Pascoe sanctioned by the NRL

[Fade_To_Black]

I guess the other big question is will they get an interim CEO if Pascoe can't beat the charge or will someone like Kelly Egan step up for the short term ??

Surely even if Pascoe is found guilty, the punishment is excessive and should be greatly reduced (but it is the crooked, wishy-washy NRL we are dealing with unfortunately). Egan should be the talking head whilst Pascoe calls the shots from afar….if there is no paper/email/phone trails it shouldnt be too difficult to negotiate for a few months. We are not one of the "chosen clubs" however so the lowlife NRL will be busting their gut to catch us out through fair means or foul.

 

[supercoach]

I guess the other big question is will they get an interim CEO if Pascoe can't beat the charge or will someone like Kelly Egan step up for the short
term ??

My biggest fear is Pascoe walks off into the sunset and joins another sport

 

[Russell]

I guess the other big question is will they get an interim CEO if Pascoe can't beat the charge or will someone like Kelly Egan step up for the short
term ??

My biggest fear is Pascoe walks off into the sunset and joins another sport

Hopefully - however they do it, they do not let Pascoe go.

Best thing to happen to WT since they started.

 

[TigerGal]

I've scrolled through and skim read most of this thread. My questions are:
1) If Justin Pascoe has been ordered to have zero contact with the club, how is he meant to argue his case?
2) If this does go to court, is it Justin challenging it or the club? Or both together?
3) I saw a 9 month term mentioned. Obviously there could well be zero truth to that but if that was the case, couldn't Justin just sit out for that period while Kelly Egan for example, took the temporary reins before returning after that time? Where did that info originally come from? I know de-registered means banned but when I saw a time frame mentioned it threw me?

These could be stupid questions but thought I'd put it out there for some clarification. I'm very sad to see this situation unfold, I've met and spoken to Justin a number of times and he really is an asset to the club. He speaks passionately and has big visions and plans moving forward. Hopefully the Brydens team can/have come onboard and help fix this mess.

 

[hammertime]

We have an obvious risk of Pascoe heading to another sport if he is stood down. The bloke isn't going to sit on the sidelines for months and let his family starve. It's not the same as say flanagan, as pascoe skills are more transferable.

I just hope marina comes up with a good plan for the worst case scenario to get justin back in the chair.

 

[happy_tiger]

We have an obvious risk of Pascoe heading to another sport if he is stood down. The bloke isn't going to sit on the sidelines for months and let his family starve. It's not the same as say flanagan, as pascoe skills are more transferable.

I just hope marina comes up with a good plan for the worst case scenario to get justin back in the chair.

I think Justin will think he owes the WT's big time

And we would be mad to let him go

Can't see him leaving

 

[sheer64]

I've scrolled through and skim read most of this thread. My questions are:
1) If Justin Pascoe has been ordered to have zero contact with the club, how is he meant to argue his case?
2) If this does go to court, is it Justin challenging it or the club? Or both together?
3) I saw a 9 month term mentioned. Obviously there could well be zero truth to that but if that was the case, couldn't Justin just sit out for that period while Kelly Egan for example, took the temporary reins before returning after that time? Where did that info originally come from? I know de-registered means banned but when I saw a time frame mentioned it threw me?

These could be stupid questions but thought I'd put it out there for some clarification. I'm very sad to see this situation unfold, I've met and spoken to Justin a number of times and he really is an asset to the club. He speaks passionately and has big visions and plans moving forward. Hopefully the Brydens team can/have come onboard and help fix this mess.

Wests Tigers need to take Greenberg and the NRL to court for defamation of our CEO and our brand. There are more holes in their accusations than swiss cheese. Any decent barrister will bend the NRL over!

 

[sheer64]

He did refuse to jump, he dug his heels in like none other I have ever seen.

I don't think they missed the point at all. We did ensure that Robbie was paid every cent that we owed him. The position seems to be that an outside sponsorship deal (a TPA) would likely fall through if he left WT, and to compensate Robbie personally for that, WT may have agreed to pay him some funds after his career to cover that lost income.

