Salary Cap Rumours?

[HOORAY PUNT]

An article a day after Ralph dropped a rumour ? Refer my comment above.

[sjt]

Rucci today has a two page spread which doesn't say much, but tries to say a lot.

Seems to be trying to suggest how Centrals does its bookwork has some question marks, and that its a big reason it can maintain its list.

nothing much earth-shatteringly new though.

That's a big surprise to all that have followed this thread. Vendetta, by someone who couldn't handle being criticized for his media beat up, against the sanfl.

[CENTURION]

please, please be the case- man what a crack up that would be!

it won't bother Us, We don't rely on importing players, We get Our guns locally.

Um incorrect- Gowans , Callinan, O,sullivan- no need to go on, but you get my drift- cant rely on local guns- juniors arent doing much these days.

Can anyone name the last three players centrals actively recruited, that had played at least one afl minor or major round game, that didn't originate from centrals?
What about the other eight clubs?

Simon Arnott, I would say.

[Voice]

The station can ultimately be sued for defamation if something goes to air that is slanderous. They are in control of what is said, even if Ralph isn't known to them they authorise the comments by letting them go to air. Either way, I don't care. I'm confident the club isn't cheating the cap. Have a look at the players we have signed over the last few years. Hardly big name recruits you'd spend serious coin on. We just turn them into better players. Would love to hear who the last non Central aligned player we recruited straight out of the AFL system was, because I don't remember any for quite some time now.

Ironic people were getting into Lawry for chasing coin earlier on, now we're cheating the cap. Can't have us splashing coin around on one hand and losing the only bidding contest we'd have been in if there was one.

And it's not slanderous if it's presented as a rumour. Rumours can be right.....or they can be wrong..... so it wouldn't stand a chance in a defamation case. If it was stated as fact, which none of Ralph's crap is, then you would have a case.

[Jim05]

FWIW i dont reckon Ralph is Rucci. I reckon thats what the station wants us to think, far to obvious IMO

[sjt]

The station can ultimately be sued for defamation if something goes to air that is slanderous. They are in control of what is said, even if Ralph isn't known to them they authorise the comments by letting them go to air. Either way, I don't care. I'm confident the club isn't cheating the cap. Have a look at the players we have signed over the last few years. Hardly big name recruits you'd spend serious coin on. We just turn them into better players. Would love to hear who the last non Central aligned player we recruited straight out of the AFL system was, because I don't remember any for quite some time now.

Ironic people were getting into Lawry for chasing coin earlier on, now we're cheating the cap. Can't have us splashing coin around on one hand and losing the only bidding contest we'd have been in if there was one.

And it's not slanderous if it's presented as a rumour. Rumours can be right.....or they can be wrong..... so it wouldn't stand a chance in a defamation case. If it was stated as fact, which none of Ralph's crap is, then you would have a case.

That doesn't sound right to me. By inference, your saying you can say what you like about someone or an organization as long as you say, "I heard the following rumour". If that's the case Mick molloy should have said, "Ralph told me a rumour".

"Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image"

[whufc]

The station can ultimately be sued for defamation if something goes to air that is slanderous. They are in control of what is said, even if Ralph isn't known to them they authorise the comments by letting them go to air. Either way, I don't care. I'm confident the club isn't cheating the cap. Have a look at the players we have signed over the last few years. Hardly big name recruits you'd spend serious coin on. We just turn them into better players. Would love to hear who the last non Central aligned player we recruited straight out of the AFL system was, because I don't remember any for quite some time now.

Ironic people were getting into Lawry for chasing coin earlier on, now we're cheating the cap. Can't have us splashing coin around on one hand and losing the only bidding contest we'd have been in if there was one.

And it's not slanderous if it's presented as a rumour. Rumours can be right.....or they can be wrong..... so it wouldn't stand a chance in a defamation case. If it was stated as fact, which none of Ralph's crap is, then you would have a case.

True wouldnt it be similar to this site where stuff posted can still be held accountable and taken to court.

