Some serious Questions should be asked.

[1967]

I feel the article about the Laundy’s wanting to offer Tino a pub partnership, dropped a very telling piece of information that needs further explaining.

It’s states that when the storm had a bunch of their players off contract, to keep them, the chairman Matt Trip sort and was granted approval by the Nrl to offer players investments in his booking firm, Betr.

This Betr firm, being an online gambling platform like Ladbrokes and Sportsbet.

If an opposition clubs offering your player say $300k extra to come to their club… and you can turn around and say look, we’ll offer you $150k under the SC plus an outside $150k in investment shares via my betting agency, plus that investment will create a guaranteed $75k income pa for you, so you’ll be $75k better of each year .. Isn’t that a massive unfair advantage for clubs that can’t offer these types of arrangements?

Now we see why these top clubs are accumulating all the best players, it’s not premierships or playing with their mates, it’s MONEY, and the Nrl approving investment opportunities for them to make more MONEY!

Clubs needs to stand up and ask some hard questions, how did this all work, was it part of the SC, classed as TPA’s, did the players have to buy in, were they offered a guaranteed income return, or was it just here you go, we’ll give you this $150k investment opportunity if you stay at our club.

People like Laurie Daly couldn’t even work as an assistant coach because he’s employed by betting agencies …. yet here’s the Nrl allowing the chairman of a club to offer players investment opportunities in an online betting agency … isn’t that also a huge conflict of interest? ..

I don’t remember any of this in the media, something stinks, all seems a bit behind closed doors to me … “favourites being looked after rings a bell” ..

Makes you wonder what else these top clubs are asking the Nrl to approve behind closed doors, so they get to buy and keep all the best players?

 

[Raysie]

Welcome to what's been the reality for Rugby League in Australia for a long time.

The top clubs have been doing this since the dawn of time, and all a salary cap does is make the unfair advantage worse.

At least with no cap there's complete transparency.

 

[CMP]

I feel the article about the Laundy’s wanting to offer Tino a pub partnership, dropped a very telling piece of information that needs further explaining.

It’s states that when the storm had a bunch of their players off contract, to keep them, the chairman Matt Trip sort and was granted approval by the Nrl to offer players investments in his booking firm, Betr.

This Betr firm, being an online gambling platform like Ladbrokes and Sportsbet.

If an opposition clubs offering your player say $300k extra to come to their club… and you can turn around and say look, we’ll offer you $150k under the SC plus an outside $150k in investment shares via my betting agency, plus that investment will create a guaranteed $75k income pa for you, so you’ll be $75k better of each year .. Isn’t that a massive unfair advantage for clubs that can’t offer these types of arrangements?

Now we see why these top clubs are accumulating all the best players, it’s not premierships or playing with their mates, it’s MONEY, and the Nrl approving investment opportunities for them to make more MONEY!

Clubs needs to stand up and ask some hard questions, how did this all work, was it part of the SC, classed as TPA’s, did the players have to buy in, were they offered a guaranteed income return, or was it just here you go, we’ll give you this $150k investment opportunity if you stay at our club.

People like Laurie Daly couldn’t even work as an assistant coach because he’s employed by betting agencies …. yet here’s the Nrl allowing the chairman of a club to offer players investment opportunities in an online betting agency … isn’t that also a huge conflict of interest? ..

I don’t remember any of this in the media, something stinks, all seems a bit behind closed doors to me … “favourites being looked after rings a bell” ..

Makes you wonder what else these top clubs are asking the Nrl to approve behind closed doors, so they get to buy and keep all the best players?

A complete overhaul and rethink of the “Salary Cap” is overdue.

I’m starting to lean towards the NRL contracting every player. The NRL should stop paying the clubs grants and instead use this money to individually contract every top 30 player to minimum wage deals.

With a further $6 million allocated to each club to spend on players. Once again to be paid directly by the NRL to play for a set club for a period of time. With all offers for any player submitted to the NRL. Whether the player signs with that club or not. They find out the real value of a player. Flagging deals that are well under value.

With provisions for Two Marquee players for each club with not cap.

 

[Alan79]

The system is broken. By no means should the chairman of a club be able to offer shares in his own company.

If every club is allowed to skirt the rules it's ok. But I really think the NRL still has clear bias with certain clubs. Look at Soiths and their medical retirements verse us still having to pay Josh Jacksons money in our salary cap because he's been given a club job.

The NRL will deny us the chance to pay anyone under Laundies proposed deal. I'd almost bet my nuts on it.

 

[Lynchpin]

well under value

"Value" is subjective; determined by the two parties (player & club). It is best resolved in a competitive market (Capitalism, as it were).
Attempting to "control" that process from Central Command (Socialism, if you will) will work just fine, right up until the point that the theory meets reality.
A simplistic, "complete overhaul" is unlikely to solve much without the long and comprehensive "rethink" you describe.

