Why I believe the Storm players knew nothing
Roar Guru By Steve Kaless, 28 Apr 2010 Steve Kaless is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Melbourne Storm, NRL, Rugby League, salary cap scandal
Related coverage
So far, the Storm players are saying they knew nothing of the secret payments that were sending their club over the salary cap. And so far, I believe them. I may end up with egg on my face, but I’ll back the players that they were unaware of the cooking that was occurring with the books. My beliefs are based on a number of factors.
First, in my experience, players don’t discuss what they are earning. They may discuss openly the length of contract of they are seeking, but not the finances behind the deal.
Secondly, few deals these days see a player actually earn the same amount for each year of his contract.
To avoid the cap, deals are front loaded or back loaded, so players earn different amounts for different years so the books balance (or give the appearance of balancing). Players are, therefore, hardly going to be doing the maths to see whether the club is over.
Thirdly, the amount of players leaving would have had the players believing that the club was staying under the cap.
Fourthly, it would seem that a large part of the reason for the blow out came from third party deals which were guaranteed by the club rather than just third party deals. With managers likely to have been ensuring players that everything was sweet, I’d argue they were none the wiser.
If anything, the managers of the star players have so far escaped any scrutiny. I wonder for much longer this will be the case.
Back in 2002, I was working for the Bulldogs and I remember having breakfast with second rower Jamie Feeney, who was simply dumbstruck that the club was so far over the cap.
“It’s not like we have a team of internationals”, he told me over a bowl of cornflakes.
I’d imagine it is similar at the Storm. With honest toilers like Bryan Norrie coming in to replace the likes of Dallas Johnson, it is fair to say the players thought the club was staying under the cap.
As I said, I may end up ultimately disappointed, but at this stage I’m backing the players.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- Melbourne Storm, NRL, Rugby League, salary cap scandal
April 28th 2010 @ 11:17am
sledgeross said | April 28th 2010 @ 11:17am | Report comment
Comes down to plausible deniability. If you dont talk about it, you can claim not to know anything, and players can use ambiguous terms such as “we never talked about it”. or “I leave that to my manager and the club”.
Im assuming they are not all idiots, so of course they would know something duplicitous is going on.
April 28th 2010 @ 11:37am
Brett McKay said | April 28th 2010 @ 11:37am | Report comment
bingo, Sledgie. Plausible deniabilty….
April 28th 2010 @ 11:51am
The Answer said | April 28th 2010 @ 11:51am | Report comment
This is such a massive story because no one saw it coming, so why should the players have known that there was something dodgy going on?
April 28th 2010 @ 11:32am
Mushi said | April 28th 2010 @ 11:32am | Report comment
So every roar member, other than me knows the exact amount every person they have ever worked with was paid and the exact source of every payment?
April 28th 2010 @ 11:49am
Steve Kaless said | April 28th 2010 @ 11:49am | Report comment
Thanks all for your comments, it is an evolving story so we’ll see how things play out.
One point should be made, plenty of people seem to be saying that because players may have got a TV, boat or something else that they should have realised they were over the cap.
However, these are third party deals which aren’t illegal under the cap, it’s only the case if it is guaranteed by the club. As I said I this could be a bit vague and I’ll back the players.
As to the players being complicit because of their managers, because managers do most of the wheeling and dealing and then just present the players with the nuts and bolts I’d argue it would make them even less complicit.
At this stage, I’m holding off the egg.
April 28th 2010 @ 11:56am
katzilla said | April 28th 2010 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Why wouldn’t Cameron Smith sign that contract for the third party back room deal though?
He obviously knew something wasn’t quite right, I dare say he wasn’t the only one.
April 28th 2010 @ 12:11pm
Michael C said | April 28th 2010 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
I’d've thought the best guide is what players (whether they stay or go) are being offered.
In the case of a successful team over a period of years – - there MUST be salary cap concerns – - irrespective of code. Either players accept less than market value to stay together or the club has to off load players from somewhere in the list.
Geelong’s president this morning stated that the top 25 on the Geelong list are probably on b/w 20% and 30% lower than market value. We know the concerns now with G.Ablett being offered the world by GC17.
However, RL – has to fend off RU in Aust, other RL clubs, RU and RL overseas.
Why the RL salarcy cap isn’t more realistic, and more flexible I’ll never know.
Michael Hagan this morning spoke on radio SEN in Melb about only $100K allowable for ‘veterans’. The AFL salary cap allows one club veterans to have half their salary outside of the cap. THis allows a couple of things. Massively back ended contracts for club legends, and allows and encourages player loyalty.
