Western Force unprofessional as Graham goes to Reds
By Ewen W, 26 Apr 2012 Ewen W is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Brumbies, Michael Hooper, Reds, Richard Graham, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, Waratahs, Western Force
David Pocock (left) captain of the Western Force and coach Richard Graham. AAP Image/Paul Miller
Related coverage
- Western Force news
- ACT Brumbies news
- NSW Waratahs news
- Queensland Reds news
- Rugby Union news
- Super Rugby news
This past week saw two significant transfers take place in Australian rugby. Flanker Michael Hooper left the Brumbies for the Waratahs, and coach Richard Graham moved from the Force to the Reds.
While they are both good moves and significant boosts for their new clubs, what is different about the two situations is how their current clubs have treated the news of their defections.
In doing so they have highlighted the continuing tensions between the amateur and professional aspects of modern-day rugby.
Hooper’s loss will be a blow to the Brumbies. He’s an emerging talent and has shown to be a huge influence in games. The Brumbies loss to the Reds at Suncorp was partially a result of him not having more game time.
When it was announced that he would be leaving, the response by the Brumbies, in particular Jake White, was commendable.
Instead of freezing out Hooper, as had been done in the past, (as with Ashley-Cooper, for example) White insisted nothing would change as Hooper had already earned the right to play for the Brumbies.
This is how it should be done.
Once news hit that Richard Graham was moving to the Reds in 2013 to take up a head coaching role there was an outcry at the Force.
Despite assurances that a parting would be amicable, The Force ousted Graham the day after his announcement, via a player vote of no confidence.
This is despite Graham having a clause in his contract that would allow him to move at the season’s end. He is a good coach, that’s why the Reds went and got him. How he has been treated in the West is unprofessional and desperate.
These two transfers highlight the tension between amateurism and professionalism – between loyalty and money – in this modern era. The reality of rugby and all sporting codes is that players no longer play just for loyalty and accolades.
Since the mid-1990s rugby has being paying its players and the code has benefited enormously. The players can concentrate on playing.
If this standard is to continue, the teams and the public need to recognise that other factors aside from loyalty will now influence a player’s or coach’s decision about where they ply their trade.
Loyalty and mateship will still play a part, but a club can’t cry foul when a professional in their ranks decides to switch clubs. Sidelining a player or coach creates a bad precedent for the club.
The Brumbies knew this with Hooper but the Force did not with Graham.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- SPIRO: ‘Captain Magic’ Quade Cooper goes down with all flags flying (333)
- Deans confirms no spot for Quade Cooper (281)
- Want to beat the Lions? Pick Quade Cooper (229)
- SPIRO: All Blacks learning to live without Carter (218)
- Wallabies’ six worst-kept secrets confirmed (204)
- A lesson in Deans-speak (154)
- Inside the mind of Robbie Deans (150)
- British and Irish Lions teams post WW2 (part 3) (13)
- Fifteen reasons why the Lions will beat the Wallabies (26)
- Lions vs Wallabies: the teams I’d pick (17)
- My Waratahs vs Lions experience (2)
- Brumbies vs British and Irish Lions: Tour match live scores, blog (220)
- These British and Irish Lions are different (49)
- Robbie Deans can learn from those Randwick Greens (27)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Brumbies, Michael Hooper, Reds, Richard Graham, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, Waratahs, Western Force

April 26th 2012 @ 6:20am
kingplaymaker said | April 26th 2012 @ 6:20am | Report comment
A coach and a player leaving a team are not the same thing. The whole direction and vision of the club are his, and the working out of this takes place over a long time span. So a coach departing early has a radical and unexpected effect on the club, and is not the same as a player leaving.
In any case, AAC wasn’t blamed for leaving but from allegedly damaging the whole atmosphere of the Brumbies, being a rebel indeed. Hooper has done nothing of the sort which is why he given a blessing and let go.
April 26th 2012 @ 6:23am
Nipper said | April 26th 2012 @ 6:23am | Report comment
Great minds think alike, king!
April 26th 2012 @ 6:22am
Nipper said | April 26th 2012 @ 6:22am | Report comment
The comparison of the two situations isn’t meaningful. In Hooper’s situation, he is one of 15 players. He plays a role in the bigger picture. In Graham’s situation, he was the ostensible leader of the on-field organization. When there is no confidence in a leader (caused by questions about his commitment to the team), he has to go.
If you want to criticize something as unprofessional, criticize making the announcement smack in the middle of the season. He seems like a straight shooter and all, but I just don’t get the timing. This was always going to be disruptive to the team.
I think you’re barking up the wrong tree.
April 30th 2012 @ 4:09pm
Sharminator said | April 30th 2012 @ 4:09pm | Report comment
exactly … I dont thik there is anything unprofessional about the force terminating Graham mid season … when he has announced he is going to a direct rival.
A coach is involved in negotiations with players ,,, and RG would have a clear conflict of interest … especially for example over where Pocock is playing next year (when Pocock has said he is interested in the Reds).
