Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Re - Storm, may I ask your opinion of this?

I believe that the players involved KNEW they were above the salary cap. I would certainly know if I was being over paid.

Those players should be stood down, at least for this season, and Melbourne continue to compete, and compete for points.

With their current players, Melbourne would realistically win more games than they would lose, so if they are playing now, for no points, why should they be allowed to play now and deny legitimate teams the opportunity for points?

I applaud the NRL for acting swiftly, but they need to reconsider.

Sorry, there is too many questions here, but I'd like others' opinions.

8 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    oh they know FOR SURREEE, ok picture this, in front of you is a contract that says you are on $150,000 per season, you sign on the dotted line, next thing you know, you check your bank account, and there is $250,000 in there, wouldnt you think, "theres something not right here", they would of known and been told, "we're telling the NRL, in this book, that you are on $150,000 per year, so sign that in this book, then sign for an extra $100,000 in this book, its all good, no one will find out" trust me, they know

  • 1 decade ago

    There has been no evidence that any of the players knew they were cheating the salary cap only conjecture and supposition from mainly Melbourne Storm haters. The Bulldogs were $2M over the salary cap in 3 years in 2002 (more than the Storm and over a shorter time frame) and they were not asked to shed any players. They went on with their "super team" assembled by rorting the salary cap to win the 2004 premiership so why should the Storm have to shed players if they are willing to take a pay cut to get under the salary cap?

    Manly and the Gold Coast have beaten a full strength Storm team this year so why can't the other teams in the competition aim up and give it a go as well. They are not unbeatable and they never were. There is more to a good football team than just buying good players because if that's all it took then the Roosters and the Broncos would be fighting out the Grand Final every year. I'm sure that all the teams in the NRL want to go out and beat a full strength Storm team so that they can show that their team is truly the best. It would be a hollow victory against a watered down side and unfair on the teams that have already played the Storm.

  • Bill P
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Firstly I agree that the NRL acted swiftly on this matter. I feel their actions were totally correct. One change I would have made was their fine. It was the same as the Dogs inn 2002. The fine here should have been the same as their overspend, $1.7 million.

    That the players knew is debateable. They would have been given a contract and they would have signed it. It was reported in the press that some players had stipulated that their contracts were within the cap and they were advised by the Storm that they were. To a degree the players have been as much wronged as the fans. The Storm must now look at shedding players to come under the salary cap.

  • 1 decade ago

    The players job is to go out and play footy.their managers job is to look after their contracts.Unless you can say for sure that you knew the players knew they were being over paid then I think you should keep your opinions to yourself. I also think that Storm is not alone in rorting the salary cap so I wouldn`t throw around the term "legitimate teams" quite yet. I am sure the NRL knew that Andrew Johns was a druggie during his playing days but yet he was allowed to play and his team won a premiership, so it is a case of double standards in the NRL.

    NRL want a team in Melbourne they just never banked on it being such a good team.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    In 2002 Canterbury were stripped of points later in the season than is the case with the Storm. In the Storm's case it was premeditated fraud. Why should they get a better points penalty than the Bulldogs?

    I do agree that players should be stood down from the club because it is ridiculously unfair that the Storm play these games full strength.

  • Shelby
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I don't think they could do that given that quite a few teams have already played (and lost) against the Storm. It wouldn't be fair to these clubs if they had to verse Melbourne at the top of their game whilst teams later on verse them considerably disadvantaged.

  • 1 decade ago

    I don't do a lot of football stuff cos most times it bores me to tears but I remember back when St george was stripped of points a few years ago and..and....oh look, there's a cute lil duck over there.........*grabs bread crumbs out of sisters mouth and runs off quacking like a gay hippo....

  • 1 decade ago

    You would know if you were overpaid..?

    Can't you accept that MAYBE they didn't? They wern't neccesarily overpaid.. Eg. Slater on 300k a season, contract runs out, gets offers for 500k a season from Eels.. Storm give him 550k a season.

    He isn't over paid, but they club is over their cap, not his fault.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.