Parramatta prepare to appeal NRL’s salary cap sanctions seeking transcripts of Stuart & Seward

Parramatta directors last night voted to seek leave to appeal their sanctions from the NRL as details emerged of the club’s multiple attempts to secure access to interview transcripts from former Eels chief executive Scott Seward and ex-coach Ricky Stuart that formed part of the case against them.The Weekend Australian understands the Eels board will press ahead with plans to maintain their vigil against the NRL, with the next step to seek leave to appeal the verdict through appeals tribunal chairman Ian Callinan QC. Last night’s decision will further antagonise the NRL and ensure the saga will continue for the foreseeable future.The club has been locked in a spat with the game’s governing body for months, the relationship reaching its nadir last week when NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg confirmed the sanctions against the Eels — a fine of $1 million and 12 premiership points for salary cap rorts.Parramatta’s legal representatives tried and failed on multiple occasions to gain access to interview transcripts from Seward and Stuart, only to be told by the NRL that the material was not required for the club to properly respond to allegations of massive salary cap rorts.The Weekend Australian has obtained a series of letters exchanged between the respective legal teams of Parramatta and the NRL, which were included in the club’s response to the breach notice.The Eels’ legal advisers, Carroll and O’Dea, sent a letter to the NRL on May 10 requesting all statements and interview transcripts from Stuart, Seward, former chief executive Ken Edwards and ex-chairman Roy Spagnolo, along with Newcastle businesswoman Tracey McKelligott, the club’s former recruitment manager Peter Nolan and ex-salary cap auditor Ian Schubert.“After having reviewed the materials you provided us on 6 May last it appears there are a number of pertinent documents which we will require before our client can respond,” the Eels wrote.“We consider that the requested documents are imperative to allow our client an opportunity to properly understand and respond to the breach notice by the NRL.“Accordingly, we reserve our right to request further time to respond until we have read and considered the documents we have requested.”A follow-up letter on May 16 again requested access to the transcripts of interview with Seward and Stuart — the NRL provided only a statement from Seward. It is understood Spagnolo and Edwards were never interviewed by the NRL.The next day the NRL sent a letter via lawyer Tony O’Reilly which stated that the material the Eels had requested was not required to respond to the breach notice.Again, the Eels’ lawyers sent a letter to the NRL on May 19 voicing their frustration at the NRL’s decision to withhold the transcripts.“It remains our firm view that the modified list of documents we have requested remains of significance,” they wrote.“You have not provided reasons why the transcript of interview/statement of Ricky Stuart or our request in relation to records of Scott Seward will not be provided.“We remain of the view that these documents are critical to our ability to meaningfully respond to the breach notice. We once again re-state our request for this information.“If you remain of the view that you are not willing to provide these documents, please provide us with your reasons.”The board is in the throes of fending off challenges to their authority from three separate parties seeking to overthrow the directors at an extraordinary general meeting — the board opted to call an EGM on August 22, where they are expected to ask the members to vote for a full election on October 10.http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/nrl/parramatta-prepare-to-appeal-nrls-salary-cap-sanctions/news-story/a92139ce3051ea915114d65b420e2761

How can Stuart's evidence not be of value to the club defending the breach notice?

He and his overhead projector would have placed so much pressure on the cap. Maitua, Harrison, Chase Blair amongst others were being paid at other teams while we still had to put together a top 25.

Among his replacements he signed were Norman, Peats, Mossop,, another 3 blokes who's names have popped up a lot lately.

Yet he does a runner , gives evidence against the club and benefits when we release 1 of our best forwards?

I'm sure the NRL has us by the balls on a number of things here, but im also sure it's been a shambolic investigation. Full of media leaks, agendas , conflicts of interest and flimsy investigative processes.

Replies

Snakey - Sack Dylan Brown July 16, 2016 at 4:13am

Id love to see what Stuart said to them, looks like he's being protected too, no doubt in my mind he has given em a bit.
- Nutcracker > Snakey - Sack Dylan Brown July 16, 2016 at 8:48am
  
  That's a very interesting question Snake. I wondered that too.
Girth Wind & Fire July 16, 2016 at 5:36am

How can Stuart's evidence not be of value to the club defending the breach notice?

He and his overhead projector would have placed so much pressure on the cap. Maitua, Harrison, Chase Blair amongst others were being paid at other teams while we still had to put together a top 25.

Among his replacements he signed were Norman, Peats, Mossop,, another 3 blokes who's names have popped up a lot lately.

Yet he does a runner , gives evidence against the club and benefits when we release 1 of our best forwards?

I'm sure the NRL has us by the balls on a number of things here, but im also sure it's been a shambolic investigation. Full of media leaks, agendas , conflicts of interest and flimsy investigative processes.
- RIDER > Girth Wind & Fire July 16, 2016 at 6:33am
  
  Also Nolans transcript would have to be of the same if not more importance given he was the recruiter.
  
  How do the 3 main players get off Scott free and the guys left holding the poisoned challis take the full rap?
  
  I'm starting to feel like a court case is needed not to absolve the Go5 because they played their part, but to make sure ALL involved get found and dealt with.
  
  It's the NRL (clubs, managers, coaches, players, admin) that need a clean up not just one particular club.
- Hugo > Girth Wind & Fire July 16, 2016 at 10:51am
  
  One would guess that the NRL probably promised those who gave evidence a guarantee that they wouldn't be prosecuted and that they would withhold some of thier evidence. This may be the only way that they agreed to cooperate because you obviously wouldn't willingly shoot yourself. Unfortunately for the NRL if an appellate tribunal forces release of these documents, this may expose these people, thus allowing the Police access to the whole thing. The so called whistle blowers may then recant a lot of their evidence or at least tell investigators that the NRL unfairly forced them to come to certain conclusions.
  It won't save the gang of 5 as undoubtedly they have done wrong but it will smash the NRL to pieces.
  Seward, Irvine and the rest will be very uncomfortable at the moment knowing their immunity is looking decidedly shaky and wondering if it was really worth it.
  To that end - the NRL in a conciliatory offer may announce a backdown - they really have much more to lose than the eels, but a backdown will be a last minute move - in the interests of negotiating and to fix up this mess or for the good of the game. No...it will be for the NRL only.
- Angry Eel > Girth Wind & Fire July 16, 2016 at 8:06pm
  
  I don't think the NRL can back down or negotiate with Parramatta anymore. They've come too far.
Gymnotiformes July 16, 2016 at 6:16am

They just need to read the telecrap.....they seem to have the transcripts.
Parraborn79 July 16, 2016 at 6:54am

I just can't understand how disgruntled ex employees statements have weight
- RIDER > Parraborn79 July 16, 2016 at 6:57am
  
  Because those ex employees told them exactly where to find the proof, how did they know where it was? They put it there.
  
  The forensic investigation was to help back their stories
- Prof. Daz > Parraborn79 July 16, 2016 at 9:18am
  
  It's a well known principle that if you want the real dirt, you ask former institutional insiders who are now not constrained by their institutional ties.