We have Scott Seward being summonsed to speak to the NRL in relation to this matter. In the case of the Broncos and their little hiccup with Andrew Gee; NRL were very keen to speak to him but because he was 'no longer involved with the club 'they could not. In effect a confidentiality agreement protected him and the Broncos, so, in my mind surely the fact that Gee did not co operate means that there was indeed a suggestion of an impropriety in that particular case. Scott Seward is 'no longer involved' with the Eels either but he is going to be "allowed" to detail exactly what transpired. .
http://www.triplem.com.au/sydney/sp...speak-while-eels-star-caught-up-in-cap-probe/
Former Eels boss Scott Seward
will be allowed to break a confidentiality agreement so he can participate in the NRL’s investigation into Parramatta’s salary cap breaches.
Eels Stars Caught Up In Cap Probe
Corey Norman Photo: The Daily Telegraph
In-form Parramatta playmaker
Corey Norman is one of several high-profile past and present Eels players reported to be caught up in NRL club's salary cap scandal.
And as speculation continues to mount around the case, the Eels are also becoming concerned at what impact it might have on the NRL's forensic investigation.
According to Newscorp Australia, the NRL have uncovered documents suggesting Eels powerbrokers flouted the salary cap by offering players beefed up third-party payments.
Norman, Chris Sandow and Will Hopoate celebrate a try Photo: The Daily Telegraph
It's understood the documents were put together from June 2013 to the end of the 2013 season and include details of payments owed to
Chris Sandow, Will Hopoate, Reni Maitua, Wille Tonga, Justin Hunt and
Cheyse Blair.
Money owed to Norman, hooker
Nathan Peats and now departed English prop
Lee Mossop, who all joined for the start of the 2014 campaign was also detailed.
Under NRL rules, third-party agreements must be at arms length from the club, but the report claims documents state that in some cases the club made unregistered third-party payments.
There's no suggestion any of the players have done anything wrong.
Former
Parramatta CEO Scott Seward has been called before the integrity unit and will be interviewed next week as the embattled club face the prospect of being docked competition points.
The Eels hit back on Tuesday morning, questioning the relevance of the reports.
"The current leadership at the Parramatta Eels remain concerned at the damage ongoing media speculation is doing to the integrity of the NRL's current salary cap investigation," a club statement said.
"The story seems to relate to allegations of internal discussions three years ago in 2013, under the tenure of previous administration."
***********************************************************
The systematic rorting of things may not have delivered any titles to the club over the last 4 or so years ( yes, some of the so called infringements go back as far as 2012) but they should not be allowed to be swept away because of a time frame. Ask the Dogs and Melbourne whether or not that is a fair punishment or the Warriors who have also been docked points in the past. A fine does nothing, loss of points sends a much clearer warning that cheating will not be tolerated. The following article shows Parramatta was fined in 2011 also for breaching the cap.
http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/05/03/strip-clubs-of-premiership-points-for-breaching-salary-cap/
The time has come for the newly formed Australian Rugby League Commission to get tough on National Rugby League clubs that are found to have committed salary cap breaches by removing premiership points from them.
Last Friday the ARLC and the NRL announced that four NRL clubs would be issued with breach notices for salary cap infringements in the
2011 Telstra Premiership and Toyota Cup. The clubs were
Parramatta ($80,366), Gold Coast ($41,200), Penrith ($39,633) and Canberra ($5,358) .
The Commission and the NRL will pocket $166,557 from these clubs, but is that enough of a deterrent for these offending clubs?
While these fines pale into insignificance when compared to the fines handed down to the Bulldogs in 2002 ($500,000), the Warriors in 2005 ($450,000) and more recently the Storm in 2010 ($1.6 million) there is still a worrying trend of NRL club’s consistently exceeding the now $4.4 million a season salary cap.
Since the 2000 season the NRL has handed out a staggering 75 fines to clubs, totalling in excess of $5.1 million.
The NRL goes to great lengths to promote its competition as the fairest and most even competition. The salary cap is the undeniable symbol of that fairness that NRL CEO David Gallop thrusts before NRL fans at every opportunity.
“The salary cap we have, for example, means we’ve got eight close games every week and literally every team can win”, claimed Gallop earlier this year.
“It’s something I don’t think other codes can really say.”
Yet the salary cap is clearly not being adhered to by clubs, and while the competition remains unpredictable week in and week out,
it isn’t fair that a club that exceeds the salary cap by an amount so great that they are fined over $50,000 in one season is able to compete the following season without being penalised.
While there is no doubt that the NRL Salary Cap is a complicated beast – it includes separate amounts allocated to Top 25 players and second tier players at each club, third party player payments and even player bonuses for playing representative football – it is up to all NRL clubs to get their sums right.
The salary cap rules have been in place for over a decade, and the Commission needs to begin penalising teams, by not only fining them, but also by stripping them of NRL Premiership points.
Here is a simple and transparent solution – for every $50,000 that a club is fined in one salary cap breach, that club should have one competition point taken from them in the year that they are presented with a salary cap fine.
Therefore, if a club is fined $100,000 they would lose two points and if a club is fined $200,000 they would lose four points, and so on.
This may seem excessive, given that a club would effectively be penalised twice for their offence, but it has become unquestionable that fining a club isn’t having the desired effect of reducing salary cap infringements.
If there is one thing that a fan hates, it’s their football team losing points in a competition like the NRL that is so ridiculously tight.
A loss of competition points from salary cap breaches could even prevent a club from qualifying for a finals series.
