Monthly Archives: March 2015

Rugby League and player contracts: community standards v player rights again!

March 7, 2015 By in Shumpty Speaks Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

In case you missed it, Daly Cherry-Evans of the Manly Sea Eagles announced yesterday evening after his team’s round one loss to the Parramatta Eels that he has signed a lengthy contract to play with the Gold Coast Titans in 2016.  

That’s right: the best player on a team in the NRL who is contracted to play for them for the whole of 2015 has already signed a contract to play in 2016 and beyond with a direct competitor.  

I have long been an opponent of the contracting system in the NRL.  It is just, for want of a better term, stupid to grant players an absolute right to negotiate a contract any time they want.  It is not in the interests of the code or the club for which the player is currently contracted too. 

What I struggle with most here is the notion that a player (Cherry-Evans is but one) will spend the whole season playing for another team whilst a direct oppontent awaits his services in 12 months time.  When I think about the business I am in and what would happen in the same scenario I am just gobsmacked.  I am a director of a large accounting firm.  If I was to resign on Monday to go and do exactly the same job with a direct competitor I know that my employer and most like mine would simply pay out my notice period and show me the door.  The other option would be that I am given no work to do and left to look out a window for my notice period. 

There is no neferious reason for this, rather simply why would my employer keep me on the tools when I am going to a direct competitor at some point in time in the near future? 

This is the same scenario as with any rugby league player who signs a contract like Cherry-Evans has isn’t it? When Anthony Milford did the same thing to the Canberra Raiders last year I suggested that he should either be released immediately from his contract OR sent back to the lower grades to mark out his time.  

I am at a loss to understand, yet again, why a rugby league player has any heightened rights than a normal punter in the street when it comes employment conditions?  Is there anyone out there in the community who has signed a contract with a competitor in the same industry and the same market to commence in 12 months time and kept their job?  Of course there isn’t because in the “real” world that notion is just ridiculous! 

At the moment players seem to have the NRL and clubs over a barrel when it comes to negotiating contracts.  I say kudos to them for having good negotiators and lawyers.  Equally, I am left to wonder again when some form of status quo between the rights of the player and the interests of the code will be reached.  If such a status quo is not reached fans are going to (continue to in my view) vote with their wallets and stop coming to games. 

Sports Fan Poll: Player Behaviour and Punishment

March 6, 2015 By in Shumpty Speaks Tags: , , , Leave a comment

Yesterday, Queensland Reds player Karmichael Hunt pleaded guilty to the possession an illegal drug and was punished both under the criminal justice system and by the Queensland Reds.  The punishment received by Hunt from the Reds has been widely debated.  Interestingly, the views of among my circle of family and friends are completely divergent from those of people that I follow on social media.  On the one hand there is a feeling that the punishment from the Reds is not on all fours with community standards whilst on the other there is a feeling that punishment is about right, if not a little harsh.

I have no interest in rehashing that debate here.  Regular readers will know my views.

What I am interested in discussing though is this quote from Queensland Reds CEO (in his letter to Reds Members sent by email):

“In determining our course of action, you have my assurance that we will always regard, as our primary concern, the long-term interests of the game, our Members, fans, partners and stakeholders.  However, the welfare of our players is paramount.” (emphasis added)

The statement is internally self defeating in the sense that it commences with a declaration of primacy that it then reverses in the very next sentence.  Whilst I am in violent agreement that player welfare is an important aspect of the management of players by any sport club, I struggle with the notion that the interests of player welfare trump that which is in the best interests of the sporting code or those who fund the game through their membership, payment for tickets and sponsorship.

I am left to ponder:

  1.  Whether the manner in which the Queensland Reds have dealt with Karmichael Hunt represents a new paradigm for dealing with player behaviour or whether the interests of code, the club, the members, the fans and the sponsors have always been secondary and I have just missed it in the punishment phases of the other scandals that have befouled sport in this country.
  2. How long will it be before a player gets into trouble again but is not punished in a fashion that has his (or her) welfare as the paramount focus and appeals his punishment.  Will the Carmichael “doctrine” become an appealable (litigious) point for a player at some point in the future?

I am, of course, aware that often in these matters I do not possess the popular view point so I thought I would open this question up to the readers for a poll the results of which I will publish in a week’s time on this blog.

The poll question is this:

I look forward to seeing how the results of this poll come out in a week’s time.