Pascoe sanctioned by the NRL

[ricksen]

i dont think i have all the facts here but is this the summary?

- robbie was under contract for x amount of years with the WT
- rabbitohs picked him up dirt cheap in 2017 where we were gonna pay robbie the remaining of what was owed to him
- he also signed a contract with the club for 639k for an "ambassador role" to be paid out over 3-4 years

didn't we get an unfair advantage in 2017/18 because technically whatever is owed to robbie should've been included in the cap?

I believe the timeline is as follows:
1\. Club negotiates to have Farah released at the back end of 2016\. An ambassadorial role is openly discussed.
2\. Farah is released and joins Souths, who are reportedly only paying $250k of his ~$950k contract, with the Tigers responsible for the rest.
3\. Around this time, the Tigers apply for cap relief from the NRL, on the basis that Farah was only released as he was a disruptive presence.
4\. Farah plays out the remainder of his contract with Souths and then back at WT for the back half of 2018.
5\. Farah then re-signs for one more year (2019) with WT.

The crux of the matter appears to be whether an agreement was formally agreed to re: this ambassador role. Whilst Pascoe etc spoke of it publicly, the club’s statement today suggests they don’t believe anything was officially signed to and/or agreed.
The NRL clearly believe they have documentation stating that the deal was signed off. If that’s the case, then WT don’t really have a leg to stand on.
As Greenberg said, the rules re: these jobs post-playing are quite clear in that they need to be declared - there was an issue with Gasnier and the Dragons a few years back from memory.

Still, even if that is the case, the punishment seems very harsh in terms of the fine, cap penalty as well as Pascoe being banned.
As a comparison, the Eels were fined $465k for their ongoing illegal payments a few years back. The Tigers fine is nearly double that.

 

[fibrodreaming]

i dont think i have all the facts here but is this the summary?

- robbie was under contract for x amount of years with the WT
- rabbitohs picked him up dirt cheap in 2017 where we were gonna pay robbie the remaining of what was owed to him
- he also signed a contract with the club for 639k for an "ambassador role" to be paid out over 3-4 years

didn't we get an unfair advantage in 2017/18 because technically whatever is owed to robbie should've been included in the cap?

I believe the timeline is as follows:
1\. Club negotiates to have Farah released at the back end of 2016\. An ambassadorial role is openly discussed.
2\. Farah is released and joins Souths, who are reportedly only paying $250k of his ~$950k contract, with the Tigers responsible for the rest.
3\. Around this time, the Tigers apply for cap relief from the NRL, on the basis that Farah was only released as he was a disruptive presence.
4\. Farah plays out the remainder of his contract with Souths and then back at WT for the back half of 2018.
5\. Farah then re-signs for one more year (2019) with WT.

The crux of the matter appears to be whether an agreement was formally agreed to re: this ambassador role. Whilst Pascoe etc spoke of it publicly, the club’s statement today suggests they don’t believe anything was officially signed to and/or agreed.
**The NRL clearly believe they have documentation stating that the deal was signed off. If that’s the case, then WT don’t really have a leg to stand on.**
As Greenberg said, the rules re: these jobs post-playing are quite clear in that they need to be declared - there was an issue with Gasnier and the Dragons a few years back from memory.

Still, even if that is the case, the punishment seems very harsh in terms of the fine, cap penalty as well as Pascoe being banned.
As a comparison, the Eels were fined $465k for their ongoing illegal payments a few years back. The Tigers fine is nearly double that.

That's true, but if there is a signed document, why would the tigers say this in their statement: "The club does not know if he is going to take it up and Robbie has not indicated his intention in return."

That doesn't sound like an agreement was reached.

I will be very angry if it turns out there is a signed document. It's one thing to break the rules (perhaps unwittingly), but it is another thing altogether to lie about it.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

i dont think i have all the facts here but is this the summary?

- robbie was under contract for x amount of years with the WT
- rabbitohs picked him up dirt cheap in 2017 where we were gonna pay robbie the remaining of what was owed to him
- he also signed a contract with the club for 639k for an "ambassador role" to be paid out over 3-4 years

didn't we get an unfair advantage in 2017/18 because technically whatever is owed to robbie should've been included in the cap?

I believe the timeline is as follows:
1\. Club negotiates to have Farah released at the back end of 2016\. An ambassadorial role is openly discussed.
2\. Farah is released and joins Souths, who are reportedly only paying $250k of his ~$950k contract, with the Tigers responsible for the rest.
3\. Around this time, the Tigers apply for cap relief from the NRL, on the basis that Farah was only released as he was a disruptive presence.
4\. Farah plays out the remainder of his contract with Souths and then back at WT for the back half of 2018.
5\. Farah then re-signs for one more year (2019) with WT.

The crux of the matter appears to be whether an agreement was formally agreed to re: this ambassador role. Whilst Pascoe etc spoke of it publicly, the club’s statement today suggests they don’t believe anything was officially signed to and/or agreed.
The NRL clearly believe they have documentation stating that the deal was signed off. If that’s the case, then WT don’t really have a leg to stand on.
As Greenberg said, the rules re: these jobs post-playing are quite clear in that they need to be declared - there was an issue with Gasnier and the Dragons a few years back from memory.

Still, even if that is the case, the punishment seems very harsh in terms of the fine, cap penalty as well as Pascoe being banned.
As a comparison, the Eels were fined $465k for their ongoing illegal payments a few years back. The Tigers fine is nearly double that.

Thanks for that, most of the facts collated in one post.

I had no idea we applied for cap relief over Farah… No wonder the NRL think it stinks if there's a signed contract.

 

[tigertuff]

So if a club employs an ex player in a role with the club after they have retired it comes out of the salary cap. Wow. This NRL are a farce. Still waiting for the explanation off Andrew Gee and the Broncos for all their rorting - oh but wait its the Broncos- my bad.

 

[TrueTiger]

I think we need a rally…

Ring BBF and get him to organise things he apparently loves rallies and protests…..
\
\
seriously Im with swordy and others,I was looking at renewing my out of towner membership for 2019,however if we get fined,lose a large amount of cap money and Justin is deregistered then Im going to give the game the flick and concentrate on playing golf...I cant keep supporting a sport with so many hypocrits and wannabees running the game....
\
\
On a side note,Justin Pascoe is the best thing that has happened with this club in years,he and the board have done great to change the way things were done in the club and it is an absolute disgrace that a man of Justins calibre is treated in this way...I love the WTS and wish them well,but cant support them while they get hammered by the NRL in whatever way they want...

I eagerly await that Justin and the WTS are cleared of any wrongdoing....its the only way I will return to the game I so dearly love and played...

 

[ricksen]

i dont think i have all the facts here but is this the summary?

- robbie was under contract for x amount of years with the WT
- rabbitohs picked him up dirt cheap in 2017 where we were gonna pay robbie the remaining of what was owed to him
- he also signed a contract with the club for 639k for an "ambassador role" to be paid out over 3-4 years

didn't we get an unfair advantage in 2017/18 because technically whatever is owed to robbie should've been included in the cap?

I believe the timeline is as follows:
1\. Club negotiates to have Farah released at the back end of 2016\. An ambassadorial role is openly discussed.
2\. Farah is released and joins Souths, who are reportedly only paying $250k of his ~$950k contract, with the Tigers responsible for the rest.
3\. Around this time, the Tigers apply for cap relief from the NRL, on the basis that Farah was only released as he was a disruptive presence.
4\. Farah plays out the remainder of his contract with Souths and then back at WT for the back half of 2018.
5\. Farah then re-signs for one more year (2019) with WT.

The crux of the matter appears to be whether an agreement was formally agreed to re: this ambassador role. Whilst Pascoe etc spoke of it publicly, the club’s statement today suggests they don’t believe anything was officially signed to and/or agreed.
**The NRL clearly believe they have documentation stating that the deal was signed off. If that’s the case, then WT don’t really have a leg to stand on.**
As Greenberg said, the rules re: these jobs post-playing are quite clear in that they need to be declared - there was an issue with Gasnier and the Dragons a few years back from memory.

Still, even if that is the case, the punishment seems very harsh in terms of the fine, cap penalty as well as Pascoe being banned.
As a comparison, the Eels were fined $465k for their ongoing illegal payments a few years back. The Tigers fine is nearly double that.

