Rik E Boy wrote:Jim05 wrote:Time to close the thread, the SANFL has given us the all clear after finalising their review
There will be howls of protest from some posters...
regards,
REB
Becasue they were barking up the wrong tree??
by am Bays » Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:38 pm
Rik E Boy wrote:Jim05 wrote:Time to close the thread, the SANFL has given us the all clear after finalising their review
There will be howls of protest from some posters...
regards,
REB
by Jimmy_041 » Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:42 pm
Rik E Boy wrote:Jim05 wrote:Time to close the thread, the SANFL has given us the all clear after finalising their review
There will be howls of protest from some posters...
regards,
REB
by daysofourlives » Thu Nov 13, 2014 3:30 pm
Red Rocket wrote:stan wrote:Booney wrote:Jim05 wrote:Time to close the thread, the SANFL has given us the all clear after finalising their review
Hang on a minute, whoa whoa WHOA!
Are you implying a board member, whilst gossiping over a latte, may have given false information?
Or that the original post was bullflop and mostly a troll......
No, my mail is Centurian was on the money.
A major sponsor/board member was being investigated for employing players but due to said employer not being compelled to hand over the books the investigation has ended and Norwood are in the clear.
FWIW I dont have a problem with what Norwood did its been going on for years and I dont think its got anything to do with the SANFL to say who a person can/cant work for. If a employer wants to pay someone that doesnt attend work or does very little hours thats their choice IMO
by DOC » Thu Nov 13, 2014 5:32 pm
by SANFLnut » Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:36 pm
by Tech1 » Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:43 pm
SANFLnut wrote:I think that there is plenty wrong with a club sponsor paying a player who doesn't actually do any work just so that the payment isn't recorded as being part of the salary cap.
by JK » Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:57 pm
SANFLnut wrote:I think that there is plenty wrong with a club sponsor paying a player who doesn't actually do any work just so that the payment isn't recorded as being part of the salary cap.
by Jim05 » Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:36 pm
SANFLnut wrote:I think that there is plenty wrong with a club sponsor paying a player who doesn't actually do any work just so that the payment isn't recorded as being part of the salary cap.
by johntheclaret » Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:00 pm
JK wrote:SANFLnut wrote:I think that there is plenty wrong with a club sponsor paying a player who doesn't actually do any work just so that the payment isn't recorded as being part of the salary cap.
Still has to be market rates. If there's minimal work being done by the employee/player then that can only be an issue for the employer. All clubs would be getting jobs for players through supporters and sponsors I would think.
by johntheclaret » Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:05 pm
Jim05 wrote:SANFLnut wrote:I think that there is plenty wrong with a club sponsor paying a player who doesn't actually do any work just so that the payment isn't recorded as being part of the salary cap.
An employer should be entitled to spend his/her money how they please, if they want to pay a bloke $50k a year for minimal hours good luck to them, as long as its all declared to the ATO thats all that matters
by JK » Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:47 pm
johntheclaret wrote:JK wrote:SANFLnut wrote:I think that there is plenty wrong with a club sponsor paying a player who doesn't actually do any work just so that the payment isn't recorded as being part of the salary cap.
Still has to be market rates. If there's minimal work being done by the employee/player then that can only be an issue for the employer. All clubs would be getting jobs for players through supporters and sponsors I would think.
True, but not quite the same thing mate.
Sponsors employing a player to do a job of work is one thing. Sponsors paying a players football salary and dressing it up as employment is another thing altogether.
True, if there was no salary Cap there would be no need for these "back door" payments. But there is a salary cap and clubs should work within its constraints.
Unless you are an AFL Reserve team of course
by Bounce of the ball » Fri Nov 14, 2014 7:04 pm
CENTURION wrote:teaoby wrote:CENTURION wrote:Well well, here we go again. The things you hear whilst shmoozing at Cibo on The Parade.
Allegedly, Norwood are under investigation for breaking the salary cap for the past THREE seasons!
And Tripodi is running to the hills, will be resigning from his position at Norwood very soon, or he will be in deep shtick.
Who did you overhear? 2 random blokes having a convo??
or is this just a fishing expedition?
No, I was having a chat with a board member & they told me!
by stan » Fri Nov 14, 2014 10:51 pm
Bounce of the ball wrote:CENTURION wrote:teaoby wrote:CENTURION wrote:Well well, here we go again. The things you hear whilst shmoozing at Cibo on The Parade.
Allegedly, Norwood are under investigation for breaking the salary cap for the past THREE seasons!
And Tripodi is running to the hills, will be resigning from his position at Norwood very soon, or he will be in deep shtick.
Who did you overhear? 2 random blokes having a convo??
or is this just a fishing expedition?
No, I was having a chat with a board member & they told me!
Has he resigned yet ? Board member form which club? Ironic if from Centrals.
by CENTURION » Sat Nov 15, 2014 9:37 am
by stan » Sat Nov 15, 2014 10:55 am
CENTURION wrote:sounds like I was correct!
by legsman » Sun Nov 16, 2014 8:23 am
CENTURION wrote:sounds like I'm left with egg on my face!
by CENTURION » Sun Nov 16, 2014 9:47 am
legsman wrote:CENTURION wrote:sounds like I'm left with egg on my face!
Edited for accuracy
by teaoby » Mon Nov 17, 2014 11:26 am
CENTURION wrote:sounds like I was correct!
by Dogwatcher » Mon Nov 17, 2014 11:49 am
CENTURION wrote:Well well, here we go again. The things you hear whilst shmoozing at Cibo on The Parade.
Allegedly, Norwood are under investigation for breaking the salary cap for the past THREE seasons!
And Tripodi is running to the hills, will be resigning from his position at Norwood very soon, or he will be in deep shtick.
by JK » Mon Nov 17, 2014 12:06 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:CENTURION wrote:Well well, here we go again. The things you hear whilst shmoozing at Cibo on The Parade.
Allegedly, Norwood are under investigation for breaking the salary cap for the past THREE seasons!
And Tripodi is running to the hills, will be resigning from his position at Norwood very soon, or he will be in deep shtick.
It would seem they were investigated. Not sure why people have their knickers in a knot.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |