Norwood & the salary cap

[am Bays]

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??

[Jimmy_041]

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

Shame red&black isn't here
I always loved him knocking Norwood when Westies were done as well
The old "look over there" strategy

[daysofourlives]

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

Good to see the SANFL clubs are setting the example for country and amateur clubs to follow when the SANFL and CFL enforce some type of salary cap onto these clubs

[DOC]

Don't think there is anything wrong with employing players, if its a legit working arrangement.

[SANFLnut]

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.

[Tech1]

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.

May as well just get rid of the salary cap, plenty of clubs must be doing this, can't be just Norwood, i'm sure there are other ways around the salary cap too, it either needs to be significantly lifted or scrapped.

[JK]

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.

[Jim05]

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

[johntheclaret]

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

[johntheclaret]

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

This of cousre coming from a Norwood fan
I think Ethiad's sponsorship of Man City is all perfectly reasonable and above board.

[JK]

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

All players (thankfully) from all clubs seem to have generous bosses in terms of time off for playing and training etc. I don't really see it as any different. All clubs are capable of finding these roles for players so I don't see how it benefits any club over another?

[Bounce of the ball]

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.

[stan]

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.

An un named board member from an um named club. But we are all supposed to just take his word.

Because hes always on the money.

[CENTURION]

sounds like I was correct!

[stan]

sounds like I was correct!

Let me know when your a cibo's next.

[legsman]

sounds like I'm left with egg on my face!

Edited for accuracy

[CENTURION]

sounds like I'm left with egg on my face!

Edited for accuracy

thou art a diphallic terata.

[teaoby]

sounds like I was correct!

Who? Where? What? Why?

[Dogwatcher]

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.

[JK]

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.

I hadn't heard we were being investigated (which is not to say it didn't happen though), and Joe was always going to retire. I reckon Centrals' copped a lot of the Salary Cap suspicion when they were racking up flags so I think it probably just comes with the territory. Particularly in our case when unlike the Dogs we've been found guilty of breaching in recent seasons.