Pascoe Held to Account

[TrueTiger]

I dont think JP should be held to account for lots of reasons,however I will say that since he has came to our club he has made mistakes,we all make mistakes,in having said that he is putting this club first in so many ways with corporate sponsorship,membership and the COE that you really have to give him credit as well as criticism....

I clearly remember the days of Mayer and co ....

JP is so far ahead of them business wise there is no comparison...

 

[cochise]

I find it difficult to blame him for us not making finals, he’s not a coach or head of football he’s the CEO, his job is to make sure the club as a business is running smoothly and he’s done a fair job in that regard. Obviously not perfect and he’s made mistakes but overall I think he’s done alright.

Agreed Josh, I think if the club was a little more transparent with its plans then he would have a lot more support.

Membership numbers, profit, crowd numbers, tv numbers and merchandise sales all went up last year so he must be doing something right.

I’d like to know who handles player contract values and who signs off on them, Pascoe probably wouldn’t know how much a player is worth, would it be Hartigan deciding that stuff?

There are some interesting things happening in the commercial and membership sides of Wests Tigers and I think if they were well known then the support would be much stronger.

Salary caps are handled differently at every club, but I would guess Hartigan and Madge at Wests Tigers

 

[jirskyr]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.


“The games rules are very, very clear on these arrangements. Any commitment to make such a payment should have been disclosed and it should have been included in the salary cap.

“The club failed to do this. The club **then compounded its conduct by submitting a misleading application to the NRL** in relation to the salary cap treatment of money paid to Robbie when he left the club.

“We feel like the club and Justin have misled the NRL around this ambassador agreement and we have to provide consistent sanctions on individuals and clubs throughout.

So after caught out tried to cover it up but submitting a misleading application??????

He never copped anything on the chin was most likely stood down on full pay for 6 months or used entitlements, they never miss out or are accountable.

Ahh, just to help you get the story straight.
The misleading application was in regards to clearing Farah from the cap, after he went to Souths. I don’t feel it was misleading at all. They were very direct about how they and stakeholders felt at the time of the debacle Farah and Taylor put the club through and tried to get dispensation.

If your implying that the sentence you quoted was in the more recent time then you’ve understood that wrong.

The NRL found it to be misleading because the club applied for salary cap relief for Farah stating he was a destabilising influence but had a job offer on the table for him after he retired. I can see how that would be viewed as misleading.

Because the offer to Farah was an inducement to leave for which he would be remunerated at a later date..

Which is fine in itself but then to claim cap relief as a disestablishing figure was misleading..

I think they would have been fine if they were just honest with the NRL throughout the entire process, I understand why we were fined.

I don't know any company that would offer someone a job 2 years down the track when the reason you want them to leave is because they are disestablishing to your organisation...

Oh wait Wests Tigers..

Happens all the time, depends what the role is. People get moved around because they don't fit where they are currently.

Tigers were being cheeky because we were trying to max-out our compensation wrt Farah departing, and that's obviously because we don't have the kind of cash someone like the Broncos has to just absorb million-dollar problems like they've done with Seibold.

To come out and poleaxe the Tigers, and if you recall Sharks got done too, but NRL does nothing to Souths or Storm or Roosters or Broncos who also very clearly incentivise their players with post-career guaranteed jobs. I'm not that guy who claims "conspiracy" at HQ or preferential treatment, but when it comes to incentivising players, it shouldn't matter whether you are trying to move them on or trying to retain them, it should all be treated the same.

But no NRL chose to thunder down on Tigers for, at worst, being cheeky or "misleading"... or actually being too forthright, which is the reality. Tigers got done for mentioning the Farah deal, thinking it was ok, but finding out it wasn't. Whereas Roosters lie about it and then announce the same types of deals once the retirement is locked in.

You may well argue its a better handling of the situation, of which I won't deny, but it's BS to be rewarding of the more deceitful and non-disclosing behaviour. Examples: Cronk at Roosters, now Aubo at Roosters has a job for life, GI at Souths getting his long-term deal for doing nothing, Corey Parker and D. Lock at Broncos etc.

 

[the_third]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.

