Salary cap regulations breach penalty for Norwood announced

[holden78]

"Norwood Football Club (“NFC”) entered a plea of guilty to breaching regulations 18.11.1.2 and 18.11.1.3 and made submissions on penalty at a hearing on the 25th of March."

What exactly are regulations 18.11.1.2 and 18.11.1.3?

Good point Aerie, let's remember boys that Norwood pleaded GUILTY.
Regardless, whoever sent the wrong contracts to the SANFL needs to be moved on to the NorEast Pokie Parlour and put in charge of janitorial duties

[fester69]

"Norwood Football Club (“NFC”) entered a plea of guilty to breaching regulations 18.11.1.2 and 18.11.1.3 and made submissions on penalty at a hearing on the 25th of March."

What exactly are regulations 18.11.1.2 and 18.11.1.3?

Good point Aerie, let's remember boys that Norwood pleaded GUILTY.
Regardless, whoever sent the wrong contracts to the SANFL needs to be moved on to the NorEast Pokie Parlour and put in charge of janitorial duties

Person no longer at Club anyway so non-issue there. Pleaded Guilty and co-operated all along. That's why the penalty seems harsh!!

[Scrapboy]

Hurtful.

Bunton would do well to take note of klaan and yourself Doc. It must be hard to see his own hypocrisy while trying to round up a posse to head down to the ol' hanging tree.

[SDK]

Guess what we did last night Bunton?? We unfurled a Premiership Flag in front of an excellent crowd of 7,600!!!

Ever seen your club do that???

Somehow I don't think so, suffer in your jocks!!!



Neither the flag OR the 7,600 !

[SDK]

An absolute joke SANFL. What a disgracefull penalty for poor paperwork. No breach of salary cap just an admin error.
Bigger penalty than the two clubs who actually BREACHED the salary cap. Not that I agree with their penalty either.
Now it is time to name and shame the SANFL official who is deliberately leaking information to the press as a personal vendetta to discredit the Norwood Football Club. Care to name him Big Phil ????

[whufc]

An absolute joke SANFL. What a disgracefull penalty for poor paperwork. No breach of salary cap just an admin error.
Now it is time to name and shame the SANFL official who is deliberately leaking information to the press as a personal vendetta to discredit the Norwood Football Club. Care to name him Big Phil ????

Surely you can understand that you can't continue to make the same mistakes and not expect the punishment to get more severe

[Jim05]

An absolute joke SANFL. What a disgracefull penalty for poor paperwork. No breach of salary cap just an admin error.
Now it is time to name and shame the SANFL official who is deliberately leaking information to the press as a personal vendetta to discredit the Norwood Football Club. Care to name him Big Phil ????

Surely you can understand that you can't continue to make the same mistakes and not expect the punishment to get more severe

Do agree on that point.

[Jim05]

This is my understanding of the breach and I may be way off mark but here goes.
To work out the salary cap you firstly have to be a nuclear physicist. I think that at some point during the season someone at the club believed we would be over the cap and decided to "shift" a couple of payments which is fairly reckless IMO. Later on in the season after reviewing the figures I think the club then realised that we would be under even after including these extra payments, the club then went to the league and fessed up.
At the end of the day all we are guilty of IMO is trying to be sneaky when we under the cap all along the way.
Fact is even with these extra payments included we are still under the cap.
I agree it was totally irresponsible and reckless by the the club and to me it wasnt an error it was intentional.
But really all we are guilty of is trying to deceive the league when there never was a need to.
I still think the Cap needs some major work, there is too many differant paremeters regarding injuries etc, must be a simpler way.
Guess we will just cop our whack and move on, have a good bunch of kids and a fairly young list. Im sure we will be fine

[eaglehaslanded]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-29/r ... ch/4601268

[robranisgod]

The recruiting penalty could be interesting. Rumour has it that Norwood are interested in an ex SANFL captain who actually lives in their area but plays for another club. Given that they are only allowed to recruit from their area for the next 18 months does this preclude them from pursuing this allegedly disgruntled player. I would think so, but unless the wording of the ban is quite specific they may be able to recruit him because he does reside in their area.

[Dutchy]

I dont really understand the recuriting ban being 18 months, it really is just a 12 month ban as this years recruiting is over and come the end of next year they can recruit again.

[statsman]

West drafted no players and recruited 2 players prior to any penalty being imposed,I wouldnt class 2 players as being a "number" of players as your trying to infer numerous new recruits. West went to the sanfl part way through the season and said that they could be in trouble with the cap so they had come forward themselves rather than try to hide it. When this is Norwoods second breach in such a short time you would expect a harsher penalty. Remember when Chris Dittmar 1st mentioned this on radio Norwood threatened him with legal action as they had nothing to hide...or so they said!!!!

There were, 12 months

Yes, but wasn't this after they'd already recruited a number of players for this season? Did both port and west partake in the pre-season draft? Did port get a recruiting ban?

No mini draft selections and the two recruits were signed before the penalty was delivered. Don't think Port got a recruiting ban because their breach was minor

Yep that's what I thought, westies had already recruited or drafted a number of players before the ban took affect. So norwoods got a harsher penalty for what some have described as an administrative error.

[statsman]

This relates to players registered living in the zones and registered at amatuer,association or country zones belonging to that club. The player in question is registered to another SANFL club so therefore cant be recruited.