That's true, but if there is a signed document, why would the tigers say this in their statement: "The club does not know if he is going to take it up and Robbie has not indicated his intention in return."

That doesn't sound like an agreement was reached.

I will be very angry if it turns out there is a signed document. It's one thing to break the rules (perhaps unwittingly), but it is another thing altogether to lie about it.

That’s the $750k question.
It should be a pretty quick process of appeal either way - the agreement either exists or it doesn’t.

 

[coivtny]

Just leaving aside the obvious harshness of the penalties for a moment, I have a question. The fine and cap restrictions are pretty easy to understand but I don't understand what the deregistration of Pascoe actually means. I know it means he can't resume his CEO role but is it for a period of time or is it forever. Surely it can't be forever because that would be a ridiculous penalty for the offence. If it's for a period of time, why wasn't the period specified in the NRL's pronouncement. Or is it likely the period will be specified after WT have responded to the breach notice?
Does anyone know the answer?

 

[Telltails]

I feel physically ill by this. Not sure what we do it about but it has to be more than venting on a forum.

 

[ricksen]

So if a club employs an ex player in a role with the club after they have retired it comes out of the salary cap. Wow. This NRL are a farce. Still waiting for the explanation off Andrew Gee and the Broncos for all their rorting - oh but wait its the Broncos- my bad.

It’d be an easy way to circumvent the cap. We could effectively offer an experienced, elite player minimum wage in 2019-20 with an agreement for $500k a year from 2021-23 to be an ambassador or whatever else.
Thus we have Mr Elite on the books for nothing whilst we chase a premiership, when his real market value is far beyond that.

It obviously happens all the time in terms of handshake agreements, but clubs would be smart enough to ensure there’s nothing official until the player’s career is over.

 

[Curly_Tiger]

Farah announced as acting CEO

… on $639k over two years

Seriously though, it's hard not knowing all the facts but I do know from a WT board member that in their eyes we are at a massive disadvantage because we play 100% within the salary cap guidelines whilst others do not and that until Greenberg/Beattie fixes that it will always be tough for us. I gathered the NRL appointed board members at the time played a role in that i.e. our being 100% compliant

Do we still have NRL appointed board members? Aren't Go and Perry effectively that? Wouldn't that then infer that the NRL view the board somewhat culpable as well, surely something of this nature would have gone through the board

I believe in Go and Pascoe and I think there's a lot to run in this. The NRL may regret this ........ I hope

 

[Seantice]

Absolute joke. Can we write a joint email to Greenturg?

We are being punished for all the previous salary cap issues. Ridiculous..

 

[Snake]

The NRL better have this right as Mr Pascoes reputation as a sports administrator is in ruins … this is heavy duty stuff and they will have millions of reasons to hope so!

 

[hobbo]

Just leaving aside the obvious harshness of the penalties for a moment, I have a question. The fine and cap restrictions are pretty easy to understand but I don't understand what the deregistration of Pascoe actually means. I know it means he can't resume his CEO role but is it for a period of time or is it forever. Surely it can't be forever because that would be a ridiculous penalty for the offence. If it's for a period of time, why wasn't the period specified in the NRL's pronouncement. Or is it likely the period will be specified after WT have responded to the breach notice?
Does anyone know the answer?

De registration…..means forever !

 

[jadtiger]

I have said on many occasions that the NRL are incompetent i think i can add corrupt to that now.There is no such thing as a level playing field under the current administration just greenie looking after the powerful clubs and shafting other clubs.
It honestly sickens me.At the moment i would rate Greenberg below Ribot and Murdoch as a person he is doing more harm to the code than superleague and that is saying something.
I hope the club and Pascoe sue the NRL and Greenberg for punitive damages.I am incensed by the overreaction that was announced

 

[tig_prmz]

i dont think i have all the facts here but is this the summary?

- robbie was under contract for x amount of years with the WT
- rabbitohs picked him up dirt cheap in 2017 where we were gonna pay robbie the remaining of what was owed to him
- he also signed a contract with the club for 639k for an "ambassador role" to be paid out over 3-4 years

didn't we get an unfair advantage in 2017/18 because technically whatever is owed to robbie should've been included in the cap?

