Melbourne boss knew of the penalties to come before telling NRL of rorts

[waveydavey]

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -uot7.html

Melbourne boss knew of the penalties to come before telling NRL of rorts
ROY MASTERS
May 11, 2010

Melbourne Storm chairman Rob Moodie was warned of the draconian penalties the NRL planned to impose on his club for salary-cap breaches 90 minutes before his meeting with David Gallop at which he revealed the size of the excess spending.

Moodie received two separate calls at 9.30am on April 22 informing him of the sanctions, well ahead of the 11am meeting with Gallop and NRL administration staff in which he made the admissions.

Gallop has insisted he decided to strip the Storm of two premierships, fine the club $1.5 million and prevent it from winning any points this season only after the Storm admitted they had breached the cap by $1.7 million over five years.

Storm coaches and officials suspect Gallop's strong action was designed to distract public attention from the series of leaks that resulted in many NSW punters backing the Storm to win the 2010 wooden spoon.

They point out the information could not have come from Melbourne because the club assumed it would be punished with the loss of just eight premiership points, reflecting their four wins before the breaches were discovered.

Coach Craig Bellamy was philosophical on the evening of April 21, the night before Moodie's trip to Sydney, after being told by officials the club could be punished eight points. He was confident he could recover the points and still make the semi-finals.

Similarly, Moodie had no fears of savage sanctions and did not even take a lawyer to the Sydney meeting.

The 9.30am warning that the club would be heavily punished might have contributed to the ''what have we got to lose?'' frank admissions by Moodie and his then chief executive, Matt Hanson, of over-spending, which Gallop admits surprised him and his administration team.

Gallop also concedes that conversations he had, presumably with News Ltd executives, could have been passed on to Moodie.

''Until the admissions were made at the meeting, no final decision was made on penalty but certainly after the letter [to the Storm] was settled by our senior counsel and sent on the Wednesday [April 21], the potential enormity of the situation was apparent,'' Gallop said.

''There were certainly conversations about potential penalties with various people and certainly News Ltd's attitude, as it had been all along, was, 'You guys do what you've got to do'. But we consulted with the lawyers after the admission was made and it was only then that the final decision was taken on penalty. I'll never forget [NRL salary cap auditor] Ian Schubert saying to me after the admission was made, 'I had hoped they would have had an explanation for all of this', meaning it wouldn't be the problem it transpired to be. I agreed with him.''

Storm directors admitted they had frequently raised at board meetings the issue of excessive spending in the club's marketing budget, the source of most of the secret payments to players. Of approximately $5m in marketing income from sponsorships, some $4.2m was spent, suggesting alarm bells should have rung.

One director said: ''We were continually told [presumably by then chief executive Brian Waldron and Hanson] that the spending was necessary to promote the game in Victoria.''

Another director pointed out the club had been cleared in frequent audits by three separate teams - internal News auditors, Ernst & Young and Schubert.

The Storm board will await the results of the forensic audit now being conducted by Deloitte, the accounting firm appointed by News to track club spending. Legal action is not on the immediate agenda, with one director saying: ''The game has been hurt enough. We can't put it through more misery.''

In any case, legal action by the Storm board would be futile. Shareholders appoint boards and News is the exclusive owner of the Storm. If the Storm board sued the NRL, which is half-owned by News, the directors could be sacked by the shareholders before the writ was lodged.

Deloitte will report to News, raising the issue whether its information will be passed on to the NRL. If not, the ARL, half-owner of the NRL, will have been totally sidelined in this whole wrenching saga, not even being consulted by Gallop before he handed down what some believe will be a death sentence for the club.

Some Victorian ministers fear the Storm will not survive long term, falling as emotions subside and crowds drop as they become uncompetitive.

However, two - Sports Minister James Merlino and the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Tim Pallis - attended Sunday's match, along with lord mayor Robert Doyle, at which they spoke optimistically about the club's future.

Memberships bought since the effective suspension of the team from the 2010 competition have risen by 1000, with Moodie telling a gathering of VIPs: ''Total memberships cancelled to date … two.''

One Storm director hoped the club would eventually become a viable, privately owned operation, saying: ''Out of disaster comes opportunity.''

If this article is true,then:

1)  I find it absolutely inconceivable that the ARL were not consulted before the penalties were laid down given that they make up 50% of the NRL.

2)  The penalties had been decided before the meeting with the Storm, and thus Gallop has lied.

3)  The leak concerning the Storm being stripped of points, etc., etc., came from either NRL headquarters of News Limited.

I fully understand the systematic rorting by some at the Storm, and therefore accept fully that penalties were required, but it is beginning to look as if News Limited have been the driving force in this to attempt to save some face, i.e. punish them hard so we are seen not to have any favouritism.  Would any non  News Limited owned club have been punished as harshly I wonder?  I also believe that some of the penalties have been laid without full consideration - were we over the cap significantly in 2006 and 2007 - if not, is it then a fair penalty to strip two minor premierships and a premiership?  

[noa nandruku]

Its why I keep saying the lack of process will come back to bite Gallp in the arse WHEN this goes to court. Note Masters said in the article that NEWS wont sue while they run half the game. Now Master' is a massive Storm supporter and to me the unsaid thing there is they will be out of the game very shortly, thus paving the way for legal challenges to begin.