[CENTURION]

you need to chuck in the word "allegedly". Who cares anyway, We're bigger than this, move on, nothing to see here.

[Bunton]

The station can ultimately be sued for defamation if something goes to air that is slanderous. They are in control of what is said, even if Ralph isn't known to them they authorise the comments by letting them go to air. Either way, I don't care. I'm confident the club isn't cheating the cap. Have a look at the players we have signed over the last few years. Hardly big name recruits you'd spend serious coin on. We just turn them into better players. Would love to hear who the last non Central aligned player we recruited straight out of the AFL system was, because I don't remember any for quite some time now.

Ironic people were getting into Lawry for chasing coin earlier on, now we're cheating the cap. Can't have us splashing coin around on one hand and losing the only bidding contest we'd have been in if there was one.

And it's not slanderous if it's presented as a rumour. Rumours can be right.....or they can be wrong..... so it wouldn't stand a chance in a defamation case. If it was stated as fact, which none of Ralph's crap is, then you would have a case.

Spot on Voice - speaking of which, has anyone ever seen Rucci with a women, or does the rumour that he prefers men have some legs to it?

[sjt]

please, please be the case- man what a crack up that would be!

it won't bother Us, We don't rely on importing players, We get Our guns locally.

Um incorrect- Gowans , Callinan, O,sullivan- no need to go on, but you get my drift- cant rely on local guns- juniors arent doing much these days.

Can anyone name the last three players centrals actively recruited, that had played at least one afl minor or major round game, that didn't originate from centrals?
What about the other eight clubs?

Of the 62 premiership players, over the last decade, I could only find Simon Arnott (2002?), then James Gowans in 2000 (I think he played 3 games), then maybe Simon Luhrs?

[CENTURION]

The station can ultimately be sued for defamation if something goes to air that is slanderous. They are in control of what is said, even if Ralph isn't known to them they authorise the comments by letting them go to air. Either way, I don't care. I'm confident the club isn't cheating the cap. Have a look at the players we have signed over the last few years. Hardly big name recruits you'd spend serious coin on. We just turn them into better players. Would love to hear who the last non Central aligned player we recruited straight out of the AFL system was, because I don't remember any for quite some time now.

Ironic people were getting into Lawry for chasing coin earlier on, now we're cheating the cap. Can't have us splashing coin around on one hand and losing the only bidding contest we'd have been in if there was one.

And it's not slanderous if it's presented as a rumour. Rumours can be right.....or they can be wrong..... so it wouldn't stand a chance in a defamation case. If it was stated as fact, which none of Ralph's crap is, then you would have a case.

Spot on Voice - speaking of which, has anyone ever seen Rucci with a women, or does the rumour that he prefers men have some legs to it?

Now THAT could get you into trouble.

[blueandwhite]

Ah the old salary cap chestnut....

Lets do the math.The sanfl salary cap is 335k if I remember correctly.That includes all league and reserves players.. I am led to believe that top line sanfl players, ie ex afl listed or multiple premiership players are recieving around 50k or in some cases quite a bit more. If a club has 4 "top line" players there goes more than 50% of that clubs' salary cap.So do the other 40 players on that clubs senior list play for the love of the club..?
There are some very creative ways for clubs to get around the cap apart from the brown paper bag.The secret is to generate cash that doesnt go through the clubs financial records where it may be perused by the sanfl.
If the sanfl is naive enough to believe that all is well with salary cap breaches and that no club is breaching the cap Ithink they should look a bit harder.

[Pseudo]

Spot on Voice - speaking of which, has anyone ever seen Rucci with a women, or does the rumour that he prefers men have some legs to it?

You're saying he has a soft spot for a Norwood player?

* insert the word "allegedly" and "rumour" as appropriate

[Grahaml]

$50k might be what the top line players earn, but no club would have 4 earning that. at most, there might be 1 or 2 players in the whole comp earning that.

[heater31]

Ah the old salary cap chestnut....