There is also the fact that it was in response to the players that the WF had to sack graham. RG lost the support of the players, you cant have a coach who dosnt have the respect of the players so he had to go.
April 26th 2012 @ 8:46am
Brett McKay said | April 26th 2012 @ 8:46am | Report comment
Ewen, I reckon KPM and Nipper have nailed the obvious response here. There really is no comparing the two cases.
Realistically, both organisations handled each situation logically and the only way they could. The Brumbies need Hooper to keep hitting rucks head down, bum up, for the rest of the season, but the Force can’t be left in the situation where players and admin are second-guesing the motives of the Head Coach.
No-one should begrudge Graham making a decision for his professional career, and he’s just as entitled to change clubs as a player is. But as Nipper suggests, the timing of his departure really couldn’t have been much worse than it was..
April 26th 2012 @ 5:17pm
Wilson said | April 26th 2012 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
I agree – a player and a coach are completely different considerations.
The Force season is very close (if not already) gone. As such the remainder of the year will be on winning games firstly and then on rebuilding the team and squad for 2013. How would Ewen suggest the Force do that with the Reds coach for 2013 in their ranks? Short sighted article indeed. The players were sad to see him go but knew they didn’t have a choice. Especially as I heard a number of the top players had already been approached to go to the Reds next year.
I heard that the Reds had informed Graham that they were going to make their statement so Graham’s hand was forced. Either reveal the news now yourself or only be able to react to the Reds announcement. So the error is really the Reds management for the timing. It suited their purposes I suppose but what detrimental to Graham and the Force. Great respect shown to their new coach. I’m sure he was hurt by being asked to leave but I believe he would have done the same thing in their shoes. Not too dissimilar to Graham taking over early from John Mitchell towards the end of his coaching before he got his release for the Lions.
April 26th 2012 @ 8:56am
Shungmao said | April 26th 2012 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Seriously Graham was never going to stay long term anyway, the force is in a pro competition but is being run by a bunch of amateurs. How can a club play a whole season without a recognized 10? How can a club now have a 5 coach panel (including players) deciding training each week, “coaches coach – players play”. The list goes on…….
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
April 26th 2012 @ 9:00am
jeznez said | April 26th 2012 @ 9:00am | Report comment
I’ll add a further difference.
When Hooper is on the field doing his job he can only influence the result of that 80 minutes which only impacts this season.
Graham as coach is involved in player retention and signings, selection and development of players, strategy and training. These things have influence beyond this season and create a conflict of interest. Do the Force really want Graham sitting in on Pocock’s contract re-negotiation?
April 26th 2012 @ 9:45am
kingplaymaker said | April 26th 2012 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Nipper’s point highlights what’s truly astonishing: why, on God’s green earth did he announce his departure in week 8?
This effectively cannonballs the season for the Force, or it would have been expected to when he made the decision. Why couldn’t he wait, if not until the season finished, maybe four or six weeks before? Then the players although annoyed wouldn’t feel as if they had been dropped in the middle of things, and the destiny of the season would have been almost complete anyway. It would seem as if he thought that the situation of the coach and player is the same and so leaving in mid-season is ok.
April 27th 2012 @ 7:10am
formeropenside said | April 27th 2012 @ 7:10am | Report comment
Yeah, its like Queensland’s captain announcing he was off to the Force mid-season back in 2005.
Sharpe should immediatly have been dropped back to club rugby for that.
April 26th 2012 @ 9:51am
Pillock said | April 26th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
I think you are kidding yourselves if you think players and coaches are not looking at offers from other clubs on a consistent basis. The reality of the situation in the Graham case is that he has an option at the end of the year and Queensland want to sign him now, do they have to wait until the end of the year or does Graham sign up and they both keep their mouths shut?
You cannot say Graham did the wrong thing by signing and the Force did what they think is in their best interests by asking him to leave.
Same as the corporate world send them on gardening leave when they resign.
If anything I think the Graham and the Force have all acted in a professional manner, just that the press tries to play the emotional / loyalty, card to try to make it look as if there is a drama.
April 26th 2012 @ 10:24am
kingplaymaker said | April 26th 2012 @ 10:24am | Report comment
Pillock rugby is not in fact exactly like the corporate world, despite being professional. In fact there are many other professional activities that are not exactly like the corporate world: the military, education, politics, charities, where behaviour is not justifiable on purely professional grounds. What’s more it is not as if being in a professional environment means ethics can go hang. In rugby the coach is such a fundamental figure, and coaching an activity that by its very nature is effective over lengthy time spells, that to leave prematurely even if you can legally do so is not necessarily the right thing to do.
What’s more if he was leaving he should either have signed later or announced his signing later: if the Reds weren’t happy with waiting for the signing or the announcement he should have told them that’s the way it had to be because of his obligations to the Force, and if they didn’t accept that, then he should have stuck by his principles.