Isn’t that copping it on the chin

Copping it on the chin would have been resigning.

That’s falling on your sword. Completely different ???

 

[tigerbalm]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.

Didn’t he admit guilt?


Irrelevant. He accepted the punishment. Copped it.

What else was he going to do? Tbh I don’t think Pascoe has accepted responsibility for anything he’s done, and there’s been a couple of howlers.


We should be looking for a new CEO under his leadership we have not played finals - that's what the fans expect especially when they and the Media build it up each year.
He was mates with Cleary and signed him that's another howler, i think he can't wait for this week to finish...

Joe Kelly was Manly CEO during 2015-2016, during which Manly finished 9th and 13th. The season prior to him joining Manly came 2nd in the regular season, so they got much worse during his tenure. Prior to Manly, Kelly was Souths CFO 2007-2014, during which they made the finals 4 of his 8 years, with his final year being the premiership.

Kelly was thenappointed Roosters CEO from 2017 onward, and in 2018 he was suspended for 9 months for being involved in the Manly salary cap scandal. Kelly is STILL Roosters CEO.

So I'm not exactly clear how player performance comes back on the CEO if they are fulfilling their primary business role of increasing the funds available to the club. Joe Kelly, as then example above, had very little history of on-field success and yet was appointed CEO of the most successful club in the comp, at a time where they'd already been minor premiers 3 of the 4 years before he joined (i.e. they were already a successful club before he got there).

Roosters have kept Kelly on despite his huge ban in 2018 and highly negative association with, and penalty from, Manly's rorting. So clearly there is separation between CEO business performance and how the team performs.

Sounds like we need this Kelly bloke, looks like a winner. If i am reading what you wrote, apart from two years of being 9th (ha) and 13th he has been involved in premiership winning clubs.

 

[gallagher]

I find it difficult to blame him for us not making finals, he’s not a coach or head of football he’s the CEO, his job is to make sure the club as a business is running smoothly and he’s done a fair job in that regard. Obviously not perfect and he’s made mistakes but overall I think he’s done alright.

Agreed Josh, I think if the club was a little more transparent with its plans then he would have a lot more support.

Membership numbers, profit, crowd numbers, tv numbers and merchandise sales all went up last year so he must be doing something right.

I’d like to know who handles player contract values and who signs off on them, Pascoe probably wouldn’t know how much a player is worth, would it be Hartigan deciding that stuff?

Week we re-signed Farah when it was obvious Cleary was going. Who made that call?

 

[jirskyr]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.

Didn’t he admit guilt?


Irrelevant. He accepted the punishment. Copped it.

What else was he going to do? Tbh I don’t think Pascoe has accepted responsibility for anything he’s done, and there’s been a couple of howlers.


We should be looking for a new CEO under his leadership we have not played finals - that's what the fans expect especially when they and the Media build it up each year.
He was mates with Cleary and signed him that's another howler, i think he can't wait for this week to finish...

Joe Kelly was Manly CEO during 2015-2016, during which Manly finished 9th and 13th. The season prior to him joining Manly came 2nd in the regular season, so they got much worse during his tenure. Prior to Manly, Kelly was Souths CFO 2007-2014, during which they made the finals 4 of his 8 years, with his final year being the premiership.

Kelly was thenappointed Roosters CEO from 2017 onward, and in 2018 he was suspended for 9 months for being involved in the Manly salary cap scandal. Kelly is STILL Roosters CEO.

So I'm not exactly clear how player performance comes back on the CEO if they are fulfilling their primary business role of increasing the funds available to the club. Joe Kelly, as then example above, had very little history of on-field success and yet was appointed CEO of the most successful club in the comp, at a time where they'd already been minor premiers 3 of the 4 years before he joined (i.e. they were already a successful club before he got there).

Roosters have kept Kelly on despite his huge ban in 2018 and highly negative association with, and penalty from, Manly's rorting. So clearly there is separation between CEO business performance and how the team performs.


Sounds like we need this Kelly bloke, looks like a winner. If i am reading what you wrote, apart from two years of being 9th (ha) and 13th he has been involved in premiership winning clubs.

That is not at all what I was arguing.

