelopes full of cash, but again it's not the players that have the responsibility for the way a club runs its business.

In addition, outside of the cap there's nothing actually illegal about players receiving payments from third parties (assuming they declare them for tax and so forth - and even that would between the player, his accountant and the ATO, nothing to do with the NRL). If Nick Politis's mates want to take James Tedesco golfing and chuck him $20,000 for his time, that's not an issue so far as the law is concerned. That puts the comp in very dubious legal territory when it comes to penalising players because there would be all sorts of issues around restraint of trade, unfair dismissal and so forth.

I'm also guessing the NRL is very cautious about punishing players for this sort of stuff anyway, especially given the big cap-breach scandals started when there was a very live threat from the UK, rugby etc. The threat of losing your livelihood because you've taken a few extra quid here and there would be a pretty big incentive to sign for a rival comp or code.
If that was the case, I’d argue that salary cap rorting is on par with match fixing.

It’s about the integrity of sport in this country and should be covered under the same laws as match fixing laws.

Fines, contract cancellations and criminal proceedings should not be off the table.
You've missed the point.

Match fixing is something a player does for themselves. It breaks a contract with the player's employer, which presumably contains clauses about integrity and appropriate effort.

The difference is that complying with the salary cap is a club's responsibility, not a player's. For one thing, it would be very hard to prove that a player knows that money they take that would otherwise be legal is in fact outside the cap. The NRL doesn't have the right to demand players' tax returns, and even if it did it would struggle to prove that amount X was paid to player Y for playing for club Z rather than just for services rendered unrelated to the game.

Even if the NRL is pretty damn certain a player or players knew they were being paid outside the cap, as I say the player(s) would have a decent case if they sued the NRL, because it's not up to them to ensure clubs are cap compliant.

It's all well and god talking tough about player penalties for cap breaches, but in practice it would be much harder to do than you think. There's a reason why the NRL has never gone after players.
Are you a lawyer?

Pawsandclaws
Member
Member
Posts: 3262
Joined: Sat 20 Jun, 2015 5:53 pm

Post by Pawsandclaws » Sat 01 Sep, 2018 8:50 pm

will1999 wrote:
Wed 29 Aug, 2018 4:03 pm
apparently Sharks are a million dollars under the cap
SMH article and also on Sharks' forum that business is not so good in the Shire and club has only spent 95% of its cap as a consequence. There have been delays to parts of the development and returns not as expected. How this impacts player roster we will have to wait and see.

User avatar
Sabre
Member
Member
Posts: 6958
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:06 pm
Location: Tiger Town

Post by Sabre » Sat 01 Sep, 2018 9:03 pm

How about anyone over the cap gets the Storm treatment of losing all their points and is unable to gain any further points. Regardless of whether they are over by $1, $100K or $1Mil.

Tcat
Member
Member
Posts: 156
Joined: Wed 08 Aug, 2018 5:18 pm

Post by Tcat » Sat 01 Sep, 2018 9:30 pm

Sabre wrote:
Sat 01 Sep, 2018 9:03 pm
How about anyone over the cap gets the Storm treatment of losing all their points and is unable to gain any further points. Regardless of whether they are over by $1, $100K or $1Mil.
I'd be happy with that. Sting them hard regardless of the amount. Easier said than done when there's corruption within the organisation.

User avatar
TigerTiger
Member
Member
Posts: 587
Joined: Tue 13 Jun, 2017 4:56 pm

Post by TigerTiger » Sat 01 Sep, 2018 10:19 pm

The whole point about stopping TPAs being a restriction on trade, no forget it. If the NRL wanted to, they could say on the merit and integrity of the sport and to make it fair et cetera, no TPAs allowed at all. Make the players sign an agreement or leave the game.

Maybe a couple would leave, most would stay. The ones that left could be replaced, they would be the sort we don't want anyway.

The RLPA wouldn't agree, but so what, they would only consider what's good for their members, not the game.

Todd would never do it though, he's so dodgy he could probably get a run after his NRL CEO gig at Storm. We need someone else to do it. Someone not under the thumb of the Politis and the big business.
A one eyed supporter, mostly :crazy, always :sign:

Post Reply