Staff Phil Gould

Robster_old

Guest
He wants Ruben Wiki and Steven Price to leave the Warriors and play for other clubs, man what a prick!! he's the joke of Rugby League.

Sure if the Warriors are guilty of going over the Salary Cap they should get fined heavily but you think the players passion will still be there if they told to play for another club, like Steven Price for the Canberra Raiders? you think he really want to help the club out? I think not.

He's a Goose.
 

mosh_old

Guest
Phil Gould reckons Wiki and Price should go to a new club and the Warriors should pay their salaries anyway, be fined.

Interesting coming from Phil Gould who is close with the Roosters.
 

mosh_old

Guest
CAN you imagine the drama if the Warriors had won the premiership last year and we then learnt the club had so blatantly and significantly breached the salary cap? Surely this is the wake-up call the NRL has needed about our ridiculous salary cap laws.

I'm sick of hearing that the NRL is vigilantly enforcing the salary cap and that the cap is responsible for the great football we see every week in the NRL.

On the first point, the three most significant examples of salary cap breaches to be exposed in rugby league have come from the Cowboys, the Bulldogs and now the Warriors.

It would appear the normal salary cap auditing processes can detect minor indiscretions or misinterpretations of the laws, but major breaches have been pointed out to the NRL because of someone's conscience when it is far too late to reverse a disaster.

If normal audits failed to detect massive illegalities, who's to say this isn't going on everywhere?

On the second point, the NRL claims the cap is making the game more even, therefore better.

The competition is more evenly contested because more clubs are learning how to manage their salary caps better and because the level of coaching and development is improving all the time.

What the salary cap does is force a lot of players into early retirement. It forces players to go to England or rugby in search of their true monetary value. It also forces clubs to sack popular long-serving players.

The salary cap restricts the earning potential of the game's top entertainers, who deserve a greater slice of rugby league's financial success.

Because all payments made to top players must come out of a limited wage pool, average players and youngsters earn less money.

This other rubbish that clubs should include a monetary figure in the salary cap based on jobs guaranteed to players after retirement really takes the cake. This means the money earned after retirement is still coming out of the current players' wage pool. It's ludicrous.

Now, back to the Warriors. How many people suspected they were over the cap? I haven't heard one person ask how the Warriors kept all those great players under the salary cap. They finished at the back of the pack last year!

The major concern here is how do teams such as the Warriors, Raiders and Storm attract players to their more remote areas without exceeding the salary cap levels? We expect them to be competitive spending the same amount as teams in more traditional rugby league areas. It obviously doesn't work.

Of greater concern is the unbelievable statement from South Sydney president-in-waiting Henry Morris that had Souths been successful in signing prominent players such as Braith Anasta and Matt Orford last year, the club could not have met the payments.

If true, surely this kind of thing is far more serious than clubs with financial capabilities paying a player his true monetary value.

I don't think the Warriors should be penalised competition points for this season. It was different in the case of the Bulldogs as they had gone all season benefiting from their breaches.

The Warriors benefited from their breaches last year. Just as well they didn't win the premiership or the NRL would have a massive problem on its hands.

In the short term, the Warriors should have to pay a significant fine. They should have to unload two highly paid players to lower-placed clubs such as Souths or Newcastle. The Warriors should still have to pay their wages.

It seems unfair to their supporters that their year would be virtually over before it began by docking them points before a ball is kicked.

The salary cap needs to be changed. If it can't be policed equitably - and history shows it isn't - we have to try to find another way.

Making club directors and administrators personally responsible for shortfalls in wages if a club cannot meet its commitments would soon lead to more vigilance in their own financial management.
 

L N_old

Guest
give yourself a couple of uppercuts gouldie
thats great perspective coming from a bloke who club some how seems to hold
minichello
fitzgibbon
morley
anasta
roberts
tupou
all under the salary cap???
 

KeepingTheFaith_old

Guest
Gould said 2 highly paid players. Not necessarily the higest paid players which would be Price and Wiki.

All I saw in that article is that the Warriors shouldn't lose points. More people who agree with that the better.
 

Northern_Union

Guest
Who cares what Gould thinks. What you have to remember is that when the Super league wars broke out he was a ARL man through and through...this is why he wants the Warriors out, and for that matter any other club with Super league ties.
 

Skinny_Ravs82

Guest
He can kiss my ass that dorkhead. (hell I can think of manhy other names to call him right about now). As being a little sidekick @ the Roosters-the goody too shoes of the NRL apparently he will say anything against any other club to make himself feel better. Whatever the reaon the Roosters have in keeping as many players as they do and always seemingly filled with money at the end of every year is because they are doing a very sneak job. Not that I care, but right now they aren't being found out.
Oh and back on the Roosters offis forum when some members mentioned that the Roosters were doing things under the table money wise they got banned and then other team forums being shut down from memory because it was cuasing some "un-nessary stress to clubs"

As for the Warriors, as much as their punishment should go, probably a fine and some thing else. I'm not saying they should get off lightly if this is a big deal. But for that ugly fat arse to mention we should just rid off a coupel of our players and send them away is one of the most ridiculos ideas on the planet. I didn't see him going ape over such an idea when the Dogs were under scrunitity. Phil needs to learn to shut his big mouth. When the Warriors are doing good he loves them to bits, as soon as something bitter comes up he expresses some venon of hate.
 