Roosters were already minor premiers 3 times before Kelly even joined. His clubs made the finals 5 times out of 10 seasons when he was there.

Kelly was found guilty of salary cap rorts at Manly.

Still he gets the CEO job of the competition's heavyweight club. Clearly on-field has little to do with CEO-related business acumen.

 

[Sco77y]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.


“The games rules are very, very clear on these arrangements. Any commitment to make such a payment should have been disclosed and it should have been included in the salary cap.

“The club failed to do this. The club **then compounded its conduct by submitting a misleading application to the NRL** in relation to the salary cap treatment of money paid to Robbie when he left the club.

“We feel like the club and Justin have misled the NRL around this ambassador agreement and we have to provide consistent sanctions on individuals and clubs throughout.

So after caught out tried to cover it up but submitting a misleading application??????

He never copped anything on the chin was most likely stood down on full pay for 6 months or used entitlements, they never miss out or are accountable.

Ahh, just to help you get the story straight.
The misleading application was in regards to clearing Farah from the cap, after he went to Souths. I don’t feel it was misleading at all. They were very direct about how they and stakeholders felt at the time of the debacle Farah and Taylor put the club through and tried to get dispensation.

If your implying that the sentence you quoted was in the more recent time then you’ve understood that wrong.

The NRL found it to be misleading because the club applied for salary cap relief for Farah stating he was a destabilising influence but had a job offer on the table for him after he retired. I can see how that would be viewed as misleading.

Because the offer to Farah was an inducement to leave for which he would be remunerated at a later date..

Which is fine in itself but then to claim cap relief as a disestablishing figure was misleading..

I think they would have been fine if they were just honest with the NRL throughout the entire process, I understand why we were fined.

I don't know any company that would offer someone a job 2 years down the track when the reason you want them to leave is because they are disestablishing to your organisation...

Oh wait Wests Tigers..

Happens all the time, depends what the role is. People get moved around because they don't fit where they are currently.

Tigers were being cheeky because we were trying to max-out our compensation wrt Farah departing, and that's obviously because we don't have the kind of cash someone like the Broncos has to just absorb million-dollar problems like they've done with Seibold.

To come out and poleaxe the Tigers, and if you recall Sharks got done too, but NRL does nothing to Souths or Storm or Roosters or Broncos who also very clearly incentivise their players with post-career guaranteed jobs. I'm not that guy who claims "conspiracy" at HQ or preferential treatment, but when it comes to incentivising players, it shouldn't matter whether you are trying to move them on or trying to retain them, it should all be treated the same.

But no NRL chose to thunder down on Tigers for, at worst, being cheeky or "misleading"... or actually being too forthright, which is the reality. Tigers got done for mentioning the Farah deal, thinking it was ok, but finding out it wasn't. Whereas Roosters lie about it and then announce the same types of deals once the retirement is locked in.

You may well argue its a better handling of the situation, of which I won't deny, but it's BS to be rewarding of the more deceitful and non-disclosing behaviour. Examples: Cronk at Roosters, now Aubo at Roosters has a job for life, GI at Souths getting his long-term deal for doing nothing, Corey Parker and D. Lock at Broncos etc.

Totally agree. Pascoe was made a scapegoat because he was an easy target. Rather than conducting any investigative work going after other clubs who have clearly done the same thing, the NRL could only be bothered holding to account the guy that handed himself in.

 

[cochise]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.


“The games rules are very, very clear on these arrangements. Any commitment to make such a payment should have been disclosed and it should have been included in the salary cap.

“The club failed to do this. The club **then compounded its conduct by submitting a misleading application to the NRL** in relation to the salary cap treatment of money paid to Robbie when he left the club.

“We feel like the club and Justin have misled the NRL around this ambassador agreement and we have to provide consistent sanctions on individuals and clubs throughout.

So after caught out tried to cover it up but submitting a misleading application??????

He never copped anything on the chin was most likely stood down on full pay for 6 months or used entitlements, they never miss out or are accountable.

Ahh, just to help you get the story straight.
The misleading application was in regards to clearing Farah from the cap, after he went to Souths. I don’t feel it was misleading at all. They were very direct about how they and stakeholders felt at the time of the debacle Farah and Taylor put the club through and tried to get dispensation.