TPA is meant to be exclusive from the club, and it should not be the responsibility of the club to compensate a player when a TPA deal falls through. If this all went down like has been said, then Robbie screwed us over again, and whoever offered compensation made an idiot mistake if they left evidence of this.

Where is the evidence that this post-career role is intended to compensate Robbie for a lost TPA arrangement? I'm not asking people on the forum for evidence, I'm asking what evidence do the NRL have that this was the case? I guess they think they have something?? Why has it not been leaked, like all this other stuff has been leaked?

**The NRL don't need evidence the role was to compensate, all they need is evidence of the role as that is all that is needed to prove the Tigers breached the cap.**
I'm a little more sympathetic to Robbie in regards to this, why would he leave the club if it would leave him $200K out of pocket? he had every right to stay.

You keep saying we breached the cap. Can you explain where this breach is?

If they have evidence of the role than the Tigers have breached the cap, they don't need to prove the role was to compensate for salary or a TPA. If he has a guaranteed role after retirement and the Tigers have not told the NRL about it or received approval for that amount to be not included in the cap then the club has breached the cap.

So based on what you have stated a signed contract by both parties would be required for the NRL to have made these claims? And if any player leaves a club and signs a post playing contract effective in the future even if signed the day of leaving this now forms part of future salary caps or the current years salary cap?

If the NRL think they can implement the later they need to get a better law firm to represent them.

 

[Tiger_Steve]

We have an obvious risk of Pascoe heading to another sport if he is stood down. The bloke isn't going to sit on the sidelines for months and let his family starve. It's not the same as say flanagan, as pascoe skills are more transferable.

I just hope marina comes up with a good plan for the worst case scenario to get justin back in the chair.

I think Justin will think he owes the WT's big time

And we would be mad to let him go

Can't see him leaving

Mightn’t have a choice if Greenturd gets his way

 

[cochise]

**The NRL don't need evidence the role was to compensate, all they need is evidence of the role as that is all that is needed to prove the Tigers breached the cap.**
I'm a little more sympathetic to Robbie in regards to this, why would he leave the club if it would leave him $200K out of pocket? he had every right to stay.

You keep saying we breached the cap. Can you explain where this breach is?

If they have evidence of the role than the Tigers have breached the cap, they don't need to prove the role was to compensate for salary or a TPA. If he has a guaranteed role after retirement and the Tigers have not told the NRL about it or received approval for that amount to be not included in the cap then the club has breached the cap.

So based on what you have stated a signed contract by both parties would be required for the NRL to have made these claims? And if any player leaves a club and signs a post playing contract effective in the future even if signed the day of leaving this now forms part of future salary caps or the current years salary cap?

If the NRL think they can implement the later they need to get a better law firm to represent them.

1\. I don't know if the NRL needs the contract to be signed by both parties to consider it proof, they obviously believe what they have constitutes a post career job.

2\. The NRL must be informed of future employment at the club and if approval is not given by the NRL the value of that employment gets included in the salary cap.

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I guess the other big question is will they get an interim CEO if Pascoe can't beat the charge or will someone like Kelly Egan step up for the short term ??

Surely even if Pascoe is found guilty, the punishment is excessive and should be greatly reduced (but it is the crooked, wishy-washy NRL we are dealing with unfortunately). Egan should be the talking head whilst Pascoe calls the shots from afar….if there is no paper/email/phone trails it shouldnt be too difficult to negotiate for a few months. We are not one of the "chosen clubs" however so the lowlife NRL will be busting their gut to catch us out through fair means or foul.

Calling the shots from afar worked well for Flanagan and the Sharks didn’t it,
We’d have to be the dopiest club in history to try that Again

 

[Geo]

I've scrolled through and skim read most of this thread. My questions are:
1) If Justin Pascoe has been ordered to have zero contact with the club, how is he meant to argue his case?
2) If this does go to court, is it Justin challenging it or the club? Or both together?
3) I saw a 9 month term mentioned. Obviously there could well be zero truth to that but if that was the case, couldn't Justin just sit out for that period while Kelly Egan for example, took the temporary reins before returning after that time? Where did that info originally come from? I know de-registered means banned but when I saw a time frame mentioned it threw me?