This was the case with the Bulldogs in 2002 who lost all of their 37 points (this catapulted them from first to last in one fell swoop), the Warriors in 2005 who would have made the top eight had it not been for the eight points that they lost, and the Storm in 2010 who were deducted eight points after Round five and were unable to accumulate any other points for the remainder of the season (they would also have made the top eight).
Missing out on the Top eight results in a club failing to receive lucrative finals series gate takings, and reduces that club’s corporate sponsorship appeal, resulting in further indirect financial punishment.
NRL salary cap infringements have proven to be endemic amongst NRL clubs. The NRL, and now the Commission, has tried slapping clubs on the wrist, but the shear frequency of offences proves that fines alone don’t work.
The solution is clear: strip them of premiership points.
***********************************************************************************************************
What clubs can and can't do are clearly outlined in the NRL guidelines and there can be no misunderstanding. With third party the club must advise the NRL and receive approval for the deals; no approval, do deal. Just how Parramatta dealt with this remains to be seen, but from looking at the amount of infractions that have been discovered it appears highly unlikely any of the deals were dealt with in the correct manner.
http://www.nrl.com/nrlhq/referencecentre/salarycap/tabid/10434/default.aspx
What about money paid from other people or companies?
If a player is receiving money from any person as a way of inducing him to play for the club, then that money will be included in the Salary Cap.
Income that a player earns from parties not related to his club is generally not included in the Salary Cap, however, the details of the agreement must be advised to the club by the player.
The club must then get approval for the agreement from the Salary Cap Auditor in order for the remuneration to be excluded.
In 2006, the NRL also introduced an allowance for players who enter into Third Party Agreements with club sponsors, referred to as Marquee Player Agreements. In 2014, the Top 25 players are allowed to earn up to a maximum $600,000 in Marquee Player Agreements but the total payments under these agreements must not exceed $600,000 per club, otherwise any excess amounts are included in the salary cap.
Players are also able to enter into agreements with game sponsors, referred to as Sponsor Leveraging Agreements. There is no maximum amount and they are excluded from the salary cap.
How can some clubs have so many elite players and still be under the Salary Cap while other clubs at the bottom of the table seem to be just under the Salary Cap?
The reality is the majority of clubs spend the Salary Cap but not all are successful on the field. Someone has to come last and someone has to win, regardless of what they spend.
Some clubs will attract players on the basis of what the club can offer a player's career rather than just money. Other clubs may need to spend more money to attract the same level of player.
Many factors affect individual players' remuneration levels. Some of the reasons why a player may sign with a club include:
- Staying close to the player's home town and family.
- The chance to work with one of the top coaches in the game.
- Being part of a winning team and the potential to play in the Telstra Premiership Finals Series or Grand Final.
- Increased opportunity to play NRL with that club due to a lack of competition for the player's preferred position.
- The increased profile a player may enjoy in a one-team town.
- The number of support staff, their expertise and the support facilities.
- Education and welfare support structures.
- In addition, a player's salary package may include benefits that are specifically excluded from the Salary Cap, such as the payment of medical premiums, Marquee Player Agreements, relocation payments, prize money, university fees etc.
How does the Salary Cap Auditor monitor the Salary Cap?
All NRL player contracts must be lodged with the Salary Cap Auditor. These contracts are reviewed and each player's remuneration is included in the Salary Cap.
In addition, the CEO and Chairman of each club must provide a statutory declaration to the NRL at the beginning and end of each season in support of the club's Salary Cap calculation.
The Salary Cap Auditor monitors each club's Salary Cap position throughout the year based on the information provided by clubs. In addition, the Salary Cap Auditor may perform investigations into the remuneration of players if discrepancies arise. These investigations usually involve the club and its associated entities and cover all payments made and agreements entered into that may result in benefits being provided to players.
The Salary Cap Auditor also continually monitors media reports and makes enquiries in an effort to uncover any information that may have Salary Cap implications.
When clubs have been found to either breach the Salary Cap or have made undisclosed payments to a player, then the club is issued with a breach notice.
Third Party Agreements
Third party agreements are payments made by companies directly to players. There is no restriction on the amount a player can earn through third party agreements where he is being paid for his own intellectual property, without the need to employ club logos or names and where the company involved is neither a club sponsor nor are they acting on behalf of a club to secure the player's services. An example of this is a player promoting a brand or product, for example, Billy Slater and Australian Bananas.
Many players have third party agreements that are outside the salary cap. Individual players registered third party agreements totalling in excess of $15 million in 2015.
All third party agreements
must be registered and approved beforehand. This is to ensure that they do not become a way for clubs or players to use sponsors or third parties to undermine the salary cap and also for the game to ensure the protection of club and game intellectual property. There are provisions for club sponsors to enter into agreements with elite players under the Marquee Player Agreement allowance.
Why do clubs have to let players go after they have been successful?
The value of a player rises as his skills and standing in the game improves and as more clubs compete for his services. The Salary Cap does not prevent a club retaining a senior player but it does mean that a club must choose a balance between retaining established stars and buying new players. This ensures a distribution of playing talent across the game. It is important to remember that the Cap does include a long serving player allowance to assist in this balance.
*************************************************************
It is a sad situation that has been going on for far too long. It needs to be resolved and quickly. The comment regarding use of media reports is an interesting one and it appears that it is one of the many ways in which these matters are uncovered and investigated. Parramatta are now claiming trial by media; it might just be paper talk, but the information has to get out there somehow and they need to admit that after all that has transpired it has been found to have a fair degree of truth to it. The NRL never said that the investigation was over after the initial findings ; piece by piece they are uncovering more so the days ahead will be interesting.