The recruiting penalty could be interesting. Rumour has it that Norwood are interested in an ex SANFL captain who actually lives in their area but plays for another club. Given that they are only allowed to recruit from their area for the next 18 months does this preclude them from pursuing this allegedly disgruntled player. I would think so, but unless the wording of the ban is quite specific they may be able to recruit him because he does reside in their area.

[JK]

West drafted no players and recruited 2 players prior to any penalty being imposed,I wouldnt class 2 players as being a "number" of players as your trying to infer numerous new recruits. West went to the sanfl part way through the season and said that they could be in trouble with the cap so they had come forward themselves rather than try to hide it.

So hang on, West knew they were going to blow the cap and so did the SANFL, but they held the ban off long enough for the Bloods to land a couple of recruits?

West (like Norwood) are serial offenders, but one club went over the cap - The other didn't but didn't declare details as they should have .. I'm still trying to work out why the penalties weren't identical??

I wonder why the hierachy at West Lakes would seemingly favour the Bloods? Hmm, might have to look into that

[The Apostle]

599342_10200331417401110_237409856_n.jpg

[PhilH]

As a passionate SANFL fan it's a sad day all around.

Many non Redleg SANFL fans may take pleasure from a cheap shot or three but having all the main stream media report that the defending premier has penalised a record amount for salary cap "issues" damages the integrity of the whole competition.

This at a critial time when the league needs to keep AFL reserves sides out of the league comp to maintain its integrity.


A few questions for mine that I would like clarified to actually get an understanding of WTF just happened here..............

1) Did Norwood benefit from the error committed?

2) What penalty could they have got if they had not pled guilty?

3) Did the timing and especially nature of the departure of former Norwood official play a part in this error occurring?
(farewell gift?)

4) If the size of the penalty (largest for a breach of the rules so far) due more to
the specific breach identified or the fact it was the 3rd breach.
(ie is it like those 3 strike rules in the US where you can get a massive prison sentence for a relatively minor crime
simply because it is your 3rd offence.)

5) Why did this take investigation take so long and why from all the 176 days since the end of the season was it this announced on the night Norwood unveiled the 2012 premiership flag?

And on a more philsophical point ..
6) Is the current SANFL Salary Cap system too complex and does managing it take up too many club resoruces that
would be better allocated in generating growth & other income streams. is Is there a simpler way?

[topsywaldron]

Great post Phil.

Other interesting questions might be the state of the relationship between the two heads of the organisations involved and the subsequent impact on the investigation and fine, the exact nature of the conversations between the two ex-cricket administrators that lead to the charges being laid and, as JK pointed out, why the NFC have been sanctioned more severely for a lesser offence than the WAFC.

[klaan]

Great post Phil.

Other interesting questions might be the state of the relationship between the two heads of the organisations involved and the subsequent impact on the investigation and fine, the exact nature of the conversations between the two ex-cricket administrators that lead to the charges being laid and, as JK pointed out, why the NFC have been sanctioned more severely for a lesser offence than the WAFC.

I've just heard that the SANFL had the information since March LAST year and Chandler forwarded to the investigator without approaching anyone at Norwood. Poor form SANFL if that is the case.

[whufc]

Great post Phil.

Other interesting questions might be the state of the relationship between the two heads of the organisations involved and the subsequent impact on the investigation and fine, the exact nature of the conversations between the two ex-cricket administrators that lead to the charges being laid and, as JK pointed out, why the NFC have been sanctioned more severely for a lesser offence than the WAFC.

Could it be because Norwoods breach was deemed to be intentional and the fact they denied and tried to hide the error.

[The Sleeping Giant]

As a passionate SANFL fan it's a sad day all around.

Many non Redleg SANFL fans may take pleasure from a cheap shot or three but having all the main stream media report that the defending premier has penalised a record amount for salary cap "issues" damages the integrity of the whole competition.

This at a critial time when the league needs to keep AFL reserves sides out of the league comp to maintain its integrity.

Aren't the SANFL trying to maintain the integrity of the comp, by enforcing the rules? Would you prefer it was all swept under the carpet?


A few questions for mine that I would like clarified to actually get an understanding of WTF just happened here..............

1) Did Norwood benefit from the error committed?

It didn't hurt them, that's for sure.

If Norwood genuinely believed or could prove it was an error, they would have pled not guilty.

2) What penalty could they have got if they had not pled guilty?

If Norwood genuinely believed or could prove it was an error, they would have pled not guilty.

3) Did the timing and especially nature of the departure of former Norwood official play a part in this error occurring?
(farewell gift?)

Just let me put on my tin foil hat.

4) If the size of the penalty (largest for a breach of the rules so far) due more to
the specific breach identified or the fact it was the 3rd breach.
(ie is it like those 3 strike rules in the US where you can get a massive prison sentence for a relatively minor crime
simply because it is your 3rd offence.)

Continually breaking the rules wouldn't have helped.

5) Why did this take investigation take so long and why from all the 176 days since the end of the season was it this announced on the night Norwood unveiled the 2012 premiership flag?

Too highlight the fact Norwood have won a "dirty" premiership.

And on a more philsophical point ..
6) Is the current SANFL Salary Cap system too complex and does managing it take up too many club resoruces that
would be better allocated in generating growth & other income streams. is Is there a simpler way?

Are the clubs the ones making it complicated, by trying to find loopholes and "legal" ways to make extra payments? Do you think it should be easier to cheat?

You are almost portraying Norwood as a victim in all this.