Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:28 am  

Him wrote:

Except Puletua doesn't know what is being declared to the RFL and what isn't and shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of a club.

If it could be proven that he knew those payments weren't being declared then I'd be in favour of punishing him in some fashion. But that would be almost impossible to prove.

Again though, Tony Puletua never agreed to the Salary Cap, even if he knew, they are rules that apparently 'don't apply to him'.

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:30 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Puletua would have never signed up to the salary cap, why should he be punished?

If he knew the club were doing something that was a breach of the cap - and let's face it, when the club put the second contract in front of him to sign he'd either have to be incredibly stupid or incredibly naive to not at least ask why he was being paid in this way - then he's complicit in them breaking it and should face some form of sanction for his part in it.

If you had a supplier who you knew was committing VAT fraud and you helped them do it by agreeing to issue some phoney invoices, should you be able to walk away and leave them to take the punishment for it?

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:54 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Again though, Tony Puletua never agreed to the Salary Cap, even if he knew, they are rules that apparently 'don't apply to him'.

I bet there's some part of a players contract that says they agree to abide by the rules of the competition. If there isn't then it's very easy to introduce in the future

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 2:01 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

If he knew the club were doing something that was a breach of the cap - and let's face it, when the club put the second contract in front of him to sign he'd either have to be incredibly stupid or incredibly naive to not at least ask why he was being paid in this way - then he's complicit in them breaking it and should face some form of sanction for his part in it.

If you had a supplier who you knew was committing VAT fraud and you helped them do it by agreeing to issue some phoney invoices, should you be able to walk away and leave them to take the punishment for it?

That would be fraud. Fraud laws apply to me. Salary Cap regulations don't apply to players.

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 2:02 pm  

Him wrote:

I bet there's some part of a players contract that says they agree to abide by the rules of the competition. If there isn't then it's very easy to introduce in the future

I bet the RFL and clubs are very careful to ensure there are no parts of the Salary Cap regulations which either implicitly or explicitly apply to individual players.

I also bet that no contract which states you arent allowed to sign any contracts with others would be laughed at by pretty much everyone.

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 5:52 pm  

FWIW, we got rid of a fair few of our top earners last year in Hock, Chase, Paterson, Hansen etc so really can't see his wage for half a dozen games making much of a dent on the cap. However, being Salford, every player on our books is on 500k a year......

Funny how a team with no internationals from the "big 3" RL playing nations can be accused of SC breaches every time they sign a player when the likes of Leeds, Wigan etc have multiple "star" international players but must be paying them peanuts!

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:09 pm  

did you have him on two contracts? yes
was was declared? no

ergo you deliberately cheated the salary cap

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:21 pm  

tad rhino wrote:

did you have him on two contracts? yes
was was declared? no

ergo you deliberately cheated the salary cap

Not discussing Puletua..... have no issues with that and we've been rightly punished (more than any other previous club). I'm talking about the current squad, which is nowhere near the cap, and adding Burgess and the other guy from the NRL on short-term contracts isn't going to suddenly blow the cap!

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:30 pm  

SaleSlim wrote:

FWIW, we got rid of a fair few of our top earners last year in Hock, Chase, Paterson, Hansen etc so really can't see his wage for half a dozen games making much of a dent on the cap. However, being Salford, every player on our books is on 500k a year......

Funny how a team with no internationals from the "big 3" RL playing nations can be accused of SC breaches every time they sign a player when the likes of Leeds, Wigan etc have multiple "star" international players but must be paying them peanuts!

If you read my original post I did not mention any club specifically since Salford is not the only club doing this. Indeed we - Leeds Rhinos - did with Segeyaro but we also released Falloon to allow this to happen.
But as a club with previous it's hardly surprising that the Salford name came up in the discussions.

Re: Salford sign Burgess : Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:46 pm  

Perhaps Marwan was a bit naive in handing Puletua 2 separate contracts in his name only to sign,Especially as the 2 contracts apparently added up to his previous Saints deal to the penny ?

Rumour has it that both Steve Renouf and Trent Barrett were only required to sign the 1 contract at Wigan when they were lured over to these shores and that they were happy to sign on those terms just as long as their partners were also on the payroll