Lets do the math.The sanfl salary cap is 335k if I remember correctly.That includes all league and reserves players.. I am led to believe that top line sanfl players, ie ex afl listed or multiple premiership players are recieving around 50k or in some cases quite a bit more. If a club has 4 "top line" players there goes more than 50% of that clubs' salary cap.So do the other 40 players on that clubs senior list play for the love of the club..?
There are some very creative ways for clubs to get around the cap apart from the brown paper bag.The secret is to generate cash that doesnt go through the clubs financial records where it may be perused by the sanfl.
If the sanfl is naive enough to believe that all is well with salary cap breaches and that no club is breaching the cap Ithink they should look a bit harder.

At one club the minimum payment for a league game is $200. Reserves get $75. I would assume most clubs would be similar.

[Apachebulldog]

YEP they have breached the salary cap they are spending all the money on medical treatment and rehab for all their injured players this year.

[nickname]

Spot on Voice - speaking of which, has anyone ever seen Rucci with a women, or does the rumour that he prefers men have some legs to it?

That would be an issue for you would it?

[FlyingHigh]

So if you don't recruit high-profile players you can't go over the salary cap? Don't any of the locals get paid?
Thomas, Cica and Gallagher wouldn't have been playing for only the minimum payment all these years.

[Voice]

The station can ultimately be sued for defamation if something goes to air that is slanderous. They are in control of what is said, even if Ralph isn't known to them they authorise the comments by letting them go to air. Either way, I don't care. I'm confident the club isn't cheating the cap. Have a look at the players we have signed over the last few years. Hardly big name recruits you'd spend serious coin on. We just turn them into better players. Would love to hear who the last non Central aligned player we recruited straight out of the AFL system was, because I don't remember any for quite some time now.

Ironic people were getting into Lawry for chasing coin earlier on, now we're cheating the cap. Can't have us splashing coin around on one hand and losing the only bidding contest we'd have been in if there was one.

And it's not slanderous if it's presented as a rumour. Rumours can be right.....or they can be wrong..... so it wouldn't stand a chance in a defamation case. If it was stated as fact, which none of Ralph's crap is, then you would have a case.

That doesn't sound right to me. By inference, your saying you can say what you like about someone or an organization as long as you say, "I heard the following rumour". If that's the case Mick molloy should have said, "Ralph told me a rumour".

"Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image"

Your definition proves my point. A rumour is neither expressly stated or implied to be factual.
Rumour: gossip (can be a mixture of truth and untruth) passed around by word of mouth.

[sjt]

The station can ultimately be sued for defamation if something goes to air that is slanderous. They are in control of what is said, even if Ralph isn't known to them they authorise the comments by letting them go to air. Either way, I don't care. I'm confident the club isn't cheating the cap. Have a look at the players we have signed over the last few years. Hardly big name recruits you'd spend serious coin on. We just turn them into better players. Would love to hear who the last non Central aligned player we recruited straight out of the AFL system was, because I don't remember any for quite some time now.

Ironic people were getting into Lawry for chasing coin earlier on, now we're cheating the cap. Can't have us splashing coin around on one hand and losing the only bidding contest we'd have been in if there was one.

And it's not slanderous if it's presented as a rumour. Rumours can be right.....or they can be wrong..... so it wouldn't stand a chance in a defamation case. If it was stated as fact, which none of Ralph's crap is, then you would have a case.

That doesn't sound right to me. By inference, your saying you can say what you like about someone or an organization as long as you say, "I heard the following rumour". If that's the case Mick molloy should have said, "Ralph told me a rumour".

"Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image"

Your definition proves my point. A rumour is neither expressly stated or implied to be factual.
Rumour: gossip (can be a mixture of truth and untruth) passed around by word of mouth.

I'm not disagreeing as I don't know the legal answer. I would assume Rucci does. However, would that mean if Mick Molloy had said "I heard a rumour about Nicole etc etc, he would have saved himself a fair bit of coin?
If you state something that is not "implied" to be factual, there's no real point in saying it. Unless you're reading a fairytale.