I believe the timeline is as follows:
1\. Club negotiates to have Farah released at the back end of 2016\. An ambassadorial role is openly discussed.
2\. Farah is released and joins Souths, who are reportedly only paying $250k of his ~$950k contract, with the Tigers responsible for the rest.
3\. Around this time, the Tigers apply for cap relief from the NRL, on the basis that Farah was only released as he was a disruptive presence.
4\. Farah plays out the remainder of his contract with Souths and then back at WT for the back half of 2018.
5\. Farah then re-signs for one more year (2019) with WT.

The crux of the matter appears to be whether an agreement was formally agreed to re: this ambassador role. Whilst Pascoe etc spoke of it publicly, the club’s statement today suggests they don’t believe anything was officially signed to and/or agreed.
**The NRL clearly believe they have documentation stating that the deal was signed off. If that’s the case, then WT don’t really have a leg to stand on.**
As Greenberg said, the rules re: these jobs post-playing are quite clear in that they need to be declared - there was an issue with Gasnier and the Dragons a few years back from memory.

Still, even if that is the case, the punishment seems very harsh in terms of the fine, cap penalty as well as Pascoe being banned.
As a comparison, the Eels were fined $465k for their ongoing illegal payments a few years back. The Tigers fine is nearly double that.

That's true, but if there is a signed document, why would the tigers say this in their statement: "The club does not know if he is going to take it up and Robbie has not indicated his intention in return."

That doesn't sound like an agreement was reached.

I will be very angry if it turns out there is a signed document. It's one thing to break the rules (perhaps unwittingly), but it is another thing altogether to lie about it.

That’s the $750k question.
It should be a pretty quick process of appeal either way - the agreement either exists or it doesn’t.

i can't find the artcile but didn't the tigers pay him 400K as well?

feels like we tried to do something shady and it didn't work out- and tbh i dont buy the whole "we didn't treat you fair so we are going to give you roughly the amount we owed you anyway to work as an ambassador for us"

the fine seems excessive though

 

[larrycorowa]

Marina go needs to make an announcement if the facts differ from the statement that was released earlier today.

I can’t see how we can be punished if indeed he was paid what he was owed under his contract. Nrl are saying that a signed contract exists, statement earlier today said different.

Someone is telling porkies.

 

[Russell]

I have said on many occasions that the NRL are incompetent i think i can add corrupt to that now.There is no such thing as a level playing field under the current administration just greenie looking after the powerful clubs and shafting other clubs.
It honestly sickens me.At the moment i would rate Greenberg below Ribot and Murdoch as a person he is doing more harm to the code than superleague and that is saying something.
I hope the club and Pascoe sue the NRL and Greenberg for punitive damages.I am incensed by the overreaction that was announced

Well said Jadtiger - spot on.

 

[WT2K]

What’s the problem with Robbie Farah’s Tigers arrangement?

Post-career arrangements between clubs and players must be declared and approved by the NRL, otherwise they go on the salary cap.

The agreement between Farah and the club which was signed in September 2016 only recently became apparent to the NRL.

The NRL said they made enquiries and looked into the contract.

“We have obtained documents which showed the club entered an agreement to pay Robbie Farah to act as an ambassador at the club when he retired from playing,” Greenberg said.

“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. We’ve done that through other clubs and we have to do it again.”
NRL chief operating officer Nick Weeks said there was a provision in the rules which enabled clubs to have money excluded from the salary cap where players were moved on due to “reputational reasons”.

“When Robbie left, the club paid him money that he was owed under his contract and they aproached us to exclude some of those payments on the basis he was a destablising influence on the club,” Weeks said.

“What they didn’t disclose when they made that application was the fact the club had earlier entered into ambassador agreement to bring him back.”

Greenberg stressed there is no suggestion that Farah has done anything wrong.
Via foxsports

 

[Tarl]

I hope that not only Wests Tigers fight this and are cleared of any wrongdoing, but they then take legal action against the NRL for defamation and potential loss of sponsorship dollars and signings.

This administration is a joke. Hypocritical, corrupt bullies.

 

[Tigerdave]

That's a pretty harsh punishment for something that has very little effect on the field.

I guess if Pascoe got drunk and assaulted someone he would have gotten away with less? The punishments don't appear to fit the crime.