If your implying that the sentence you quoted was in the more recent time then you’ve understood that wrong.

The NRL found it to be misleading because the club applied for salary cap relief for Farah stating he was a destabilising influence but had a job offer on the table for him after he retired. I can see how that would be viewed as misleading.

Because the offer to Farah was an inducement to leave for which he would be remunerated at a later date..

Which is fine in itself but then to claim cap relief as a disestablishing figure was misleading..

I think they would have been fine if they were just honest with the NRL throughout the entire process, I understand why we were fined.

I don't know any company that would offer someone a job 2 years down the track when the reason you want them to leave is because they are disestablishing to your organisation...

Oh wait Wests Tigers..

Happens all the time, depends what the role is. People get moved around because they don't fit where they are currently.

Tigers were being cheeky because we were trying to max-out our compensation wrt Farah departing, and that's obviously because we don't have the kind of cash someone like the Broncos has to just absorb million-dollar problems like they've done with Seibold.

To come out and poleaxe the Tigers, and if you recall Sharks got done too, but NRL does nothing to Souths or Storm or Roosters or Broncos who also very clearly incentivise their players with post-career guaranteed jobs. I'm not that guy who claims "conspiracy" at HQ or preferential treatment, but when it comes to incentivising players, it shouldn't matter whether you are trying to move them on or trying to retain them, it should all be treated the same.

But no NRL chose to thunder down on Tigers for, at worst, being cheeky or "misleading"... or actually being too forthright, which is the reality. Tigers got done for mentioning the Farah deal, thinking it was ok, but finding out it wasn't. Whereas Roosters lie about it and then announce the same types of deals once the retirement is locked in.

You may well argue its a better handling of the situation, of which I won't deny, but it's BS to be rewarding of the more deceitful and non-disclosing behaviour. Examples: Cronk at Roosters, now Aubo at Roosters has a job for life, GI at Souths getting his long-term deal for doing nothing, Corey Parker and D. Lock at Broncos etc.

We tried to hide it from the NRL, the other clubs have worked through those roles with the NRL, that is the difference.

 

[tigerbalm]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.

Didn’t he admit guilt?


Irrelevant. He accepted the punishment. Copped it.

What else was he going to do? Tbh I don’t think Pascoe has accepted responsibility for anything he’s done, and there’s been a couple of howlers.


We should be looking for a new CEO under his leadership we have not played finals - that's what the fans expect especially when they and the Media build it up each year.
He was mates with Cleary and signed him that's another howler, i think he can't wait for this week to finish...

Joe Kelly was Manly CEO during 2015-2016, during which Manly finished 9th and 13th. The season prior to him joining Manly came 2nd in the regular season, so they got much worse during his tenure. Prior to Manly, Kelly was Souths CFO 2007-2014, during which they made the finals 4 of his 8 years, with his final year being the premiership.

Kelly was thenappointed Roosters CEO from 2017 onward, and in 2018 he was suspended for 9 months for being involved in the Manly salary cap scandal. Kelly is STILL Roosters CEO.

So I'm not exactly clear how player performance comes back on the CEO if they are fulfilling their primary business role of increasing the funds available to the club. Joe Kelly, as then example above, had very little history of on-field success and yet was appointed CEO of the most successful club in the comp, at a time where they'd already been minor premiers 3 of the 4 years before he joined (i.e. they were already a successful club before he got there).

Roosters have kept Kelly on despite his huge ban in 2018 and highly negative association with, and penalty from, Manly's rorting. So clearly there is separation between CEO business performance and how the team performs.


Sounds like we need this Kelly bloke, looks like a winner. If i am reading what you wrote, apart from two years of being 9th (ha) and 13th he has been involved in premiership winning clubs.

That is not at all what I was arguing.

Roosters were already minor premiers 3 times before Kelly even joined. His clubs made the finals 5 times out of 10 seasons when he was there.

Kelly was found guilty of salary cap rorts at Manly.

Still he gets the CEO job of the competition's heavyweight club. Clearly on-field has little to do with CEO-related business acumen.

