slotmachine
Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
It's very easy to say everyone else is cheating when you're club has been a joke for 20 years
Totally, it just always looks like victim complex to me. Same as moaning about the refs.It's very easy to say everyone else is cheating when you're club has been a joke for 20 years
70% of NRL bosses also think it is so*. It's just the way to be successful in the modern game, and the Knights need to start doing the same if we are ever to see a Premiership again.It's very easy to say everyone else is cheating when you're club has been a joke for 20 years
I'm convinced. There's nothing quite as compelling as a survey.70% of NRL bosses also think it is so*. It's just the way to be successful in the modern game, and the Knights need to start doing the same if we are ever to see a Premiership again.
Either join the successful clubs in cap "management" or hope for a fluke of happenstance. The choice is simple, the remedy might be hard.
*
"Seventy per cent of NRL club bosses believe rival teams use illegal third-party deals to flaunt the competition’s salary cap system."
https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...m/news-story/a652390e8ef0dbfba40ccfd460bec52b
I totally agree with you, we have common ground here. Very compelling is the factual data contained within the article, along with the opinions of the educated minds tasked with running the game.I'm convinced. There's nothing quite as compelling as a survey.
Sure, that's how businesses compete, via whatever means possible. The only thing preventing clubs from overtly breaking the rules are the punishments that follow. So they are crafty about how they seek an advantage over their competitors. 3rd party arrangements provide that flexibility.70% of NRL bosses also think it is so*. It's just the way to be successful in the modern game, and the Knights need to start doing the same if we are ever to see a Premiership again.
Either join the successful clubs in cap "management" or hope for a fluke of happenstance. The choice is simple, the remedy might be hard.
*
"Seventy per cent of NRL club bosses believe rival teams use illegal third-party deals to flaunt the competition’s salary cap system."
https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...m/news-story/a652390e8ef0dbfba40ccfd460bec52b
Correct. Clear difference between suspecting something and then suggesting that others are gullible because they don't hold the same suspicion. As I said earlier, that view is hilarious.And because I have not personally seen audited financials to prove this, there's no logical basis to even hold the suspicion
Amazing that that article came out 18 months ago as well, and yet the NRL has taken no further action. I'm guessing Fox Sports surveys carry the weight they should: nil.I totally agree with you, we have common ground here. Very compelling is the factual data contained within the article, along with the opinions of the educated minds tasked with running the game.
Logically, you're incorrect. If the standard of evidence required to be justified in 'suspicion' was proof, it would by definition no longer be suspicion, would it? It would be knowledge of said thing - I'd be making a statement of fact, not a claim.Correct. Clear difference between suspecting something and then suggesting that others are gullible because they don't hold the same suspicion. As I said earlier, that view is hilarious.
Absolutely . Although the article is not for this year, 3rd party deals are beneficial far beyond the present.Sure, that's how businesses compete, via whatever means possible. The only thing preventing clubs from overtly breaking the rules are the punishments that follow. So they are crafty about how they seek an advantage over their competitors. 3rd party arrangements provide that flexibility.
How 3rd parties deal with players is difficult to govern. And rich clubs enjoy the fact that legally there is arms length seperation between the 3rd party and the club, despite the relationship being of core interest to the club.
I'm 100% certain rich clubs don't abuse that system. And because I personally haven't seen audited financials to prove this, there's no logical basis to even hold the suspicion. Obviously
Suspect whatever you want. If you're basing it off punching some numbers into a calculator, and telling people they are gullible to believe otherwise, then you're just as gullible.Logically, you're incorrect. If the standard of evidence required to be justified in 'suspicion' was proof, it would by definition no longer be suspicion, would it? It would be knowledge said thing - I'd be making a statement of fact, not a claim.
The standard of evidence for suspicion, on the other hand, would be if one team were to field a substantially more valuable team than their competitors, year after year, decade after decade. Even if the difference in value cannot be precisely qualified and is largely anecdotal. That's still meets a fair standard for suspicion.
Lets just simplify things and move on.Suspect whatever you want. If you're basing it off punching some numbers into a calculator, and telling people they are gullible to believe otherwise, then you're just as gullible.
* As written in the article, clearly in the second paragraph (that includes a link) - it is a Fairfax Media Survey.Amazing that that article came out 18 months ago as well, and yet the NRL has taken no further action. I'm guessing Fox Sports surveys carry the weight they should: nil.
- nil indeed. You don't tell me what I believe, as I never said that. I'll reserve my position until I see something, anything other than online speculation and conspiracy theories, to suggest clubs are non-compliant.Lets just simplify things and move on.
I suspect the Roosters (almost definitely) and probably the Broncos of cheating the cap.
You believe they are fully compliant.
I'm happy for anyone reading this to decide which of the two positions represents gullibility.
Well, that changes everything. I just went from not caring, to not giving a f***.* As written in the article, clearly in the second paragraph (that includes a link) - it is a Fairfax Media Survey.
I am 100% sure the games major stake holder, and owner of the Broncos ( and formerly the Storm ), has no sway over the governing body![]()
- nil indeed.
That News Ltd even posted an article on the subject is remarkable, that nothing come of it, no surprise. Murdoch press would rather report on Mad Monday celebrations, than bring into question the integrity of their investment.
Hang on, there's no room for agnosticism here. The choice is between compliant and non compliant.You don't tell me what I believe, as I never said that. I'll reserve my position until I see something, anything other than online speculation and conspiracy theories, to suggest clubs are non-compliant.
The Roosters are compliant or they're not. I don't have enough information to decide one way or the other. Suspect whatever you want, but you've already suggested others are gullible to believe anything other than that the Roosters are cheating the cap. Pretty tired of this argument though. I've said all I want to say on that topic.Hang on, there's no room for agnosticism here. The choice is between compliant and non compliant.
For some strange reason you've taken the position that it is unreasonable to suspect the Roosters of being non compliant. That's your position lol.
Thank you so much for the very insightful commentary.The Roosters are compliant or they're not. I don't have enough information to decide one way or the other. Suspect whatever you want, but you've already suggested others are gullible to believe anything other than that the Roosters are cheating the cap. Pretty tired of this argument though. I've said all I want to say on that topic.