These could be stupid questions but thought I'd put it out there for some clarification. I'm very sad to see this situation unfold, I've met and spoken to Justin a number of times and he really is an asset to the club. He speaks passionately and has big visions and plans moving forward. Hopefully the Brydens team can/have come onboard and help fix this mess.

Wests Tigers need to take Greenberg and the NRL to court for defamation of our CEO and our brand. There are more holes in their accusations than swiss cheese. Any decent barrister will bend the NRL over!

Don't think that is going to happen somehow …be an interesting precedent if it did..

Oh and the 9 month thing is a guess as Joe Kelly from Manly was deregistered for 12 months and allowed back after 9 for their 5 years of cap rorting..shame really should have got life and Manly KICKED OUT..

 

[Fade_To_Black]

I guess the other big question is will they get an interim CEO if Pascoe can't beat the charge or will someone like Kelly Egan step up for the short term ??

Surely even if Pascoe is found guilty, the punishment is excessive and should be greatly reduced (but it is the crooked, wishy-washy NRL we are dealing with unfortunately). Egan should be the talking head whilst Pascoe calls the shots from afar….if there is no paper/email/phone trails it shouldnt be too difficult to negotiate for a few months. We are not one of the "chosen clubs" however so the lowlife NRL will be busting their gut to catch us out through fair means or foul.

Calling the shots from afar worked well for Flanagan and the Sharks didn’t it,
We’d have to be the dopiest club in history to try that Again

Too true. About as dumb as anyone who would think WT would go about it as brazen as the Sharks did. Flanagan signing a coaching extension whilst suspended was hardly the brightest thing to do. Likewise for him attending games whilst suspended under the premise of "watching my son play reggies". Nevermind the extensive email trail the buffoons left behind for the NRL to reel them in. One would think there are smarter ways to get around it than that no?

 

[Snake]

I've scrolled through and skim read most of this thread. My questions are:
1) If Justin Pascoe has been ordered to have zero contact with the club, how is he meant to argue his case?
2) If this does go to court, is it Justin challenging it or the club? Or both together?
3) I saw a 9 month term mentioned. Obviously there could well be zero truth to that but if that was the case, couldn't Justin just sit out for that period while Kelly Egan for example, took the temporary reins before returning after that time? Where did that info originally come from? I know de-registered means banned but when I saw a time frame mentioned it threw me?

These could be stupid questions but thought I'd put it out there for some clarification. I'm very sad to see this situation unfold, I've met and spoken to Justin a number of times and he really is an asset to the club. He speaks passionately and has big visions and plans moving forward. Hopefully the Brydens team can/have come onboard and help fix this mess.

Wests Tigers need to take Greenberg and the NRL to court for defamation of our CEO and our brand. There are more holes in their accusations than swiss cheese. Any decent barrister will bend the NRL over!

Don't think that is going to happen somehow …be an interesting precedent if it did..

Oh and the 9 month thing is a guess as Joe Kelly from Manly was deregistered for 12 months and allowed back after 9 for their 5 years of cap rorting..shame really should have got life and Manly KICKED OUT..

This is where the NRL have to be held accountable, Kelly received 9 months for 5 years of cheating the cap to gain advantages over other competitors. Where does the Pascoe Farahgate conspiracy punishment evern remotely come close to that . A president has to be set regarding length of penalties and monetary fines .. this rubbish of you get 12 months and this fine but after a period of 30 days it all can be halved .. your either a cheat or not ! Pascoes reputation has been trashed I would of thought there is only one avenue to persure here!

 

[cochise]

There doesn't have to be a smoking gun and the NRL doesn't need us to gain an advantage to punish the club**, though I believe the club received an advantage.**

You have probably already answered this, but what exact advantage do you believe the club received? I’ve also seen you suggest that the club agreed to pay RF money that was owed to him, that _no one knew about_. Is this tied to third party payments? Weren’t we seeking cap relief due to paying RF out?

