- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Opinion
It’s history now that in 2010, the Melbourne Storm were stripped of their 2007 and 2009 premierships, along with their 2006, 2007 and 2008 minor premierships, after being found guilty by the NRL of large-scale and systematic salary cap breaches.
This article doesn’t consider whether the Storm were guilty, or whether the punishment they received was appropriate, as that argument has now been done to death. What it does consider, however, is whether it’s high time to look at righting some of the wrongs resulting from the Storm’s breach and subsequent punishment.
The first issue for me is that the NRL website shows a list of premiers and minor premiers from 1908 to 2021, which is great, but there’s a nasty little hashtag next to Melbourne’s name in the breach years which refer to a note at the bottom of the list that says: “Melbourne Storm were stripped of 2007, 2009 premierships, 2006, 2007 and 2008 minor premierships, due salary cap breaches.”
So, that’s a bit of an embarrassment for the NRL, and if Melbourne didn’t win in those years, maybe their name should just be deleted where appropriate?
But rather than leave it blank, if Melbourne’s breach was significant enough to influence the outcome of the competition in the 2007, 2008 and 2009 years, and accordingly be stripped of their titles, why not award the title to the team that would have won except for the Storm’s salary cap advantage?
Makes sense to me. The Storm were retrospectively disqualified so the title goes to the next eligible team.
Accordingly, the 2007 premiership should be awarded to the grand-final runners-up in Manly, and the 2009 premiership awarded to Parramatta, who finished runners-up that year. Job done, the right team wins the premiership and takes their rightful place on the list.
Similarly, the minor premierships should be awarded to the second highest-placed team on the ladder in each year in question. So the 2007 and 2008 minor premierships would be awarded to Manly, and the 2009 minor premiership awarded to St George Illawarra.
While we’re at it, and righting these past wrongs, the elevated teams should also receive the winner’s prize money for those years, currently standing at $100,000 for winning the minor premiership and $400,000 for winning the premiership outright. I’m sure those clubs could use the cash.
Yes, there is the argument that if Melbourne hadn’t gained an unfair advantage under the salary cap in 2007 and 2009 that perhaps another side other than Manly in 2007 and Parramatta in 2009 may have been runners up, but we’ll never know.
What we do know, however, is that Manly and Parramatta made it to the grand finals in those years and were beaten by a team subsequently found guilty of cheating. That, to me, is sufficient grounds to award the title and the prize money to the runners-up.
Should other clubs be rewarded prize money for Melbourne’s illegally won titles? (Photo by Robert Prezioso/Getty Images)
Is it too late to do this? I don’t think so, as it should have been done in the first place. If it’s good enough to strip premierships years after the event, it’s good enough to award them on the same basis. There are a number of precedents for this in sport, most notably in relation to Olympic medals being retrospectively awarded as a result of doping findings well after the event.
Let’s face it: it’s the only fair thing to do, not only for the clubs that have missed out on a premiership, but also for the players in those sides.
From a player’s perspective, it’s hard enough to win a premiership in your career, and even harder when your team loses a grand final in dubious circumstances.
Consider 2007 Manly players Chris Hicks, Michael Monaghan, Luke Williamson, Jack Afamasaga, and Adam Cuthbertson, who played a combined total of 46 years in the NRL without winning a single premiership between them. I’m sure they’d like both the kudos and the premiership ring for their efforts in 2007.
Similarly, when you look at the 2009 Parramatta grand final team, only Daniel Mortimer, Todd Lowrie and Joe Gulavao were fortunate enough to win titles in their careers. To be fair, and to set the record straight, the Melbourne Storm players should be required to return their 2007 and 2009 premiership rings, and new rings awarded to the rightful recipients for those years.
That then brings us to the prestigious Clive Churchill Medal, awarded to the best on ground in the grand final.
History shows that Melbourne’s Greg Inglis was awarded the medal in 2007, while club mate Billy Slater took it out in 2009. Now, it defies logic that a player from a team that shouldn’t have even been allowed to play in the grand final can hold the award as best player in that game.
Clive Churchill himself would be horrified.
So, to correct the record, the medals awarded to the Storm players in 2007 and 2009 should be returned, and new medals awarded to the best player from Manly and Parramatta in those deciders.
I think that just about tidies up the mess.
Reckon you can pick the winning team? Build your own dream team with Draftstars daily fantasy and compete on any match. For great odds on the NRL head on over to PlayUp. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.