Is there any truth in the rumours of side payments regarding his time at Salford

I'm sure the new Salford oracle who specializes in negativity will be here presently to avail you of all the news.

So we take that as a yes.

Seen the article in the nations favourite 'the sun'. Hope its not true or were screwed.

Wigan bashed the cap to avoid relegation and I think they got a 2 or 4 point deduction. Surely if we have been caught it will be the same for us?

Wigan "broke the spirit of the cap" and the limit at the time was 4 points - it has since been dramatically increased since then. I believe 10 points is now the maximum (and may be higher next year, as iirc it was one of the compromises about bringing in the marquee rule in)

"broke the spirit of the cap"

Does that mean, broke the cap?

Nice way of phrasing it mind, iirc they spent big to get themselves out of trouble.

10 points would be quite a big kick in the nuts. Might as well lose the other games, keep the team fresh and earn the place back in SL from the middle eight. Well that's next year sorted out then.

My understanding is that TP brought this case because he was promised money that he says he has never received.Now i might be missing something here but if he never received any money then what offence have Salford actually committed."Failure to pay an underhand bung in used notes into a foreign bank account" is not an offence i am aware of in the RFL operating rules.

Bad news :-

"Broke the spirit of the cap" translated to "wigan were smarter than the people making the rules at the time, but we weren't great fans of what they did" - they didn't [itechnically[/i break the cap, but they diliberately circumvented it.

similarly, promising players big bonuses for winning mom and individual awards from the club followed by a wink wink nod nod doesn't [itechnically[/i break the cap, but certainly circumvents it.

Side payments in the other hand is simply breaking the cap that would see big numbers punished - as the above post says, it can be up to 20 points - starting 10 games behind is a lot!

An attempt , or 'intent ' is considered enough to constitute a breach .
I'd sort of understand if it was a Sonny Bill or a Paul Gallan they were getting, not a pensionable plodder. .

Puletua was £128k per annum at Saints, they offered him a one-year extension whereas Salford offered him a two-year deal. As we were upto the cap, only £80k of Tony's salary could be put on the cap the other £48k was to made up through a side-payment and paid by EuroMachTech under the guise that it would be for "training and advice on player recruitment".

Last Friday, Koukash and Puletua settled on an undisclosed amount. An RFL representative sat in on the two day tribunal and will investigate whether any operational rules relating to the salary cap have been broken, given the evidence disclosed. If found guilty, it carries a punishment of upto 20 points.

Marwan and his legal team are confident that they haven't done anything wrong.

Who are EuroMachTech? The only defence Salford will have based on this is if they share no common manager, owner or contract.

The rules relating to payments for training and education:



If it wasn't disclosed to the rfl at the time, then it's already a breach, and since the payment is the wrong way around, wouldn't fall into this exclusion any way so should be included in cap calculations.

Edit: as for paying him for advice on player recruitment, that would fall squarely under employees acting as players:



He also recommended you signed Josh Perry, so he should of been immediately fired anyway!

With regards to your final point, Tony Puletua wasn't selected to play for the Club in a Salary Cap Relevant Match during the Salary Cap Year - or at least not for Salford (in 2015) he wasn't.

Presuming he was registered correctly (and I make that assumption based on the rfls involvement in the mediation) then the above is all that matters...

I don't think he was registered. There is a reason why during our injury crisis following the Easter period, he wasn't selected despite the fact we were short of props. I assume Hull KR must have registered him when he joined on loan?

We're going off what the rfl publish as their procedures so my knowledge gets a little hazier, but didn't he sign a 2 year deal? Unless otherwise explicitly stated in a contract, the rfl automatically registers a player for the length of the contract (this is how teams can demand first refusal on players going to RU/ NRL).

While not a cast iron rule, a good rule of thumb is: did he have a squad number at the start of the year?

wouldn't it be just great if we were screwed before the season started, just when we thought we got through all our problems. If we are and it is our fault ive had it.

And anyway what allegedly did it help us achieve 'f**k all' - oh sorry, a battle with relegation!!!Feckin Ridiculous

Puletua wasnt registered as a player last season so wasnt counted in the 25 registered players eligible under the SC.

MK was asked on twitter if as a result of the Puletua court case was the club now under investigation by the RFL for breaches of the salary cap.He said no.

Um: Quote The League shall maintain a register of Players and Free Agents ("the Register"icon_wink.gif and shall designate whether the Players are amateurs or professionals and if the latter whether they are Contract, Conditional Contract or Contract Expired Players (and, where applicable, Dual Registered). The League shall divide the Register into sub-sections which will represent each Club's list of registered Players ("Club Registers"icon_wink.gif and Free Agents. '" Quote A Club shall not allow a Player to take part in any Club training or conditioning programme or to play for it in a Match, unless: (a) that Player is on its Club Register or unless the Club is party to a Dual Registration Agreement with the Club with whom the Player is registered and (b) all other applicable tests including, but limited to, any baseline test has been completed. Clubs may apply to the RFL for permission for a Player to take part in Club training or conditioning prior to registration, which may be granted on the terms and conditions set out by the RFL. '" According to here: www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ua-9335931 he was training so he must have been registered.

Um: Quote The League shall maintain a register of Players and Free Agents ("the Register"icon_wink.gif and shall designate whether the Players are amateurs or professionals and if the latter whether they are Contract, Conditional Contract or Contract Expired Players (and, where applicable, Dual Registered). The League shall divide the Register into sub-sections which will represent each Club's list of registered Players ("Club Registers"icon_wink.gif and Free Agents. '" Quote A Club shall not allow a Player to take part in any Club training or conditioning programme or to play for it in a Match, unless: (a) that Player is on its Club Register or unless the Club is party to a Dual Registration Agreement with the Club with whom the Player is registered and (b) all other applicable tests including, but limited to, any baseline test has been completed. Clubs may apply to the RFL for permission for a Player to take part in Club training or conditioning prior to registration, which may be granted on the terms and conditions set out by the RFL. '" According to here: www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ua-9335931 he was training so he must have been registered.

You waited longer than expected but you have the oracle of doom and gloom all over this now.

Quote ="Magic Superbeetle"Um: According to here: www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ua-9335931 he was training so he must have been registered.'" That article clearly states that Salford simply couldnt accomodate him in the squad.Puletua said he had been training and watching games.Didnt say anywhere that he had been training with the squad as a registered player.I seem to remember at the time he was acting as the players welfare officer within the club.

Quote ="Magic Superbeetle"Um: According to here: www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ua-9335931 he was training so he must have been registered.'" That article clearly states that Salford simply couldnt accomodate him in the squad.Puletua said he had been training and watching games.Didnt say anywhere that he had been training with the squad as a registered player.I seem to remember at the time he was acting as the players welfare officer within the club.

From what I gather Puletua can't have been registered last year as we the players that did play, and hence were definitely registered, took up our full non-fed quota.

This is the proverbial can of worms.
Forget TP for a minute.
Let's assume the side payment scenario is correct,which it might not be.
One assumes that he wouldn't have been the only one and several would have been in the squad this year.
So the problem would exist without TP.
And I hope they have HMRC correctly sorted,m'lud,unless the player is responsible for his own tax.

Does anyone believe a word he says anymore though? I do agree though, I don't think he was registered hence why he wasn't given a chance during the injury/suspension crisis.