April 26th 2012 @ 1:20pm
Pillock said | April 26th 2012 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
I can’t understand your reasoning, do you mean he should tell the reds he will sign at the end of the year then stick at the Force pretending he is going to be there long term? How does that represent any principle.?
Your living in lala land if you think coaches and players are only going to negotiate with other clubs when they are out of contract with there current one.
April 26th 2012 @ 1:29pm
kingplaymaker said | April 26th 2012 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
He should give the Reds a verbal commitment: the end of the season and year are different too. He could have announced it late in the season or at the end. He could even have broached it with the Force board and seen whether they thought he should make an announcement if he did it. Better still, he should have told the Reds when negotiating that he could only sign near the end of the season rather than in the middle.
April 26th 2012 @ 2:01pm
Brett McKay said | April 26th 2012 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
that still wouldn’t preclude all the obvious conflicts of interest even after the verbal committment though. You couldn’t have Graham making longterm gameplan decisions or player contract decisions knowing that he won’t be there to carry them out..
April 26th 2012 @ 2:06pm
kingplaymaker said | April 26th 2012 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Brett that’s sometimes a problem but it would have been less of a problem that the way he did do it. It was ok for the Brumbies with White showing up in may, and in this case I’m sure Ewen Mckenzie will be largely in charge of talent recruitment for the Reds anyway. It could have been a case of not that good is better than plain bad.
April 26th 2012 @ 2:13pm
Brett McKay said | April 26th 2012 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
To be honest, I don’t know that it could’ve been handled much better than it was. My suspicion is that the announcement was forced to a degree, that the story might’ve been about the break somewhere..
April 26th 2012 @ 9:37pm
jeznez said | April 26th 2012 @ 9:37pm | Report comment
kpm, he had a 6 month get out clause in his contract. If he wanted to leave at the end of the year he had to give them six months notice – that dictated the timing (or at least so that is what I gleaned from some of the reports I read)
April 26th 2012 @ 10:12pm
stu said | April 26th 2012 @ 10:12pm | Report comment
KPM yes correct again.”he should have been more principled” and the reds should have performed better.Isnt grahams manager on the qru board?
April 26th 2012 @ 11:01am
Paradox said | April 26th 2012 @ 11:01am | Report comment
How was AAC “frozen out”? From memory, he kept a position in the startng XV despite being out of form.
April 26th 2012 @ 1:20pm
Jack said | April 26th 2012 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Agree with Paradox. AAC kept is starting position when his prime objective seemed to be avoiding getting his kit dirty. The Brumbies should have dropped him and the other defectors and played the kids last year. The home fans were gob smacked at the lack of effort in the last 3 or 4 games. Those who left last year clocked off about half way through the season.
April 26th 2012 @ 12:10pm
Nathan of Perth said | April 26th 2012 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Don’t think the Force had much choice but to move him on – remember that being based in Perth, this sort of mid-season change announcement is as unfamiliar as a Martian swinger’s party.
The General Public Was Not Amused.
April 26th 2012 @ 12:59pm
kingplaymaker said | April 26th 2012 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
Nathan what do you think the reaction of Force fans will be in terms of whether they’ll turn up?
It’s an easy thing to roll out but I wonder whether dramas like this at least come into the ‘any news is publicity’ in a relatively new franchise.
April 26th 2012 @ 2:49pm
sittingbison said | April 26th 2012 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
I think the sea of blue will be at high tide KPM. They have not been happy with RG before during or after, they have often been perplexed at an apparent lack of direction by the board, but they have ALWAYS supported the players through good times and bad. It should never have been left in the players hands, but they made the correct decision, and are to be applauded.
They could get smashed by the Stormers after this incredibly distracting fiasco,, but make no mistake they have never been easy beats and I wouldnt be surprised at the upset of the season.
One thing not in their favour is the injury list, which is always mentioned about other teams, but rarely for the force:
Here’s our casualty ward.
Turner season
Fairbanks season
Rapana season
Stanley
Tupou
Wara
Cowan
Wykes season
Longbottom season
Harvey
Stannard
Shepherd season
Maafu season
Whittaker season
Ripia life
That’s starting, second and replacement 10, both starting centers and both backups, starting 15, both starting props and bench,, starting lock, starting wing, bench hooker and bench 9. There will be I think ONE available player not selected this week.
April 26th 2012 @ 5:26pm
Wilson said | April 26th 2012 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
About time someone made a mention of the Force injury list. So much seems to be made of other teams (especially the Reds injury list), but the Force too are struggling to get 22 for game day. Thanks Sittingbison
April 26th 2012 @ 9:40pm
jeznez said | April 26th 2012 @ 9:40pm | Report comment
when did your props get wiped out – must have been in the last two weeks? That is hard luck.
April 26th 2012 @ 9:59pm
sittingbison said | April 26th 2012 @ 9:59pm | Report comment
All three during Tahrds, cowan and Maafus are named this week but have had knee surgery, longbottom out for season after surgery for bulging disc.
I have had major knee surgery, but also arthroscope, and I think their selections are desperate.