SO, the RL system does not really encourage club loyalty, and the Storm is owned by a massively wealthy multi national from whom the players probably felt no guilt in taking all they could get. It’d be too easy to blame the leadership group for not comprehending that the only way they could retain the list they did would require cuts somewhere………..however……..that is what had to happen to be ‘legal’ in an overly restrictive system.
The players either knew, or hadn’t considered the obvious – - but, the system is to blame. I’d imagine the attitude of players would be vastly different were their club a community owned/based club like Geelong in the AFL or Newcastle in the NRL……but, then, cost of living might be cheaper in such centres allowing players to move readily accept a pay cut.
April 28th 2010 @ 2:19pm
AndyRoo said | April 28th 2010 @ 2:19pm | Report comment
They have widely been reported to have taken pay cuts and they have lost Players. Even with the top up that would be under market value for pretty much all of them. I don’t buy your AFL players love their community owned teams as opposed to the NRL franchise fluff.
The NRL has a mixture and the one team over the years to have the best record for keeping their stars is the other New limited owned team the Broncos. Players stay because they like the coach (since Bennet has left they have lost plenty), their family is settled and their winning. In the NRL wiining also increases your chance at rep honors too.
Looking at their gains and losses over the last couple of years (I have bolded who I consider a name player..but I’m no expert ) they have been shedding rather than gaining talent .
Gains
Atelea Vea Sharks 2010
Chase Stanley Dragons 2010
John Kite Bulldogs 2010
Todd Lowrie Eels 2010
Bronx Goodwin Sharks 2010
Luke MacDougall Knights 2010
Losses
Will Chambers Qld Reds 2010
Joseph Tomane Titans 2010
Steve Turner Bulldogs 2010
James Maloney Warriors 2010
Matt Cross Sea Eagles 2010
Wairangi Koopu Retired 2010
Brett Anderson Northern Pride 2010
Dallas Johnson Catalans 2010
Scott Anderson Broncos 2010
Aiden Guerra Roosters 2010
Arana Taumata Wests Tigers 2010
2009
Gains
Ryan Hinchcliffe (Raiders – 2010), Arana Taumata (Bulldogs – 2009), William Isa (Panthers – 2010), Andre Itula (Rabbitohs – 2009), James Maloney (Wentworthville Magpies – 2010), Wairangi Koopu (Warriors – 2009), Blaise Lomax (Wellington), Lazarus Mulu (Wellington), Jordan McLean (U20s)
Losses
Israel Folau (Broncos), Sam Tagataese (Titans), Michael Crocker (ESL – Hull FC), Jeremy Smith (Dragons), Antonio Kaufusi (Cowboys), Liam Foran (Warriors), Matt Geyer (retirement), Garret Crossman (Rabbitohs), Russell Aiken (A.S. Carcassonne), Arana Taumata (sacked)
April 28th 2010 @ 3:43pm
Michael C said | April 28th 2010 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
careful Andyroo -
I only spoke of Geelong with reference to this mornings SEN discussion, and it was Michael Hagan who opined that he’d be sceptical although in the case of a Geelong it might as a regional ‘town/city’ be a bit more similar to his experience of a club like Newcastle. I wasn’t drawing an AFL vs NRL distinction on that one – - it was more a regional city ‘community based’ club vs a big city corporate owned ‘franchise’. That’s where ‘fluff’ may, perhaps – come into it.
btw – and many of the guys who came good came to Melb as juniors or re-invented themselves at Melbourne. In Melb we just assumed that Storm was really, really good at developing talent,…..and in the case of some game plan elements and skill development areas – seemed to benefit from being an NRL club sharing an AFL training venue…….
……so, one then wonders whether there’s simply an agenda to pull Storm out of Melbourne prior to the Rebels kicking in and consolidating the NRL into NSW/QLD and warding off soccer and AFL on the codes ‘home front’.
April 29th 2010 @ 12:22pm
AndyRoo said | April 29th 2010 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
Michael I still disagree.
Not so much with the regional vs city thing (Newcastle and Geelong seem very good comaprisons).
My big dissagreance was your comaprison between the Storm and Geelong
SO, the RL system does not really encourage club loyalty, and the Storm is owned by a massively wealthy multi national from whom the players probably felt no guilt in taking all they could get
Since the cap scandal broke and their is the chance players will leave even adding the funny money to their
deals players like Smith would possibly their wages if they were too move. What matters to players is different than fans and it’s more likely who their team mates are, how much their winning and who the coach is that inspires loyalty.
btw – and many of the guys who came good came to Melb as juniors or re-invented themselves at Melbourne. In Melb we just assumed that Storm was really, really good at developing talent,…..and in the case of some game plan elements and skill development areas – seemed to benefit from being an NRL club sharing an AFL training venue…….