I’ve yet to actually read most of this thread from the past week but have seen a post re: Rule 91A (1) -declaring future roles for players to the NRL- yet admit I still don’t understand how Pascoe’s handling of things is considered highly deceiving, and is being lumped in the same category with Storm and Eels. I get that there are guidelines to reduce cap breaches and Pascoe failed to comply with certain NRL procedures. But how on earth are the imposed penalties considered just?

Is the issue that the NRL believe Farah was promised an ambassador role in lieu of money owed to him by the club?

1\. The advantage that I believe the Tigers could have been seeking was RF leaving the club, this saved them $200k salary cap wise, but with RF coming back, the NRL could quite easily argue that the advantage was to ensure that he returned the Tigers. Doesn't matter if he returned on market value. The advantage could have also included the money they would have saved cap wise if the NRL accepted the cap relief application.

2\. I'm unsure of where the money owed to him come from, I'm no longer going to discuss the information that I was told as it was made clear that information wasn't welcome. I will say the speculation of a TPA makes sense to me.

3\. The NRL claim the deception lies in the fact that the club didn't inform the NRL, the contract was hidden from them and kept offsite from the club, which if true does look to be pretty damning to me. In the NRL eyes, the deception was then compounded by the fact the Tigers sought salary cap relief for Farah on the grounds of him being disruptive while offering him a post career contract.

4\. I don't think the NRL care what the reason for the role was/is. The Tigers have either purposefully, or by really poor management breached the cap rules in away that is a way to easily rort the cap, it is not really the NRL's onus to prove why they breached the rules, only that they did.

I will say I am not 100% sure the Tigers breached the cap deliberately, if they didn't then this is a very bad mistake.

It also needs to be remembered that the Tigers have been punished at no where near the same level as Parramatta and Melbourne.

 

[Plato]

This whole mess would no doubt make complete sense to the NRL or anyone else in possession of all the facts, but we are missing a few pieces of the puzzle I think. There needs to have been correspondence, or at least conversations between the NRL and Pascoe along the lines of Pascoe being asked if there was a contract between the club and Farah, and if so, where was it? Pascoe might have said "at home, I didn't think it was relevent". Then after producing the contract there should have been a "show cause" conversation, after which the removal from office might have made some sense. If it didn't happen that way, then I'd love to know how the off premises contract came to light without searching private homes, or someone bringing it to the NRL's attention. It's what we don't know that bothers me, and the NRL must be on solid ground to have denied Pascoe all right of redress other than through his lawyers.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

I guess the other big question is will they get an interim CEO if Pascoe can't beat the charge or will someone like Kelly Egan step up for the short term ??

Surely even if Pascoe is found guilty, the punishment is excessive and should be greatly reduced (but it is the crooked, wishy-washy NRL we are dealing with unfortunately). Egan should be the talking head whilst Pascoe calls the shots from afar….if there is no paper/email/phone trails it shouldnt be too difficult to negotiate for a few months. We are not one of the "chosen clubs" however so the lowlife NRL will be busting their gut to catch us out through fair means or foul.

Calling the shots from afar worked well for Flanagan and the Sharks didn’t it,
We’d have to be the dopiest club in history to try that Again

Too true. About as dumb as anyone who would think WT would go about it as brazen as the Sharks did. Flanagan signing a coaching extension whilst suspended was hardly the brightest thing to do. Likewise for him attending games whilst suspended under the premise of "watching my son play reggies". Nevermind the extensive email trail the buffoons left behind for the NRL to reel them in. One would think there are smarter ways to get around it than that no?

So when other clubs rort the system they are maggots, but if we can get away with it "hey, why not".