5 times out of 10 seasons? that's the type of CEO we need! You win, I agree.

 

[Russell]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.


“The games rules are very, very clear on these arrangements. Any commitment to make such a payment should have been disclosed and it should have been included in the salary cap.

“The club failed to do this. The club **then compounded its conduct by submitting a misleading application to the NRL** in relation to the salary cap treatment of money paid to Robbie when he left the club.

“We feel like the club and Justin have misled the NRL around this ambassador agreement and we have to provide consistent sanctions on individuals and clubs throughout.

So after caught out tried to cover it up but submitting a misleading application??????

He never copped anything on the chin was most likely stood down on full pay for 6 months or used entitlements, they never miss out or are accountable.

Ahh, just to help you get the story straight.
The misleading application was in regards to clearing Farah from the cap, after he went to Souths. I don’t feel it was misleading at all. They were very direct about how they and stakeholders felt at the time of the debacle Farah and Taylor put the club through and tried to get dispensation.

If your implying that the sentence you quoted was in the more recent time then you’ve understood that wrong.

The NRL found it to be misleading because the club applied for salary cap relief for Farah stating he was a destabilising influence but had a job offer on the table for him after he retired. I can see how that would be viewed as misleading.

Because the offer to Farah was an inducement to leave for which he would be remunerated at a later date..

Which is fine in itself but then to claim cap relief as a disestablishing figure was misleading..

I think they would have been fine if they were just honest with the NRL throughout the entire process, I understand why we were fined.

I don't know any company that would offer someone a job 2 years down the track when the reason you want them to leave is because they are disestablishing to your organisation...

Oh wait Wests Tigers..

Happens all the time, depends what the role is. People get moved around because they don't fit where they are currently.

Tigers were being cheeky because we were trying to max-out our compensation wrt Farah departing, and that's obviously because we don't have the kind of cash someone like the Broncos has to just absorb million-dollar problems like they've done with Seibold.

To come out and poleaxe the Tigers, and if you recall Sharks got done too, but NRL does nothing to Souths or Storm or Roosters or Broncos who also very clearly incentivise their players with post-career guaranteed jobs. I'm not that guy who claims "conspiracy" at HQ or preferential treatment, but when it comes to incentivising players, it shouldn't matter whether you are trying to move them on or trying to retain them, it should all be treated the same.

But no NRL chose to thunder down on Tigers for, at worst, being cheeky or "misleading"... or actually being too forthright, which is the reality. Tigers got done for mentioning the Farah deal, thinking it was ok, but finding out it wasn't. Whereas Roosters lie about it and then announce the same types of deals once the retirement is locked in.

You may well argue its a better handling of the situation, of which I won't deny, but it's BS to be rewarding of the more deceitful and non-disclosing behaviour. Examples: Cronk at Roosters, now Aubo at Roosters has a job for life, GI at Souths getting his long-term deal for doing nothing, Corey Parker and D. Lock at Broncos etc.

We tried to hide it from the NRL, the other clubs have worked through those roles with the NRL, that is the difference.

We didn't try to hide it from anyone, it was a well known story in the media.

Pascoe just didn't advise the NRL - that is why we got pinged to my knowledge.

 

[avocadoontoast]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.


“The games rules are very, very clear on these arrangements. Any commitment to make such a payment should have been disclosed and it should have been included in the salary cap.

“The club failed to do this. The club **then compounded its conduct by submitting a misleading application to the NRL** in relation to the salary cap treatment of money paid to Robbie when he left the club.

“We feel like the club and Justin have misled the NRL around this ambassador agreement and we have to provide consistent sanctions on individuals and clubs throughout.

So after caught out tried to cover it up but submitting a misleading application??????

He never copped anything on the chin was most likely stood down on full pay for 6 months or used entitlements, they never miss out or are accountable.

Ahh, just to help you get the story straight.
The misleading application was in regards to clearing Farah from the cap, after he went to Souths. I don’t feel it was misleading at all. They were very direct about how they and stakeholders felt at the time of the debacle Farah and Taylor put the club through and tried to get dispensation.

