The Australian
A leading academic in sports law has warned the only thing Parramatta will walk away with is a hefty bill if it carries out a threat to take the NRL to the NSW Supreme Court to avoid being docked four competition points before the start of the season.
The Eels have until February 29 to adopt several initiatives that were outlined by the NRL stemming from a review into their corporate governance that was prompted after the club was found guilty of breaching the salary cap last season.
The bone of contention between the warring parties is Parramatta’s refusal to adopt a recommendation from global accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers that they restructure the way they elect their board to promote more stability.
As it stands, the Eels hold board elections every two years which has led to instability around the club, whereas PwC has recommended that elections be held every year but only a third of the directors need to stand.
Eels chairman Steve Sharp has threatened to take the case to the NSW Supreme Court over the situation but David Thorpe, a lecturer in sports law at Sydney’s University of Technology, said yesterday that would be an uphill battle for the club.
“The NRL has the contractual authority under the licensing agreement with the various clubs to penalise breaches of the ‘NRL Rules’, including infringements of the salary cap and the requirement of sound internal governance of the football club,’’ Thorpe said. “Under these rules, clubs may be docked points for failure to comply.
“The clubs, including Parramatta, agree when they take up the offer of a licence to grant to the NRL disciplinary authority, and provided it is exercised fairly and with sufficient notice to comply with any reasonable conditions imposed by the NRL, legal action before the NSW Supreme Court is likely to come to nothing, other than unnecessary expense. ’’
Hooker Nathan Peats said the prospect of starting the season on minus four competition points hadn’t been an issue among the playing group.
“To be honest — it’s a weird thing because you would think we would be — but we haven’t even spoken about it,” Peats said.
“We haven’t had a meeting about it. I’ll let the club deal with it and worry about getting ready for round one.
“At the moment it is a race to get into the 17.
“Even for me, I haven’t even thought about it once. You might have a conversation about it but it doesn’t change your whole day.
“It’s play on. It’s not ideal — no team would like that. But like I said it is out of our control so there is no point dwelling on it.
“No matter whether it happens or not, we still have to perform, try to win a game and try to get into the squad.”
Replies
I don't think (hope) the club would be stupid enough to carry out the legal threats.
Boulous's recent media outing pretty much settles down hostilities
- suggests the club IS 'making constitutional changes' (but not confirming specifics), &
- 'WORKING WITH the NRL'
This is a SHARP turnaround to Sharp's legal threats a few days previously.
- WILL NOT be forced into making constitutional changes
- THREATENING legal action if start on -4, &
- HOPES" the NRL understands (not much proactive 'working with' the NRL here, take it or leave it approach )
Someone is coming to their senses behind the scenes.
I agree.
On a side note, how much better does the club come off, when our CEO is the spokesperson.
If the club mandates that all comment from media comes out of the mouth of CEO, I think it would make an immediate impact in terms of the club's professionalism and being able to execute to a communications strategy.
I still remember Sharpy's comment when he first became Chairman that he thought a board should be invisible. We'd be much the better for it, if we'd have actually lived by that philosophy rather than it just being rhetoric.
----------------
The Boulos quotes which aren't in the snipper above are below.
Parramatta chief executive John Boulos insisted the club was working with the NRL and would do everything in its power to ensure it didn’t suffer a four-point penalty.
“We’re both working in pretty good faith and I have no doubt we will do everything in our power to put the processes and policies in place that meet the requirements of the governance review,” Boulos said.
Asked whether he was confident the club wouldn’t be penalised premiership points, he said: “I hope it doesn’t. We’re working very hard. We have been working hard since June. As a club it is very important to us.
“We acknowledge that we need to ensure the requirements of the governance review are met. We’re looking to be the best club we can in everything we do, both on and off the field.”
Hopefully this is a sign of things to come.
Who decided Sharp should be the spokesperson, anyway ? I can't understand that decision. It made us look like a small-time family owned corner shop out of its depth against big business & the big wide world (with some increasingly paranoid xeno-phobic tendencies , irrational resistance to change & evolution ).
Anyway, I'd say it was deliberate Sharp was pulled off. Not sure if Boulos chose a better media consultant or just has more nous or decided 'Oh no we're in trouble here, we're getting off the rails 'I need to take the reins, here' or make it seem that way, at least.
Lol, Sharp said that ? How ironic. I like Sharp. He's a likeable guy & a Parra person, through & through but he should not be a spokesperson. Not under any circumstances. Maybe not completely 'invisible' but definitely inaudible. Lol.
PS: Side note
We might need to put aside Snake's dislike of Boulos's tailoring & hair stylism. Personally, I didn't like Boulos's diagonally stripped tie, preferring darker hues with simpler lines & designs as it conveys greater authority & style imo.
The comment regarding the invisible board is VERY accurate Phil.
I don't like Sharp continually in the media. I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind it but he has certainly shown himself to be very media unsavvy (no slight on him or his ability to be CEO) and I get the feeling he is easily baited/mislead into giving what could be construed as sensationalistic quotes (got knows what led him to discussing legal action).
I remember when Ovo used to address the media on club issues . . . . . . actually, no I don't, not ever. Except of course for the occasional fluff/feel good piece (and only very occasionally).
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next