Can anyone help me to analyze the case study in the following attachment and then answer the three following questions in paragraphs? Thanks.

Accounting for Business Decisions B - Accounting ethics tutorial NRL salary cap case study - independence and crisis management Setting the scene At the outset of the 2010 National Rugby League (NRL) season, the Melbourne Storm was held up as one of the most professional and successful clubs in the history of rugby league. Having been introduced as a team into a century old NRL competition approximately 14 years ago, in a state (Victoria) not traditionally known for its rugby league prowess, the club had amassed multiple premierships and other achievements (competition winners). In the four seasons to 2010, the Storm had collected four consecutive Grand Final appearances, three minor premierships (first placed in the regular season) and two premierships. It boasted a playing roster replete with international stars and a management team considered to be one of the most professional in Australian sport. However, on 22 April 2010, this legacy was emphatically and irrevocably altered. Story broke of the Melbourne Storm being implicated in extensive salary cap cheating, giving it a seriously unfair advantage in the NRL competition. The ensuing crisis, involving arguably the biggest fraud in Australian sport history, significantly threatened the viability of the Storm and the legitimacy of the NRL. It also implicated some of Australia's best-known sporting heroes in wrongdoing, and conjured salacious allegations of unethical and deceitful conduct. A summary of key players in the Storm salary cap are presented in Appendix C. More generally, for a description of the sport of rugby league, see Appendix B. Strategic Management Accounting and Crisis Management As markets become more competitive and transparent, companies are expected to respond to strategic threats more so than in the past. Additionally, innovation has accelerated as organisations attempt to innovate more intensely in the face of increasingly rapid product and service duplication by competitors (Richardson, 1996). These possibilities have caused companies to reflect on the nature of their strategic risks, and their manner of controlling them. Controls guide manager and employee behaviours, ensuring managers act in ways considered desirable for achieving firm objectives. As a subset of this function, organisations impose control systems to guard against the eventuation of strategic risks. When strategic risks relate to innovation concerns that drive strategic renewal, the Levers of Control (Simons, 1995) provides an outline of how senior managers might impose control practices to inspire beliefs, identify boundaries, diagnostically evaluate performance and interactively liaise with staff to ensure competitive advantage is maintained. This represents the management of a strategic risk (the loss of competitive advantage). From a more operational standpoint, organisations might implement the Merchant and Van der Stede (2007) People, Action and Results control framework, which clarifies how controls can be used to influence how employees might be selected, resourced and culturally aligned to an organization (people controls), be provided direction, guidance and physical access to help perform their work functions and finally, incentivised and rewarded appropriately for their part in achieving firm objectives (results controls). These three control types might be deployed to address employee lack of direction, lack of motivation or personnel limitations. Last updated: 13/05/13 As effective as these controls might be in performing their function, there will be times where unforeseen risks eventuate, or foreseen risks occur irrespective of the controls put in place to minimize their occurrence. The former might happen if eventualities happen as a result of uncontrollable events, such as a new competitor entering a local market. The latter can result from employees acting fraudulently, averting the very controls put in place to ensure their behavioural adherence. These moments where the risk of occurrence transforms into actual occurrence presents a crisis to organisations. Organisation crisis therefore often results despite the best intentions of the organization to ensure its aversion. Indeed, there is a wide range of crises that might affect an organization, and subsequently require managing . Organisation crises are unknown, ambiguous situations where uncertainty exists as to the cause or effect of the crisis (Dutton, 1986). Pearson and Clair (1998) broadly define an organizational crisis as \"... a low probability, high impact event that threatens the viability of the organization and is characterized by the ambiguity of cause , effect and means of resolution, as well as by a belief that decisions must be made swiftly.\" p.60. Shrivastava (1993) argues that 4c's must be considered, when managing crisis. They are \"causes\Question 1: Give two examples of when legal accounting conduct might be unethical - describe how you might manage this in your organisation, if your employees were found engaging in such conduct. Please explain with reference to the AESB standard. Question 2: Discuss the possible ethical issues that might have arisen from the structural connectedness between the News Limited and NRL competition prior to 9th February 2012. Applying the APESB, what ethical principles and threats might be relevant here? Question 3: How does the salary cap audit ensure the maintenance of ethical behaviour by clubs in relation to player salary payments