 

[Needaname]

This whole mess would no doubt make complete sense to the NRL or anyone else in possession of all the facts, but we are missing a few pieces of the puzzle I think. There needs to have been correspondence, or at least conversations between the NRL and Pascoe along the lines of Pascoe being asked if there was a contract between the club and Farah, and if so, where was it? Pascoe might have said "at home, I didn't think it was relevent". Then after producing the contract there should have been a "show cause" conversation, after which the removal from office might have made some sense. If it didn't happen that way, then I'd love to know how the off premises contract came to light without searching private homes, or someone bringing it to the NRL's attention. It's what we don't know that bothers me, and the NRL must be on solid ground to have denied Pascoe all right of redress other than through his lawyers.

This does concern me. Greenberg and weeks basically stood there and called us salary cap cheets and pointed to finger at Pascoe as the instigator. We are sitting here discussing how the tigers should go to court and sue for defamation as how dare we and our CEO be labeled such. However defamation can only occur if what has been stated is not fact. It leads me to believe that this is not a misunderstanding at all. The NRL being as meticulous as they are would not make the mistake of calling out someone if they didn’t have facts to prove it otherwise.
Some people say we should accept the punishment and move on. I believe otherwise. I don’t want the tigers to be labelled cheats. If you are negotiating a lesser deal of some sort you are admitting as such. Fight it, take your losses if they come but always declare your innocence. If you think about Cam Smith and Paul Gallen in what they have been involved in in their respective scandals. I will always think of Gallen as a cheat as he took the deal and admitted as such. Smith although possibly knowingly cheated has never been labelled as such…

 

[Fade_To_Black]

Surely even if Pascoe is found guilty, the punishment is excessive and should be greatly reduced (but it is the crooked, wishy-washy NRL we are dealing with unfortunately). Egan should be the talking head whilst Pascoe calls the shots from afar….if there is no paper/email/phone trails it shouldnt be too difficult to negotiate for a few months. We are not one of the "chosen clubs" however so the lowlife NRL will be busting their gut to catch us out through fair means or foul.

Calling the shots from afar worked well for Flanagan and the Sharks didn’t it,
We’d have to be the dopiest club in history to try that Again

Too true. About as dumb as anyone who would think WT would go about it as brazen as the Sharks did. Flanagan signing a coaching extension whilst suspended was hardly the brightest thing to do. Likewise for him attending games whilst suspended under the premise of "watching my son play reggies". Nevermind the extensive email trail the buffoons left behind for the NRL to reel them in. One would think there are smarter ways to get around it than that no?

So when other clubs rort the system they are maggots, but if we can get away with it "hey, why not".

Bloody oath. Anyone with half a brain can surely see that clubs who participate and operate "honestly" within the current NRL system are absolutely no chance of vying for a premiership. This is pretty obvious to most with a passing interest in the game.
Long story short, yep cheaters are maggots but to compete with the likes of Easts, Broncos, Storm, Sharks etc clubs will have to find ways to deceive the shonky, lopsided system currently in place.
Sick of supporting a club that is by and large run honestly, yet getting our arses flogged by clubs who are laughably considered to be operating above-board. So it is most definitely a case of "can't beat 'em, join 'em". 100%
Ask the s###bag Storm players and fans whether their celebrations for "winning" on GF night were dulled by being stripped of those premierships years later? I most certainly would still enjoy a WT GF win in 2019 and the weeks of partying afterwards even if we got caught out and stripped down the track.
Cheats win premierships, honest clubs prop up the ladder year after year. Sad but true.
Look at Newcastle, they are pretty much sick of finishing cellar-dwellars so are starting to show some real signs of brown-paper-bagging in order to get their club up to speed with the big boys.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Im just looking forward to the day when this drama is officially over…

A smart club would admit fault, cop the penalty and move on.

Not if that club is in the right. Wests Tigers have to show that they are not there to be the downtrodden club of the NRL. There is nothing smart about being downtrodden because it will continue to happen.

What if you are guilty?

What if you are guilty of breaching the cap, but challenging the severity of the penalty?

It's one thing to deny wrongdoing, but the club might be saying "yeah we'll put our hand up, but it wasn't done to obtain advantage and as such the penalty does not match the breach."

Nothing wrong with admitting guilt, but stating pure intentions in order to reduce the penalty. It'd be stupid not to have a crack.