 

[wendog33]

The system is broken. By no means should the chairman of a club be able to offer shares in his own company.

If every club is allowed to skirt the rules it's ok. But I really think the NRL still has clear bias with certain clubs. Look at Soiths and their medical retirements verse us still having to pay Josh Jacksons money in our salary cap because he's been given a club job.

The NRL will deny us the chance to pay anyone under Laundies proposed deal. I'd almost bet my nuts on it.

AND it's not just his own company...it's a betting company.

PLAYERS HAVE SHARES IN A BETTING COMPANY.

Laundy's pub deal is almost total clean skin by comparison to the potential corruption and match fixing possibilities of Storms deal with possibly compromised gambling addicted players and potentially friends and family and crime gangs.

 

[EL Hefe]

The real question is

 

[bradyk]

As long as it's banned after we use it to our advantage

 

[1967]

If a journalist was worth his/her salt, they would of picked up on the red flag here, they’d be doing some digging and getting the real story behind this … the Nrl reportedly approving a club chairmans request to offer shares in a betting platform to keep players at his club, is no small thing.

Was the original story really about the Laundy’s pub offer, or was it a way of getting the Storms investment offer out there without really getting it out there?

What other deals are being struck with the Nrl behind closed doors that we don’t know about for certain clubs to make sure they buy and keep the best players, do these type of investment deals extend to players managers, players families?

Was it a similar type deal that got Wighton across the line for Souths when Raiders were matching their offer? …… of cause not, it was all just about him wanting to play with his mates wasn’t it ..???

If our club presented that Storm type of investment deal to the Nrl, as the Laundy’s apparently have, so we could get Tino away from the Titans, or we used something similar to get Haas away from the Bronco’s, do you really believe they’d approve it ?

 

[SPEARTAKVIDREFS]

I dont know too much about this stuff.

What I do know is Roosters and Broncos seem to always have origin players.

Who determines market value? Are there parameters? Think I read somewhere NRL doesnt allow players being paid under their market value. Brandon Smith said himself he signed for far less to go to the Roosters. Ofcoarse Id expect him to be receiving TPA's etc or real estate "help" or what ever but thats outside the cap. Same with Cronk.

Lodge on train and trial at the Roosters, how did that work? Does that mean Rooster paid him peanuts for a couple of months (with incentives we'll never know about) and then reduced his first year after resigning so they had more cap so to speak?

 

[1967]

Welcome to what's been the reality for Rugby League in Australia for a long time.

The top clubs have been doing this since the dawn of time, and all a salary cap does is make the unfair advantage worse.

At least with no cap there's complete transparency.

No cap would only make these rich clubs even stronger …

We’ve all been aware for years that some unfair advantages have been going on at certain clubs to buy and keep the best players.

Lots of talk around TPA’s, brown paper bags, crypto payments, property, jobs for families etc. but that’s all it’s been, speculation and talk ..

The other questions has always been, why are the Nrl so quiet about it, why haven’t they looked deeper into these clubs SC’s and TPA’s to find out what’s actually going on here?

The telling thing about this article is they’ve actually put in print that the Nrl approved what I believe has been a behind the door deal (which to me gave this club an unfair advantage) to help them keep their best players, so the next questions are obvious, are they using these same type of deals to get these best players in the first place, how are these deals done, are they classed as TPA’s doesn’t look like it because the TPA article has most of these clubs in the low TPA bracket .. I’m very surprised main media hasn’t picked up this story and said WTF ?

 

[1967]

I dont know too much about this stuff.

What I do know is Roosters and Broncos seem to always have origin players.

Who determines market value? Are there parameters? Think I read somewhere NRL doesnt allow players being paid under their market value. Brandon Smith said himself he signed for far less to go to the Roosters. Ofcoarse Id expect him to be receiving TPA's etc or real estate "help" or what ever but thats outside the cap. Same with Cronk.

Lodge on train and trial at the Roosters, how did that work? Does that mean Rooster paid him peanuts for a couple of months (with incentives we'll never know about) and then reduced his first year after resigning so they had more cap so to speak?

If people think back a bit, the question was asked, how can the Roosters possibly afford to sign 2 very quality players in Dom Young and Spencer Lenui, with the stacked squad they already had, both were reportedly chasing upwards of $500k …

The narrative at the time was JWH & Toupu we’re retiring and freeing up cap space, we all bought that … few months later when everything cooled down, JWH & Toupu have both re-signed and will go around for another year ..

So the question should be raised by the media again in large bold print, how are the Roosters affording to add Young & Lenui to that stacked squad, instead it’s crickets?

My point here is going by that article, it looks like these aren’t under the table shady deals, looks like the Nrl are approving them, why is that, what’s the real agenda here.

