You're Mr Gallop. What would you have done?

1. All competition points accumulated to date by the Storm would be forfeitted 2. I would permit Melbourne to compete for this years title on the proviso they get the value of their playing roster within the cap. (a) This must be done by releasing players of the relevant value (not by accross the board pay cuts). (b) No points would be accumulated until the Storm do so. 3. The NRL players association has questioned the legal right of the NRL to prevent voluntary accross the board pay cuts. However, rather than force the Storm to do so, they have the option, just as the NRL has the option of preventing them from competing this year if they fail to do so. 4.The players that are released are available to be signedby the other 15 clubs, with backloaded contracts permitted. Permitting backloaded contracts puts all 15 clubs on even footing to approach these off contract players. Some clubs might not sign the relevant players a fact of life, just as some clubs (Sharks, Knights, Raiders) would struggle to attract Slater or Inglis should they be free agents at the end of the season. 5. Of the $1.7M - $2M dollar breach, $1M - $1.3M related to seasons 2009/10. Therefore the remaining breach amounted to 700k over the previous 3 years at an average of just 230k per season and perhaps less than 200k in their 2007 premiership season. When the Roosters last won in 2002 they were 100k+ over the cap (though not intentionally). I would not strip them of 3 minor premierships or single premiership awarded between 2006-08, however 2009's premiership would be forfeitted. 6. They would also forfeit any prize money awarded in the 2009 season. 7. I would fine them. Somewhere in the vicinity of $4M, though unfortunately the 'architect' would not be liable for this amount. That's roughly 250k - 300k to be distributed to each of the other 15 clubs! 8. Re those responsible. I would commence both civil and criminal procedings against those who held office and were complicit in the rort, or those who were aware but did not act. 9. A naturaly occuring penalty is the loss of sponsors and corporate support. At present the penalties hurts innocent parties signifcantly more than those responsible. Melbourne supporters, the players (innocent ones at least) and league itself - if the Storm are lost to the game, goodbye national competition and huge TV rights deal. It also impacts upon the teams who must play a stacked side each week. If indeed the NRL cannot force the Storm to shed players this will continue, we might see a reapeat of 2004. The cheats would have justified their rort even more, they already have 2009 by cheating (you cannot rewrite history). Losing a premiership is significant, but of further significance is being forced to release one or several marquee signings, thus defeating the purpose of the rort. Also the current penalty causes a debate and puts the focus squarely on the NRL rather than those responsible. They would have a choice, if they choose not to shed players - the public can direct their vitriol at the club for being unable to compete for this years premiership.

What Gallop did was fair, he should have stripped the Storm of their franchise and given it to areas crying out for teams - Central Coast Bears and Central Queensland Comets. The bloke has some balls to send a strong message out. He could have asked the players in question to supply their tax returns and bank accounts on a purely voluntary basis and appear before a star chamber to be full and frank on everything. If the players refuse to comply, then the NRL can deregister these players from the NRL.

First I would have stripped them of the premierships, minor premierships and not allowed them to play in the finals this year. For all the talk about destroying the game in Melbourne etc few things breed solidarity of the fans and players alike than a common source of outrage and adversity. Melbourne fans and players will have a chip on their shoulder around this “injustice” and in a city which suffers from a second city complex this could be the event which entrenches the team in the cities culture. Second - I would conduct further investigation of the extent of the fraud. Whilst many corners of the media may be pressing me with unsubstantiated “common sense” conclusions about other member’s guilt I would wait until such suspicions could be confirmed before assuming anything and doling out punishment. From there any administrator who it si proven was involved would be banned from working with any NRL club. Any agent found to have acted knowingly, and their current and future organisations, would be banned from representing any NRL players. If players were found to be knowingly complicit then they would receive something ranging from the Todd Carney treatment of an extended stay out of the game to the Shoeless Joe Jackson treatment. Third I would communicate with each of the clubs with asking for statutory declarations assuring me that their representations are, to their knowledge, entirely accurate and not misleading. Clubs would not be given complete amnesty for systematic abuse but could rest assured their punishment would be worse than the storm and that, depending on the breeches, may only result in the loss of competition points to date. I would then assure them that any club who in the future was found to have committed such an act faces the strong possibility of being removed from the game at the first opportunity and their club’s entire history in the NRL stricken from the record. I would then tell Cronulla to stop smiling and that they’d get a special punishment given their fans probably want their history stricken from the record.

It isn't "harsh" to give back what you obtained through fraud. How about this I rip off your entire family in a fraudlent scheme - would it be "harsh" for me to recieve any punishment outside of paying them back?

Suspended from the exchange yes but wound up for the fraud committed by the CEO? I don't think so.

Apawy, it depends on what was included in the contract they signed and stuffed away in the desk draw. Many employment contracts have a “package” that includes other items, benefits etc other than a salary.

I would have set a timetable for the resignation of the NRL board , the salary cap audit committee and of himself. That timetable would prob be at the end of this season , this is twice in 6 years they have missed massive rorting of the rules, once is understandable but twice......

Not that easy, Jus. Wipe the salary cap and put paid to probably half the clubs in the competition, who will be unable to compete with the finances of sides controlled by multi-media conglomerates. Conservatively, Newcastle, Cronulla, Manly, Gold Coast, Souths, Penrith, Canterbury, Canberra and The Warriors would, if not fold, then never be able to compete in a "capless" competition.

