Does the Storm situation taint our 2004 title?

[jimmy_the_greek]

Simple. No it wasn't. End of story case closed.

 

[Number13]

Now when we went through our cap rort in 2002, our players were allowed to take a pay-cut to stay at the club. Going by the NRL's stance that Storm players will not be allowed to take pay-cuts, it seems as though the NRL has learnt from the mistakes it made with us.

I think most logical Dogs fans could appreciate that allowing players to take pay cuts to stay at a club that rorted the cap is simply wrong since those players would not even have been there in the first place if the club had not cheated to attain them. Players taking pay cuts to stay means that the club is still making a net gain from its cheating.

Given this information, I am sad to say that I feel our 2004 title to be a tainted one. It hurts to say it, as it was one of the greatest nights in my life. But given the way the NRL has dealt with the Storm, I just feel as though we got away with a big one. We should not have been able to keep our players in the way that we did and this knowledge is going to haunt me for a long time, or at least until we win again.

Thoughts?

This thread is appalling!

Please do not associate yourself with the words "logic" "logical" or "Bulldogs Supporter", becoause you are devoid of it.

You should introduce the following words into your vocabulary. "idiot", "moron", "pathetic" and "impotent". In case you forget how to spell them, look in the mirror!




'

 

[filto666]

Cant belive you would suggest such a thing, we won that GF fair and square and like others have mentioned we beat a team that has been proven to be over the cap. Im sure the Broncos and Roosters were cheating too but were never caught out if you look at there rosters.

 

[Dog Life 84]

Cant belive you would suggest such a thing, we won that GF fair and square and like others have mentioned we beat a team that has been proven to be over the cap. Im sure the Broncos and Roosters were cheating too but were never caught out if you look at there rosters.

The Storm weren't rorting the cap in 2004. I agree with your last statement.

 

[Dog Life 84]

Come on guys. Theres no need to hurl petty insults at me. Its something that I really feel and I wanted to see how others felt about it.

 

[Dognacious]

Given this information, I am sad to say that I feel our 2004 title to be a tainted one.
Thoughts?

Given this thread i feel the Kennel is tainted.

We were under the cap in 2004 you stupid gronk.

If the Storm players want to take a pay cut to play together next year im ok with that.

We lost players from 2002 till 2004 too.

Fail thread with a 16 storey high captial F

 

[Dog Life 84]

Given this thread i feel the Kennel is tainted.

We were under the cap in 2004 you stupid gronk.

If the Storm players want to take a pay cut to play together next year im ok with that.

We lost players from 2002 till 2004 too.

Fail thread with a 16 storey high captial F

But thats the thing. The NRL will not allow them to do that, even though we were allowed to do that in 2002. Why is this so?

 

[Dognacious]

But thats the thing. The NRL will not allow them to do that, even though we were allowed to do that in 2002. Why is this so?

Its thier decision, wrong or right, but wtf has it to do with our 2004 title?

 

[Dog Life 84]

Its thier decision, wrong or right, but wtf has it to do with our 2004 title?

It has alot to do with it imo. If the NRL had applied the same ruling to us in 2002 (not allowing players to take pay-cuts) as they are with the Storm this season, then we would have lost more players than what we eventually did. Our team for future seasons would have been weaker than what it eventually was, which imo taints our 2004 team.

 

[-alex-]

Not at all, we were punished accordingly and followed any rules given to us by the NRL afterwards. We were under the cap in 2004 and had gained/lost players like every other club.

Plus what happened with us acted as a warning to any other clubs should they follow down the same path... What happened at the Storm is not out fault and they now need to take responsibility for their actions. Especially after the massive warning issued after what happened with us in 02

 

[Dog Life 84]

Not at all, we were punished accordingly and followed any rules given to us by the NRL afterwards. We were under the cap in 2004 and had gained/lost players like every other club.

Plus what happened with us acted as a warning to any other clubs should they follow down the same path... What happened at the Storm is not out fault and they now need to take responsibility for their actions. Especially after the massive warning issued after what happened with us in 02

I am not saying its our fault. I am frustrated that the NRL has taken two very different approaches to dealing with essentially the same crime. By taking this measure (not allowing the Storm to take pay-cuts) they are essentially saying that they made a mistake when dealing us our punishment.

 

[X factor]

I am not saying its our fault. I am frustrated that the NRL has taken two very different approaches to dealing with essentially the same crime. By taking this measure (not allowing the Storm to take pay-cuts) they are essentially saying that they made a mistake when dealing us our punishment.

Everyone knows the storm players collectively will not take a paycut of close to 1 million dollars.
The dogs were no where near that figure when they were over the cap.
Dogs lost a host of stars after the 02-03 season any way so I dont know what your going on about.

 

[Slippery]

Retardation.

 

[X factor]

Retardation.

Very indeed, I dont know where this guy is coming from.

 

[Dog Life 84]

Everyone knows the storm players collectively will not take a paycut of close to 1 million dollars.
The dogs were no where near that figure when they were over the cap.
Dogs lost a host of stars after the 02-03 season any way so I dont know what your going on about.

Why will they have to take a collective pay-cut of 1 million? Like with us in 2002, they will lose some players to get under the cap. The BIG difference is that their players will not be allowed to take pay-cuts to help get under the cap. If the NRL had made us do the same in 2002, there is no doubt that we would have lost even more players than what we did.

 

[X factor]

Why will they have to take a collective pay-cut of 1 million? Like with us in 2002, they will lose some players to get under the cap. The BIG difference is that their players will not be allowed to take pay-cuts to help get under the cap. If the NRL had made us do the same in 2002, there is no doubt that we would have lost even more players than what we did.

Well by 04 we lost plenty of players and gained no one, so I really dont see how you can even think of that team as an unjustified one with so many debut's and a host of lost stars.

 

[Slippery]

I think Canterbury and Parramatta's titles from the 80s should be stripped due to unfair competition. They had a stranglehold on the opposition, like what Woolies and Coles have on the current service station market.

It only makes perfect sense.

 

[Dog Life 84]

Well by 04 we lost plenty of players and gained no one, so I really dont see how you can even think of that team as an unjustified one with so many debut's and a host of lost stars.

Well then if you feel that way, then you must think that the NRL is wrong for not allowing the Storm players to take pay-cuts. Is that right?

 

[X factor]

Well then if you feel that way, then you must think that the NRL is wrong for not allowing the Storm players to take pay-cuts. Is that right?

I think the Storm should have been allowed to keep their 07 and 09 premierships but at the end of the day what me and you think does not matter, thats what they have decided on and thats final I guess.
Plus you have to remember the bulldogs were made an example of to deter it happening in the future.
It obviously did not deter the storm so their punnishment deserves to be a little harsher.

 

[Hansta]

Everyone knows the storm players collectively will not take a paycut of close to 1 million dollars.
The dogs were no where near that figure when they were over the cap.
Dogs lost a host of stars after the 02-03 season any way so I dont know what your going on about.

rauhihi and norton were not stars lol. The only loss pretty much was vagana who left after 03.