When it comes to Rugby league i’m a Parramatta fan rather than a league fan and I have never cared about the Storm (even after they beat my team in the Grand Final I wouldn’t have cared one iota if they were wound up) but what you posted is entirely true of how they worked. They had good talent identification and all the players improved at the Storm. It’s a toss up between Bellamy and Bennett as to which coach you would want coaching your team.
700k is bassically 2 top level players, given their u20′s team one the comp they could likely shed outside backs in Inglis and Slater and still be a top 4 team.
April 28th 2010 @ 12:31pm
Crosscoder said | April 28th 2010 @ 12:31pm | Report comment
The deals that caused the controversy are the so called ” 3rd party” ones.There are 3rd party deals allowed in all clubs to the extent of $150,000.
Player managers represent different players at the Storm.IMO player managers first and foremost whoever signed or sighted the 2nd set of contracts are complicit.The players may know they were getting a top up and assumed “maybe I amwrong” that it is a 3rd party one,and will fall under the cap.That is not to say the odd player did know .Sometimes CEO s and player mgrs can be very good salesmen.Like: no worries.This is not over the cap.All part of the 3rd party.All registered with the NRL.
The real test would be did the player managers,say or explain to the players,that all these extra goodies have to be declared as part of your income for taxation purposes?.
if the players declared it on their IT,then IMO it gets back to the dodgy brothers.
April 28th 2010 @ 1:03pm
Brett McKay said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
some very interesting articles in The Australian today.
Firstly, News will only honour contracts to players “they deem to be squeaky clean”, which I think is outrageous, considering they’ve been saying the whole time they beleived the players couldn’t possibly have known. So what’s changed?? http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/if-youre-clean-you-will-get-paid-storm-players-told/story-e6frg7mf-1225859062699
Secondly, John Hartigan has labelled managers “a blight on the game”!! http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/john-hartigan-brands-misfit-managers-blight-on-game/story-e6frg7mf-1225859062822
April 28th 2010 @ 1:37pm
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
I don’t think anything has changed Brett, if they were in the dark about it all then all’s well and good, but as the owner of the team you can hardly blame News for punishing anyone involved in the scandal. After all it will cost them $1.6 million in fines and god knows how much to keep the team afloat for the next 5 or so years…….just when they were looking to get out of the Storm and save themselves some money.
April 28th 2010 @ 1:47pm
Brett McKay said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
I do agree Guru, but my point was more about how News seemed to back the players in favour of running the “chief rat” out of town (and aren’t the News tabloids having a great time at Waldron’s expense currently?), but now are suddenly having a bet each way, just in case the (or some) players know something.
It seems they’ll turn the heat on anyone if it means avoiding it themselves.
By the way, Crikey.com.au has some interesting thoughts on the whole saga too…
April 28th 2010 @ 1:51pm
AndyRoo said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
I think it’s just posturing Brett. They don’t want to be seen to be soft on the players and by having such a tough stance it then looks like the players are clean when they don’t deny any payments.
Stops any players saying “well I was a bit suspicious”.
So yeh very much a bet each way.
April 28th 2010 @ 2:06pm
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | April 28th 2010 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
“It seems they’ll turn the heat on anyone if it means avoiding it themselves.”
I think you have hit the nail right on the head.
On a different matter will you be in the bar Sat night? We will be in the Dairyfarmers/National Foods box, but will try and pop in, if I can get away from the schmoozers.
April 28th 2010 @ 3:36pm
Brett McKay said | April 28th 2010 @ 3:36pm | Report comment
I will be Guru, yes. I’ll happily come into the Dairyfarmers/National Foods box for the night if you like!!
April 28th 2010 @ 3:40pm
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | April 28th 2010 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
I don’t think I can quite swing that……but there is no harm in trying!!
April 28th 2010 @ 2:30pm
Michael C said | April 28th 2010 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
if it smells rotten – - odds on it is rotten.
News LTd smells rotten in this — and John Hartigan seems to be protesting against Waldron just a little bit too much.
Now – if only we didn’t have so much cross-media ownership and the biggest in the media game also owning the game and club in question…………how rotten it all looks too!!
April 28th 2010 @ 3:29pm
AndyRoo said | April 28th 2010 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
Hmmm the team just lost 2 priemerships and their entire 2010 season….. your a better man than may if you would respond with “thank you sir may I have some more?”.