 

[Dogs Of War]

If a journalist was worth his/her salt, they would of picked up on the red flag here, they’d be doing some digging and getting the real story behind this … the Nrl reportedly approving a club chairmans request to offer shares in a betting platform to keep players at his club, is no small thing.

Was the original story really about the Laundy’s pub offer, or was it a way of getting the Storms investment offer out there without really getting it out there?

What other deals are being struck with the Nrl behind closed doors that we don’t know about for certain clubs to make sure they buy and keep the best players, do these type of investment deals extend to players managers, players families?

Was it a similar type deal that got Wighton across the line for Souths when Raiders were matching their offer? …… of cause not, it was all just about him wanting to play with his mates wasn’t it ..???

If our club presented that Storm type of investment deal to the Nrl, as the Laundy’s apparently have, so we could get Tino away from the Titans, or we used something similar to get Haas away from the Bronco’s, do you really believe they’d approve it ?

Buzz presented it as a story so he could do the follow up the next day saying the NRL said no. Funny how it happened on a Sunday, I'm not sure the NRL unless it was properly presented by the Bulldogs to the NRL could say no until the finer details were asked.

 

[SPEARTAKVIDREFS]

If people think back a bit, the question was asked, how can the Roosters possibly afford to sign 2 very quality players in Dom Young and Spencer Lenui, with the stacked squad they already had, both were reportedly chasing upwards of $500k …

The narrative at the time was JWH & Toupu we’re retiring and freeing up cap space, we all bought that … few months later when everything cooled down, JWH & Toupu have both re-signed and will go around for another year ..

So the question should be raised by the media again in large bold print, how are the Roosters affording to add Young & Lenui to that stacked squad, instead it’s crickets?

My point here is going by that article, it looks like these aren’t under the table shady deals, looks like the Nrl are approving them, why is that, what’s the real agenda here.

Yeah thats why I brought up the question who determines market value.
If market value is set for players with lets say a 5-8% tolerance than I doubt there would be as much of an issue when looking at Roosters for example. Its pretty black and white then. Or am I missing something?

 

[wendog33]

If a journalist was worth his/her salt, they would of picked up on the red flag here, they’d be doing some digging and getting the real story behind this … the Nrl reportedly approving a club chairmans request to offer shares in a betting platform to keep players at his club, is no small thing.

Was the original story really about the Laundy’s pub offer, or was it a way of getting the Storms investment offer out there without really getting it out there?

What other deals are being struck with the Nrl behind closed doors that we don’t know about for certain clubs to make sure they buy and keep the best players, do these type of investment deals extend to players managers, players families?

Was it a similar type deal that got Wighton across the line for Souths when Raiders were matching their offer? …… of cause not, it was all just about him wanting to play with his mates wasn’t it ..???

If our club presented that Storm type of investment deal to the Nrl, as the Laundy’s apparently have, so we could get Tino away from the Titans, or we used something similar to get Haas away from the Bronco’s, do you really believe they’d approve it ?

If 360 bring it up tonight, I hope Braith details the extra incentive Storm betting shares details he knows about with Munster (as his agent!)

 

[1967]

Yeah thats why I brought up the question who determines market value.
If market value is set for players with lets say a 5-8% tolerance than I doubt there would be as much of an issue when looking at Roosters for example. Its pretty black and white then. Or am I missing something?

I agree mate,

Now it’s apparently being reported that no way would the Nrl approve the Laundy/Tino pub deal ..

We need to stfu and do things behind closed doors like these other clubs do … and then if we don’t get approved send an anonymous package to the honest media outlets blowing the whistle on the ones that have been approved.

Que Dj’s media article Nrl to say no to pub deal

 

[1967]

If 360 bring it up tonight, I hope Braith details the extra incentive Storm betting shares details he knows about with Munster (as his agent!)

Don’t hold your breath, 360 might mention the pub deal, Brothfield might say the Bulldogs are ridiculous thinking they could rort the system, the game and other clubs like this, and have a whinge ..

But I doubt Anasta brings up the Storm investment deal … we have no idea who the deal extended to ..

 

[wendog33]

Don’t hold your breath, 360 might mention the pub deal, Brothfield might say the Bulldogs are ridiculous thinking they could rort the game and other clubs like this and have a whinge ..

But I doubt Anasta brings up the Storm investment deal … we have no idea who the deal extended to ..

Well if anyone got the owners betting company shares it sure woulda been Munster

 

[Dogzzz of War]

I don’t think the “shares” in the betting agency or laundry’s pubs are offered in lieu of salary.
I believe it’s an offer to the player to invest their money in the business and earn a return. This return is higher than what they would be able to achieve investing the funds elsewhere.

 

[wendog33]

I don’t think the “shares” in the betting agency or laundry’s pubs are offered in lieu of salary.
I believe it’s an offer to the player to invest their money in the business and earn a return. This return is higher than what they would be able to achieve investing the funds elsewhere.

No its an added inducement or bonus.