MF, I am confused with your reply. The rules are what they are. By all means lobby to change them. Whether they agreed with the rules, or whether the rules are wroung is not the point. The point is the Storm signed up to those rules and for the last five years have deliberately broken those rules. The difficulties of establishing a team in Melbourne have no bearing on this. Even if they need to change the rules the fact remains that the Storm broke the rules as they stand in a sytemic manner and should not be playing in the competition at all. Perhaps the NRL are not to blame, perhaps the Storm are as they chose to break the rules. This has nothing to do with whether the NRL needs a team in Melbourne, it is about fraud and cheating by a team (And I would say the same regardless of the team involved).

Where are your sources ?

Well it seems Waldron's legal advice was to shut his mouth. He offered nothing new, bit of a fizzer really. At least he is talking to the NRL about it now it seems.

The Tax mans ears will be buzzing. Gallop probably got it right with the Storm. The Spinners have gone into overdrive though. Self Interested Parties will add to the confusion. Wipe the Salary Cap and remove the ambiguity. Easy.

Perhaps I'm naive, but how can a player be given a boat, a car and 20 grand worth of electrical goods, and be blissfully unaware that they might be getting overpaid?

I think Scott, that we haven't seen the end of the extent of the fraud yet, as the league is still investigating the whole affair. Given the current scale of the fraud, the only thing that Gallop might have done differently is to suspend the Storm for the rest of the season.

I read that today online. Interesting .

Interesting comments on News Ltd involvement from today's SMH. April 26, 2010 – TOM REILLY AND PHILIP WEN -SMH The funding structure of the Melbourne Storm is set to come under intense scrutiny from accountants investigating the team’s salary cap rort because most of the club’s financial dealings were undertaken by a separate holding company outside of the club. The club’s latest annual report shows that all but $2 million of its $19 million income came from Valimanda, a wholly owned subsidiary of the media group News Ltd. Under an opaque financial structure, Valimanda is the organisation that holds the licence to run the rugby league team in Melbourne. In effect, it then subcontracts Melbourne Storm Rugby League Club Ltd to run all aspects of the footballing franchise and pays it a ”management fee” of $16.8 million. But questions are expected to be asked over what Valimanda’s three directors – all of whom also sit on the Storm board – knew in relation to the rorts at the club. This unusual structure goes some way to explaining why the systematic payment of players outside the cap was not discovered by Storm’s auditor, Ernst & Young. Although the accounting firm would have the power to look into Valimanda finances if it suspected fraudulent activity, given the assurances from the club’s directors it would have been unusual for the auditor to do so. Last night Channel Nine reported that Greg Inglis received an extra $180,000 on top of his $400,000 contract, including a boat worth $30,000, $20,000 worth of electrical goods and furniture, and a car. Cameron Smith had a $100,000 contract with Fox Sports on top of his salary, the report said, and Billy Slater had sponsorship deals worth $100,000. There is no evidence that the players were aware of the rort. Valimanda is technically responsible for all deals relating to sponsorship, corporate sales and merchandising. The only big stream of cash being directly paid to Melbourne Storm is from members’ ticket sales, which last financial year was $1.3 million. As well as controlling Valimanda, News Ltd – the Australian arm of Rupert Murdoch’s global media empire – also owns the Storm, half of the National Rugby League competition and half of Fox Sports, which broadcasts the competition. Details of Valimanda’s revenue and expenses are not publicly available because, unlike the Storm, it does not have to file an annual report with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission or the NRL. The directors of Valimanda are Craig Watt, the financial controller of the Herald and Weekly Times, Mr Murdoch’s publishing arm in Victoria; Matt Hanson, the former chief financial officer and acting chief executive of the Storm, who has been stood down over his role in the rort; and Frank Stanton, a rugby league administrator who was a long-time employee of News and has now been put in charge of football matters at the Storm. In a News Ltd paper on Saturday Mr Stanton said that he knew little about the saga. ”I’m reluctant to comment or say anything until I’ve met with Rob Moodie [the Storm chairman] and News Ltd and been briefed on all the details.” But Fairfax Media can reveal that Mr Stanton has been a director of Valimanda and Storm since April 2004 and would have to have seen the club’s accounts last year. A number of other News executives may be quizzed. Executives with the Murdoch media company who were previously directors of both Valimanda and the Storm include Keith Brodie, who is on the NRL board, Peter Jourdain – who with Brodie used to be on the board of the Brisbane Broncos – and Ken Cowley, former executive chairman of News Ltd and present News Corp non-executive director. Despite Mr Stanton’s directorships, a News Ltd spokesman, Greg Baxter, last night said he was the right man to assist Storm in the present predicament. He said: ”He hasn’t been involved in the day-to-day running of the club before, so he hasn’t been that close to what’s happened at the Storm. He’s a very experienced rugby league man and he will be looking after the footballing aspects of the club.” Fairfax Media understands that none of the News-appointed directors of the Storm have offered to resign. When the chief executive of News, John Hartigan, faced a news conference on Thursday, he said he had become aware of the rort only two days earlier. He blamed the former Storm chief executive Brian Waldron. Mr Hartigan also alluded to the involvement of others. ”There are a couple of people who have been stood down,” he said. ”There were other people I believe who were involved but are no longer with the club.

Well I'll certainly be reading the Herald Tomorrow.

you've missed my point mate.

ok, sweet, thanks BennO

If I was the CEO of NRL, I would let the heat out of the situation firstly. Realize also that the vast majority of clubs are also rorting the cap. 1. Have an amnesty, get clubs to come out into the open about it. 2. Acknowledge that having a salary cap is no good, it is anti capitalisitic and causes damage to RL. Now you have a problem where the code is rotting from the inside out. This commision needs to happen, News Ltd needs to get out of the sport also. They have their fingerprints on everything. It could get very messy if Fairfax finds anything.