Discord 2010: Edition 11

Wednesday 10th March 2010

NRL chief executive David Gallop says criticism is unfair of the League's new system for handling off-field misbehaviour.

In Wednesday's Rugby League Week, Canberra CEO Don Furner and Cronulla's Richard Fisk each expressed reservations about a committee set up in December to run the rule over how clubs discipline wayward stars.  The committee, comprising NRL chief operating officer Graham Annesley and two ex-players, has its own investigator and reports back to Gallop.

But Furner reckon clubs could be tempted to wash their hands of discipline in future and just leave it to the new body. His Raiders will face Todd Carney this year while Fisk's Sharks will play against Brett Seymour and Greg Bird - players they sacked for poor discipline.
Certainly, it would seem that there is no great incentive anymore for a club to come down hard on a player. A player in trouble at club ‘A' could can simply point to the actions of club ‘B' and say ‘what they did was OK by the League so why should you be more harsh?'

In other words, the new committee will set up a set of precedents which we perhaps don't need.

But Gallop argues that those precedents were there already because the NRL always reserved the right to intervene.
"This just means I am not making decisions on my own without taking advice," he told Discord.
That's fair enough. The steps the League is taking right now to stamp out bad behaviour are laudable and logical.  But the current set up is half of one thing - club-based enforcement - and half of another - central enforcement. One gets the impression it is still evolving and has a long way to go.

.

SHOULD Sonny Bill Williams be allowed to return to the NRL? 

It's a very nice tabloid debating point, encompassing as it does emotion, loyalty and a bit of financial envy.
SBW's supporters point out that he has already paid a pretty penny to buy out his Bulldogs contract and they question the Belmore club for lining up for another payout from a potential suitor.
Sonny's detractors, of which there are many, point out that if players can simply walk out on their current clubs, hand over a wad of cash, and then join a rival ... well, more would be doing it.
For what it's worth, Discord believes the Dogs are well within their rights to prevent Sonny Bill Williams from playing against them until his contract expires.
And if someone wants to dissuade them from that view by handing over a fortune, that is the business of that party.

.

Thanks to reader Edmond Jorda of Perpignan (any relation to Jack?), who came up with an interesting idea for the World Club Challenge.
He said a four-team tournament should involve a representative each from New Zealand and France, opening up those countries for sponsorship and television rights income.
That's a good idea - except that it would be too easy to have a WCC final involving two teams which finishes near-to-last in their respective leagues.
But what if we used those teams as the FIFTH and SIXTH entrants in Gary Hetherington's original model?
The draw could look like this: Friday: Catalans v NZ Warriors in Perpignan. Warriors win, Catalans elminated. Saturday: Warrington v Melbourne at Bolton. Warrington wins. Sunday: Leeds v St George Illawarra at Elland Road. Leeds win.
Leeds progress to the World Club Challenge final at Elland Road. Warrington, because they did not win the Super League, have to play another qualifier - against the Warriors - to get through.

If both champions win their preliminary games, the Warriors would play the lowest-margin loser in the curtain-raiser for a cash prize and trophy.

What do you think? It gets the media of four countries involved.

stevemascord@rugbyleague.com