If your implying that the sentence you quoted was in the more recent time then you’ve understood that wrong.

The NRL found it to be misleading because the club applied for salary cap relief for Farah stating he was a destabilising influence but had a job offer on the table for him after he retired. I can see how that would be viewed as misleading.

Because the offer to Farah was an inducement to leave for which he would be remunerated at a later date..

Which is fine in itself but then to claim cap relief as a disestablishing figure was misleading..

I think they would have been fine if they were just honest with the NRL throughout the entire process, I understand why we were fined.

I don't know any company that would offer someone a job 2 years down the track when the reason you want them to leave is because they are disestablishing to your organisation...

Oh wait Wests Tigers..

Happens all the time, depends what the role is. People get moved around because they don't fit where they are currently.

Tigers were being cheeky because we were trying to max-out our compensation wrt Farah departing, and that's obviously because we don't have the kind of cash someone like the Broncos has to just absorb million-dollar problems like they've done with Seibold.

To come out and poleaxe the Tigers, and if you recall Sharks got done too, but NRL does nothing to Souths or Storm or Roosters or Broncos who also very clearly incentivise their players with post-career guaranteed jobs. I'm not that guy who claims "conspiracy" at HQ or preferential treatment, but when it comes to incentivising players, it shouldn't matter whether you are trying to move them on or trying to retain them, it should all be treated the same.

But no NRL chose to thunder down on Tigers for, at worst, being cheeky or "misleading"... or actually being too forthright, which is the reality. Tigers got done for mentioning the Farah deal, thinking it was ok, but finding out it wasn't. Whereas Roosters lie about it and then announce the same types of deals once the retirement is locked in.

You may well argue its a better handling of the situation, of which I won't deny, but it's BS to be rewarding of the more deceitful and non-disclosing behaviour. Examples: Cronk at Roosters, now Aubo at Roosters has a job for life, GI at Souths getting his long-term deal for doing nothing, Corey Parker and D. Lock at Broncos etc.

We tried to hide it from the NRL, the other clubs have worked through those roles with the NRL, that is the difference.

We didn't try to hide it from anyone, it was a well known story in the media.

Pascoe just didn't advise the NRL - that is why we got pinged to my knowledge.

So he wasn’t trying to cheat, he’s just incompetent?

 

[Russell]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.


“The games rules are very, very clear on these arrangements. Any commitment to make such a payment should have been disclosed and it should have been included in the salary cap.

“The club failed to do this. The club **then compounded its conduct by submitting a misleading application to the NRL** in relation to the salary cap treatment of money paid to Robbie when he left the club.

“We feel like the club and Justin have misled the NRL around this ambassador agreement and we have to provide consistent sanctions on individuals and clubs throughout.

So after caught out tried to cover it up but submitting a misleading application??????

He never copped anything on the chin was most likely stood down on full pay for 6 months or used entitlements, they never miss out or are accountable.

Ahh, just to help you get the story straight.
The misleading application was in regards to clearing Farah from the cap, after he went to Souths. I don’t feel it was misleading at all. They were very direct about how they and stakeholders felt at the time of the debacle Farah and Taylor put the club through and tried to get dispensation.

If your implying that the sentence you quoted was in the more recent time then you’ve understood that wrong.

The NRL found it to be misleading because the club applied for salary cap relief for Farah stating he was a destabilising influence but had a job offer on the table for him after he retired. I can see how that would be viewed as misleading.

Because the offer to Farah was an inducement to leave for which he would be remunerated at a later date..

Which is fine in itself but then to claim cap relief as a disestablishing figure was misleading..

I think they would have been fine if they were just honest with the NRL throughout the entire process, I understand why we were fined.

I don't know any company that would offer someone a job 2 years down the track when the reason you want them to leave is because they are disestablishing to your organisation...

Oh wait Wests Tigers..

Happens all the time, depends what the role is. People get moved around because they don't fit where they are currently.

Tigers were being cheeky because we were trying to max-out our compensation wrt Farah departing, and that's obviously because we don't have the kind of cash someone like the Broncos has to just absorb million-dollar problems like they've done with Seibold.

