Opposition Claim against NRL

BIG JIM · Tue Apr 27, 2010 3:39 pm

I read someones comment in the paper today on the lines of

If Storm are not allowed to earn points with being over the Salary Cap in 2010 how is it fair for opposition teams to have to play them and lose so end up with nothing.

So my question is does the opposition Clubs not have a case against the NRL having to play a ILLEGAL TEAM which come end of the season could cost them a Finals Berth ?.I believe this will no doubt be brought up going into the back end of season.

Tempest · Tue Apr 27, 2010 3:46 pm

That Illegal Team can still do horrible things to their 'for and against' as well.

stormfan · Tue Apr 27, 2010 3:51 pm

I have no doubt that come the end of the year those clubs that miss the top 8 by 1 game (or miss the top 4 by the same margin) will no doubt blame their loss to the storm (if that's the scenario).

Really, no matter what decision David Gallop and the NRL made, they were going to open themselves up to criticism from somewhere (and I am by no means supporting the decision that they made, I'm just making a point).

I did read that Gallop considered banning the Storm from taking any part in the rest of the season at all - but didn't think it was fair to deny players the opportunity to play representative football

Tempest · Tue Apr 27, 2010 3:57 pm

stormfan wrote: I did read that Gallop considered banning the Storm from taking any part in the rest of the season at all - but didn't think it was fair to deny players the opportunity to play representative football

Yeah, cos Storm players are still good enough for Gallop when he wants them for something!

glennb · Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:07 pm

The other clubs can not complain at the end of the season about missing out on 2 competiton points beacuse they lost to an ' illegal team", beacuse he had a phone meeting with all other 15 CEO's and they all agreed to the plenties. They all agreed in April, they can't complain in August.

stormfan · Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:14 pm

good point glennb, I didn't think of that.

Tue Apr 27, 2010 7:42 pm

glennb wrote: The other clubs can not complain at the end of the season about missing out on 2 competiton points beacuse they lost to an ' illegal team", beacuse he had a phone meeting with all other 15 CEO's and they all agreed to the plenties. They all agreed in April, they can't complain in August.

Can't and won't are two different things. They can't complain but I'm sure as hell certain they will.

BigG · Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:39 pm

BIG JIM wrote: I read someones comment in the paper today on the lines of

If Storm are not allowed to earn points with being over the Salary Cap in 2010 how is it fair for opposition teams to have to play them and lose so end up with nothing.

So my question is does the opposition Clubs not have a case against the NRL having to play a ILLEGAL TEAM which come end of the season could cost them a Finals Berth ?.I believe this will no doubt be brought up going into the back end of season.

Another thing to consider, what if a key opposition player gets a bad injury that keeps him out for most of or all of the rest of the season, do they have a case against the NRL also???????? This could all get so messy

bula · Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:50 am

Imagine the outcry if we injure Hayne for the season!

LESStar58 · Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:55 pm

Tempest wrote:
stormfan wrote: I did read that Gallop considered banning the Storm from taking any part in the rest of the season at all - but didn't think it was fair to deny players the opportunity to play representative football
Yeah, cos Storm players are still good enough for Gallop when he wants them for something!

Aside from the fact that Gallop is a spineless News Limited puppet he never would have suspended us for the season beacuse the NRL are contractually obligated to show 8 games of footy a week

Fri Apr 30, 2010 12:40 am

LESStar58 wrote:
Tempest wrote:
stormfan wrote: I did read that Gallop considered banning the Storm from taking any part in the rest of the season at all - but didn't think it was fair to deny players the opportunity to play representative football
Yeah, cos Storm players are still good enough for Gallop when he wants them for something!
Aside from the fact that Gallop is a spineless News Limited puppet he never would have suspended us for the season beacuse the NRL are contractually obligated to show 8 games of footy a week

And NEIN is contractually obliged to show Friday Night Footy into Melbourne before midnight. Your point?

CaptainKlutz · Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:43 am

LESStar58 wrote:
Tempest wrote:
stormfan wrote: I did read that Gallop considered banning the Storm from taking any part in the rest of the season at all - but didn't think it was fair to deny players the opportunity to play representative football
Yeah, cos Storm players are still good enough for Gallop when he wants them for something!
Aside from the fact that Gallop is a spineless News Limited puppet he never would have suspended us for the season beacuse the NRL are contractually obligated to show 8 games of footy a week

Gallop is not a News LTD puppet.

He is his own type of wanker a NSWRL puppet.

absentee · Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:22 pm

I think blaming a loss against us as being the reason for missing out on the finals is just a convenient excuse. If that team had won another match against one of the so called "legal" teams - instead of losing - they may have made it into the eight. There are too many variables to be able to say with any certainty that we cost a team a spot in the finals.

Also, I don't care if one or all of the other teams have a sook about having to play an "illegal" team. We're not unbeatable. Suck it up.

bula · Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:40 pm

absentee wrote: I think blaming a loss against us as being the reason for missing out on the finals is just a convenient excuse. If that team had won another match against one of the so called "legal" teams - instead of losing - they may have made it into the eight. There are too many variables to be able to say with any certainty that we cost a team a spot in the finals.

Also, I don't care if one or all of the other teams have a sook about having to play an "illegal" team. We're not unbeatable. Suck it up.

Our side this year, or last, is hardly invincible.

absentee · Fri Apr 30, 2010 6:06 pm

bula wrote:
absentee wrote: I think blaming a loss against us as being the reason for missing out on the finals is just a convenient excuse. If that team had won another match against one of the so called "legal" teams - instead of losing - they may have made it into the eight. There are too many variables to be able to say with any certainty that we cost a team a spot in the finals.

Also, I don't care if one or all of the other teams have a sook about having to play an "illegal" team. We're not unbeatable. Suck it up.
Our side this year, or last, is hardly invincible.

Exactly. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure during the season last year, we were beaten by each of the other top eight teams.

Connect with your social network account

Opposition Claim against NRL