*Kimmy*_old

Guest
KeepingTheFaith said:
Gould said 2 highly paid players. Not necessarily the higest paid players which would be Price and Wiki.

All I saw in that article is that the Warriors shouldn't lose points. More people who agree with that the better.
But in the sunday news with that article it had pictures of steve and ruben.
 

Skinny_Ravs82

Guest
Grr! Don't use the Doggies problem in 2002 as an excuse!
This is a seperate issue altogether. Fine I sorta agree about the points thingy but his little fuddy duddy about a couple of highly paid players (gee I wonder who he's talking about!. Maybe he forgot the great ones we just removed too perhaps.) being moved some where else AND YET the Warriors still having to pay for them. Idiot.

Go back to groveling for the Roosters you fat arsed rat!
 

*Kimmy*_old

Guest
If my memory is correct the doggies didnt have to offload anyone like gus wants the warriors to, so why should the warriors have to?
 

Skinny_Ravs82

Guest
Go_The_Doggies said:
If my memory is correct the doggies didnt have to offload anyone like gus wants the warriors to, so why should the warriors have to?
Nope, I'm pretty certain the Dogs had kept all their first graders.
 

Ronnie_7_old

Guest
"In the short term, the Warriors should have to pay a significant fine. They should have to unload two highly paid players to lower-placed clubs such as Souths or Newcastle. The Warriors should still have to pay their wages.

It seems unfair to their supporters that their year would be virtually over before it began by docking them points before a ball is kicked. "

Thats the biggest load of shit I've ever heard. Yeah all we should have to do is pay a big fine agreed but that is the only valid point in there!!!!! Unfair to the supporters?What the hell does this bloke think he's on about?I'd rather have us docked 6 points then do the stupid babble he's on about. Release 2 highly paid players to lesser clubs and still pay their wages?Pffffft. New Castle lesser?It's easier gaetting players to play there than here. Gould can go shove that load of BS where the sun don't shine
 

Skinny_Ravs82

Guest
LOL!! Go Ronnie!!

I totally agree that he's talking a bunch of crap. Another thing that pissed me off. Newcastle as a lesser club?! WTF is that? They are ten times better than the frigging Roosters!!!! Stupid ass.


Would there be a likely hood of us just deciding:
"Oh we'll just move so and so off"
No don't think so, it took a bit of talking and and convincing to get some these guys over here, like hell we are just going to let them go back to Aust.
 

Skinner_old

Guest
I would strongly suggest those of you apart from KTF & Iafeta go
back and read the article properly. The man you guys love to hate
(simply because it's trendy) is actually attempting to come up with
an alternative that will allow the Warriors to remain competitive.

A word to those (and I thought the word was given yesterday) who
insist on bringing up the Roosters.......remember why the official, and
many other sites, was closed.

Skinner
 

Skinny_Ravs82

Guest
Skinner said:
I would strongly suggest those of you apart from KTF & Iafeta go
back and read the article properly. The man you guys love to hate
(simply because it's trendy) is actually attempting to come up with
an alternative that will allow the Warriors to remain competitive.

A word to those (and I thought the word was given yesterday) who
insist on bringing up the Roosters.......remember why the official, and
many other sites, was closed.

Skinner

Nothing wrong with saying things when you don't agree Skinner. Yes maybe and perhaps KTF and Iafeta are right. But I am not about to sit around and just go agree to whatever Phil says or whatever the article says. If I don't like it I'm goiong to state it.
 

Ronnie_7_old

Guest
Yeah perhaps it isn't those 2 that he's talking about (I'll change that bit) but aside from that alot of what he's saying is bull. Even if you off load highly paid players and still pay their wages wouldn't you still be breaching the cap? That idea of his is ludacris.
 

Kav_old

Guest
Gould has a point re removal of players to lessor teams. If the Warriors have legal contracts to pay it's players more than the salary cap, then it cannot
play in the NRL unless the players accept a reduction in salary that removes the excess or they transfer players whose salaries match that excess.
I think the Bulldogs did a combination of the two so as to fit under the cap the following season.
An across the board reduction of salaries would be the simplest way but it does penalise the lower paid players more.

Kav
 

Ronnie_7_old

Guest
Okay I see the point that Gus was making about offloading players. But surely not stil paying their wages wouldn't it still be a breach?Or would it not count because they play for another team? Is there such thing as loaning them to another team to sort out the cap issues? Cause if there is couldn't we loan an injured Pricey to another team. Haha that way he couldn't really play for them he'd just be theirs on paper. Just an idea not implying anything.
 

Last Game

27 Aug

16 - 28
5.6 Total Avg Rating
0.0 Your Avg Rating

Highest Rated Player

Lowest Rated Player

Compiled from 5 ratings