To come out and poleaxe the Tigers, and if you recall Sharks got done too, but NRL does nothing to Souths or Storm or Roosters or Broncos who also very clearly incentivise their players with post-career guaranteed jobs. I'm not that guy who claims "conspiracy" at HQ or preferential treatment, but when it comes to incentivising players, it shouldn't matter whether you are trying to move them on or trying to retain them, it should all be treated the same.

But no NRL chose to thunder down on Tigers for, at worst, being cheeky or "misleading"... or actually being too forthright, which is the reality. Tigers got done for mentioning the Farah deal, thinking it was ok, but finding out it wasn't. Whereas Roosters lie about it and then announce the same types of deals once the retirement is locked in.

You may well argue its a better handling of the situation, of which I won't deny, but it's BS to be rewarding of the more deceitful and non-disclosing behaviour. Examples: Cronk at Roosters, now Aubo at Roosters has a job for life, GI at Souths getting his long-term deal for doing nothing, Corey Parker and D. Lock at Broncos etc.

We tried to hide it from the NRL, the other clubs have worked through those roles with the NRL, that is the difference.

We didn't try to hide it from anyone, it was a well known story in the media.

Pascoe just didn't advise the NRL - that is why we got pinged to my knowledge.

So he wasn’t trying to cheat, he’s just incompetent?

Avo, like our little back and forths but not this time.

I like Pascoe - you don't = let's leave it at that. Lol

 

[gallagher]

I find it difficult to blame him for us not making finals, he’s not a coach or head of football he’s the CEO, his job is to make sure the club as a business is running smoothly and he’s done a fair job in that regard. Obviously not perfect and he’s made mistakes but overall I think he’s done alright.

Agreed Josh, I think if the club was a little more transparent with its plans then he would have a lot more support.

Why arnt they sharing? Why arnt you?

 

[cochise]

"Yes I’m the CEO, I’m responsible for all things that happen at the club, and when things don’t work out as planned, I’ll cop it on the chin."

Hmm..

Contrary to others views

Can't recall him ever copping anything on the chin either.

His suspension is one thing.

He didn’t stand down voluntarily. He was de registered.


He copped it on the chin. Didn't whinge about things and came back with minimal fuss. Even though many strongly disagreed with the ruling.


“The games rules are very, very clear on these arrangements. Any commitment to make such a payment should have been disclosed and it should have been included in the salary cap.

“The club failed to do this. The club **then compounded its conduct by submitting a misleading application to the NRL** in relation to the salary cap treatment of money paid to Robbie when he left the club.

“We feel like the club and Justin have misled the NRL around this ambassador agreement and we have to provide consistent sanctions on individuals and clubs throughout.

So after caught out tried to cover it up but submitting a misleading application??????

He never copped anything on the chin was most likely stood down on full pay for 6 months or used entitlements, they never miss out or are accountable.

Ahh, just to help you get the story straight.
The misleading application was in regards to clearing Farah from the cap, after he went to Souths. I don’t feel it was misleading at all. They were very direct about how they and stakeholders felt at the time of the debacle Farah and Taylor put the club through and tried to get dispensation.

If your implying that the sentence you quoted was in the more recent time then you’ve understood that wrong.

The NRL found it to be misleading because the club applied for salary cap relief for Farah stating he was a destabilising influence but had a job offer on the table for him after he retired. I can see how that would be viewed as misleading.

Because the offer to Farah was an inducement to leave for which he would be remunerated at a later date..

Which is fine in itself but then to claim cap relief as a disestablishing figure was misleading..

I think they would have been fine if they were just honest with the NRL throughout the entire process, I understand why we were fined.

I don't know any company that would offer someone a job 2 years down the track when the reason you want them to leave is because they are disestablishing to your organisation...

Oh wait Wests Tigers..

Happens all the time, depends what the role is. People get moved around because they don't fit where they are currently.

Tigers were being cheeky because we were trying to max-out our compensation wrt Farah departing, and that's obviously because we don't have the kind of cash someone like the Broncos has to just absorb million-dollar problems like they've done with Seibold.