[The Eagle]

More proof that cricketers should not run the goddamned NRL
Cricketers have no idea of anything rugby league,emotion isnt as strong

I lost 2 Grand Finals in a row thanks to a terrible captaining options
that were the miss use of a strike pace bowler
and i barely even felt disapointed,my last season of League falling out
in the damned semi's broke me

[LESStar58]

In any case, legal action by the Storm board would be futile. Shareholders appoint boards and News is the exclusive owner of the Storm. If the Storm board sued the NRL, which is half-owned by News, the directors could be sacked by the shareholders before the writ was lodged.

Deloitte will report to News, raising the issue whether its information will be passed on to the NRL. If not, the ARL, half-owner of the NRL, will have been totally sidelined in this whole wrenching saga, not even being consulted by Gallop before he handed down what some believe will be a death sentence for the club.

The first paragraph illustrates everything that is wrong with News Ltd's involment in the game of rugby league. Conflicts of interest are rife in the game at the moment, just ask Bourbon Beccy Wilson.

As for the second paragraph and the ARL's involvement; remember that the old boys are also members of the blazer brigade at the New South Wales rugby league, where the insular attitude that it's a NSW and QLD only sport is rife. I expect there were greater ARL forces at play in our down fall than News Limited ones.

Even if I'm totally wrong and the ARL were cut out of the decision making process does this oversight by Gallop and News present some kind of reprieve for us?

Fair play to Masters. I've seen him at a few of our games in the past and he seems to have our back. And anyone who is prepared to put that evil crone Caroline Wilson in her place is alright with me!

[noa nandruku]

Noa again shows he know more then those nuffies at LU

Gallop admits talking to News Ltd before Storm TOM REILLY AND ANDREW RULE May 13, 2010

SENIOR legal experts believe the National Rugby League's ''dismal'' handling of the Melbourne Storm case would give the club strong grounds to challenge its stripping of two premierships for salary cap breaches.

Barrister Ivan Brewer claims there was a lack of procedural fairness as those investigating the breaches were also involved in setting the punishment.

Mr Brewer's assessment came as NRL chief David Gallop admitted he discussed the evidence against Storm as well as potential penalties with News Ltd executive Peter Macourt before meeting Storm.

Advertisement: Story continues belowThe admission follows reports this week that Storm chairman Rob Moodie was warned before he met the NRL that his side would be stripped of the 2007 and 2009 titles.

Mr Gallop insists the penalties were not decided upon before meeting Storm directors on April 22, despite the fact bookmakers took several hundred bets on Storm winning the wooden spoon. This indicated the penalty had leaked before the time he claimed the decision had been made.

Mr Brewer was scathing of the NRL's actions and branded the conversations between Mr Gallop and Mr Macourt ''outrageous''. ''Gallop has brought the NRL into disrepute as well as the legal profession, as he's a lawyer. The procedure has lacked any sense of natural justice - it's been dismal,'' the Melbourne-based barrister said.

''It's a bit like the local policeman picking you up down the street, and when you go to court he not only prosecutes the case but then jumps up to the bench and sits in judgment.''

Mr Brewer says an independent judicial body, with senior counsel, should have considered the evidence against Storm, allowed it time to form a defence and then issued a punishment.

Instead, a letter was sent by the NRL to Storm outlining suspicions; the next day Dr Moodie and other board members admitted breaches.

Within hours the NRL, led by Mr Gallop, had stripped the club of its most recent two titles, demanded $1.5 million in fines and prize money and ruled the club would play for no points this season.

Eminent Melbourne lawyer Peter Gordon also believes Storm has grounds for appeal: ''The severity of the penalty, its novelty, particularly with respect to the situation where a team is asked to play for a season without the possibility of gaining points, the speed with which it was enforced and the apparent lack of due process enlivens real concerns about whether natural justice was awarded to the club.''

News Ltd's vows to demand a police investigation have so far come to nothing.

A senior Victoria Police fraud squad officer confirmed yesterday that nothing to do with the Storm case had been referred to the squad - and might not be.

It was possible someone had ''contacted the chief commissioner's office'' but ''nothing has officially been reported to the major fraud squad'', the spokesman said.

Mr Gallop defended his conversations with Mr Macourt, who oversees rugby league at News. ''We did not bargain the penalty beforehand,'' he told The Age. ''We spoke on the Monday and Tuesday about what penalties were possible.''

Asked about a lack of natural justice, he replied: ''We are comfortable to defend the process.''

But even if Storm has strong legal grounds to question its punishment, it seems unlikely any appeal will be lodged as News head John Hartigan has already ruled out any challenge.

http://www.theage.com.au/rugby-league/l ... -uy4h.html

And I'll say it again, the legal challenge will begin not long after the IC is formed.

[Buzz]

Rumours abound (via Eddie on Triple M) that several of the independant board members are planning a legal challenge on the basis of a lack of procedural fairness. There is supposed to be an announcement from the Club - which could either be the start of legal proceedings with News Ltd board members excusing themselves from the process, or could even be the Club dismissing the independant board members for pursuing legal action against effectively News Ltd.

Will be yet another interesting day. For mine, I'm all for challenging on the basis of unfair procedure. Considering the investigation is not yet complete and the penalties were handed down weeks ago it's clear to every man and his dog that procedure could not have been followed.