Four NRL agents face ban for Storm dealings

[OXY-351]

If he didn't, how can he not have questions? Looking at his team, do the math.

153

 

[Coxy]

If he didn't, how can he not have questions? Looking at his team, do the math.

153

163.

You forgot to carry the 1.

 

[mrslong]

Craig Bellamy, Cam Smith & Billy Slater are all way to valuable to the NRL to have their names sullied. If they did know about it, imo the NRL will cover it up.

I sound like my mother in law - queen of the conspiracy theories.

 

[Jeba]

Craig Bellamy, Cam Smith & Billy Slater are all way to valuable to the NRL to have their names sullied. If they did know about it, imo the NRL will cover it up.

I sound like my mother in law - queen of the conspiracy theories.

Agreed, and I don't really have a problem with that to be honest. The Storm and the game has suffered enough.

 

[OXY-351]

If he didn't, how can he not have questions? Looking at his team, do the math.

Same thing could be said about the Broncos team during the Bennett years. So let's not go there.

What years are we talking though? I would have though the only questionable years would have been in the late 90s, and wasn't there some concessions back then due to players being on big contracts thanks to super league?

 

[Porthoz]

[quote="OXY-351":2z4fdz4m][quote="The Rock":2z4fdz4m]

If he didn't, how can he not have questions? Looking at his team, do the math.

Same thing could be said about the Broncos team during the Bennett years. So let's not go there.

What years are we talking though? I would have though the only questionable years would have been in the late 90s, and wasn't there some concessions back then due to players being on big contracts thanks to super league?[/quote:2z4fdz4m]

Nah, all throughout the 00's. All I ever heard was "how are the Broncos under the cap".[/quote:2z4fdz4m]
Yeah, pretty much in the same way we "would've been over the cap" if Inglis had signed with us... :roll:

 

[Coxy]

[quote="The Rock":3i37ynpm]

If he didn't, how can he not have questions? Looking at his team, do the math.

Same thing could be said about the Broncos team during the Bennett years. So let's not go there.

What years are we talking though? I would have though the only questionable years would have been in the late 90s, and wasn't there some concessions back then due to players being on big contracts thanks to super league?[/quote:3i37ynpm]

Yeah this is the thing that irks me a little. Everyone goes "oh, well look at the past Broncos teams".

OK let's.

1992-1995 - salary cap rules were a joke. Given a car by a sponsor? Fine, not counted on cap. Given a "job" working in the club? Fine, not counted in the cap. Wife given a job with a sponsor? Fine, not counted on the cap.

Broncos could basically pay their players peanuts and they'd still be millionaires (not literally millionaires, but would do very well). And it was completely legal under the rules of the NSWRL.

Then Super League war began, and salary cap went to hell.

Reconciliation in 1998 but all super league contracts were excluded from the salary cap.

Funnily enough, once they all expired the Broncos started shedding players under the tighter salary cap rules.

We've towed the line despite what critics try and sell.

 

[john1420]

[quote="The Rock":1b6cfek8]

If he didn't, how can he not have questions? Looking at his team, do the math.

Same thing could be said about the Broncos team during the Bennett years. So let's not go there.

What years are we talking though? I would have though the only questionable years would have been in the late 90s, and wasn't there some concessions back then due to players being on big contracts thanks to super league?

Yeah this is the thing that irks me a little. Everyone goes "oh, well look at the past Broncos teams".

OK let's.

1992-1995 - salary cap rules were a joke. Given a car by a sponsor? Fine, not counted on cap. Given a "job" working in the club? Fine, not counted in the cap. Wife given a job with a sponsor? Fine, not counted on the cap.

Broncos could basically pay their players peanuts and they'd still be millionaires (not literally millionaires, but would do very well). And it was completely legal under the rules of the NSWRL.

Then Super League war began, and salary cap went to hell.

Reconciliation in 1998 but all super league contracts were excluded from the salary cap.

Funnily enough, once they all expired the Broncos started shedding players under the tighter salary cap rules.

We've towed the line despite what critics try and sell.[/quote:1b6cfek8]

+1000

As for Melbourne, well they did this under the tight cap restrictions and were proven to be over the cap

Nobody has anything against the Broncos except baseless accusations

I have said from day 1 the players and the coach knew they were cheating. I'll never know for sure of course, but I just cannot believe grown men can be that naiive.

 

[Coxy]

Yep. People just go "oo look Broncos Thoroughbreds, rich businessmen looking after the players" and assume it's dodgy.

And then some douches point to how Wayne Bennett was being gifted money. So what? Coaches aren't on a salary cap.

It's most disappointing when Broncos fans repeat - whether seriously or not - the "well look at our line up" BS.

 

[Flutterby]

I have said from day 1 the players and the coach knew they were cheating. I'll never know for sure of course, but I just cannot believe grown men can be that naiive.

You know what I think? If they did know, I think once they are all retired and out of the game a few years that there will be some pretty frank autobiographies or confessions.

 

[Porthoz]

I have said from day 1 the players and the coach knew they were cheating. I'll never know for sure of course, but I just cannot believe grown men can be that naiive.

You know what I think? If they did know, I think once they are all retired and out of the game a few years that there will be some pretty frank autobiographies or confessions.

They might want to wait for the statute of limitation to expire, just in case... [icon_lol1.

 

[Flutterby]

yeah well I after they've been out of the game for a few (ie quite a few) years :-)

 

[Kaz]

Fraud doesn't have a statute of limitations.

So we won't be reading it in their books.

Unless they do a OJ Simpson type of book & call it, If We Knew.