To come out and poleaxe the Tigers, and if you recall Sharks got done too, but NRL does nothing to Souths or Storm or Roosters or Broncos who also very clearly incentivise their players with post-career guaranteed jobs. I'm not that guy who claims "conspiracy" at HQ or preferential treatment, but when it comes to incentivising players, it shouldn't matter whether you are trying to move them on or trying to retain them, it should all be treated the same.

But no NRL chose to thunder down on Tigers for, at worst, being cheeky or "misleading"... or actually being too forthright, which is the reality. Tigers got done for mentioning the Farah deal, thinking it was ok, but finding out it wasn't. Whereas Roosters lie about it and then announce the same types of deals once the retirement is locked in.

You may well argue its a better handling of the situation, of which I won't deny, but it's BS to be rewarding of the more deceitful and non-disclosing behaviour. Examples: Cronk at Roosters, now Aubo at Roosters has a job for life, GI at Souths getting his long-term deal for doing nothing, Corey Parker and D. Lock at Broncos etc.

We tried to hide it from the NRL, the other clubs have worked through those roles with the NRL, that is the difference.

We didn't try to hide it from anyone, it was a well known story in the media.

Pascoe just didn't advise the NRL - that is why we got pinged to my knowledge.

We also stated we couldn't find the deal when the NRL asked to see it. Doesn't matter if we mentioned it to the media the NRL has to be consulted and we didn't do that, this is an area that is easy to exploit in regards to the salary cap which is why the NRL wants to be consulted.

 

[cochise]

I find it difficult to blame him for us not making finals, he’s not a coach or head of football he’s the CEO, his job is to make sure the club as a business is running smoothly and he’s done a fair job in that regard. Obviously not perfect and he’s made mistakes but overall I think he’s done alright.

Agreed Josh, I think if the club was a little more transparent with its plans then he would have a lot more support.

Why arnt they sharing? Why arnt you?

I don't know why they aren't sharing but hope they will be soon.

 

[gallagher]

I find it difficult to blame him for us not making finals, he’s not a coach or head of football he’s the CEO, his job is to make sure the club as a business is running smoothly and he’s done a fair job in that regard. Obviously not perfect and he’s made mistakes but overall I think he’s done alright.

Agreed Josh, I think if the club was a little more transparent with its plans then he would have a lot more support.

Why arnt they sharing? Why arnt you?

I don't know why they aren't sharing but hope they will be soon.

spill ya guts fella

 

[cochise]

I find it difficult to blame him for us not making finals, he’s not a coach or head of football he’s the CEO, his job is to make sure the club as a business is running smoothly and he’s done a fair job in that regard. Obviously not perfect and he’s made mistakes but overall I think he’s done alright.

Agreed Josh, I think if the club was a little more transparent with its plans then he would have a lot more support.

Why arnt they sharing? Why arnt you?

I don't know why they aren't sharing but hope they will be soon.

spill ya guts fella

I just think it would be to the clubs benefit to be more transparent in regards to the future.

 

[old_man_tiger]

I find it difficult to blame him for us not making finals, he’s not a coach or head of football he’s the CEO, his job is to make sure the club as a business is running smoothly and he’s done a fair job in that regard. Obviously not perfect and he’s made mistakes but overall I think he’s done alright.

Agreed Josh, I think if the club was a little more transparent with its plans then he would have a lot more support.

Why arnt they sharing? Why arnt you?

I don't know why they aren't sharing but hope they will be soon.

spill ya guts fella

I just think it would be to the clubs benefit to be more transparent in regards to the future.

Whatever plans they have better lead to more victories on the field. I've defended Pascoe for years, but will call for his resignation if we miss the 8 again next year. The buck stops with him for results of the organisation, which is a football club. It is poor leadership to say "I'm not really the guy who does that bit", can you imagine any other situation where the CEO is not ultimately responsible for the continuing failure of the core business?
"Liking" him should not come into it.

 

[jirskyr]

We tried to hide it from the NRL, the other clubs have worked through those roles with the NRL, that is the difference.

How on Earth can anyone say "we tried to hide it from the NRL" when it was mentioned in the papers and basically all supporters knew it was on the cards? I knew about the Farah Ambassador deal long before we got in trouble for it.