If Waldon thinks he’s been defamed he can do something about it instead of asking for 100k plus for a TV interview.
The CEO is the one guy with the power to stop such shenanigans the buck stops with him.
April 28th 2010 @ 3:56pm
Michael C said | April 28th 2010 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
so you’d like to think – - alas, when Eddie McGuire was CEO of Channel 9 he found it almost impossible to run the network due to the ‘(mis)directions’ from above (funny though – people still seem to hold him responsible even though he left the position because of his frustrations),
and so, I think more recently of Archie Fraser who felt too constrained from above,
and wonder about just how well Ben Buckley is able to operate,
yep – - the CEO is the installed ‘fall guy’ for the board/owners.
Good luck to anyone willing to take that risk!!!!
April 28th 2010 @ 1:22pm
Johnny said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:22pm | Report comment
Please the players knew and their managers knew, when your contract says nothing about a 20k voucher from Harvey Norman or a 30k boat and they land on your doorstep, you wouldnt think something is fishy. Come one guys dont bury your heads in the sand here, they knew.
What the NRL and News Ltd through Hartigan is doing is trying to lay the blame on everyone but the players, yes Waldron was the architect but the players and their managers were right there helping him to build their ‘house’, cause when it is discovered they knew that is when the *** hits the fan.
Dragons
April 28th 2010 @ 1:59pm
AndyRoo said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
Johnny but they did sign contracts to receive the Boat, voucher etc etc…. it’s that these contracts weren’t registered with the NRL or were guaranteed by the club that is the issue.
April 28th 2010 @ 1:50pm
John Melbourne said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
I have done a lot of reading around this topic… and it is now TIME for ALL clubs to open up ALL their top players Tax & Bank accounts to be matched to their contracts. Lets get to some REAL facts and see how many rat clubs and players are in the comp. Then after that reset the rules. The cap is not working. At this time in the comp I see two NRL in play, one is the LOCAL sydney club system weekend footy (small) and the other is the NATIONAL world champs system (large), one needs to be KILLED and give way to the real direction. Time to make the game GREAT with the very BEST players and take the hack footy out of the formula. NRL = National Rats League
April 28th 2010 @ 1:58pm
True Tah said | April 28th 2010 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
There is buckleys of any players giving their tax returns and bank statements to the NRL or Schubert, breach of privacy and the Players Association would smash any attempt to do this.
April 28th 2010 @ 3:21pm
John Melbourne said | April 28th 2010 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
I agree, but the house better be clean before we start the finger pointing, these boys are just the tip.
I just do’t believe that Waldon, are head savy ad in the News Ltd eyes a “Master” before he left, found a BBQ or scredder, he is not that dumb!
Then there is the interesting fact that he goes from AFL with a claen slate & News Ltd love him and suddenly become corrupt… I would say he faell into the crap ridden NRL trap!
April 28th 2010 @ 6:31pm
John said | April 28th 2010 @ 6:31pm | Report comment
Maybe they think everybody eats caviar and lobster.
April 28th 2010 @ 10:01pm
Danno1 said | April 28th 2010 @ 10:01pm | Report comment
Just out of interest what would Schubert and Gallop make of a CEO or benefactor having bets with players on, say a game of golf?
The CEO/benefactor is crap at golf and after 18 holes the player has won, as he is less crap than the CEO/benefactor. Say the “bet” was for $50,000, would that have to be declared under the salary cap?
After all it is just a game between gentlemen, and no one else’s business but theirs.
Now I wonder which clubs in the NRL have support from really wealthy benefactors? They would be the ones that wouldn’t have to cook the books wouldn’t they?
April 29th 2010 @ 8:34am
Stormin Red said | April 29th 2010 @ 8:34am | Report comment
That kind of out of the box thinking could get you a job in the accounting department at the Storm or a number of other NRL clubs.
April 29th 2010 @ 12:34pm
amy_p said | April 29th 2010 @ 12:34pm | Report comment
All this investigation into deals etc., is all well and good, but for them to make this cap evasion work for 5 years with speculation and nrl raids (and what they hoped would be longer) they wouldn’t be telling too many people about it. Representative players, like Folau and Turner, have left the Storm and of course they would’ve been the first to drop in to their new clubs that the Storm have actually been cheating. Similarly, if one of the players started playing badly they would have no option but to keep them to protect their dirty little secret. A lot of thought would’ve gone into this scam and I don’t think they would risk telling the players or anyone that didn’t absolutely need to know. So, in that case, they would’ve actively made sure the players didn’t catch on.
April 29th 2010 @ 3:15pm
mushi said | April 29th 2010 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
Exactly Amy