The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Battle between free will and total control in NRL

Roar Guru
24th July, 2011
33
1770 Reads

Sometimes the CEO of an NRL club must feel like the father of several teenagers. Each night he goes to bed hoping that all of his players are tucked up in bed after a warm glass of milk and a couple of cookies.

It would be easier for a CEO to rest if he could be guaranteed that every one of his employees was tucked up in bed dreaming of scoring the match winning try in a grand final, instead of being out on the town.

Like a father, the early morning ring of a CEO’s mobile phone must send chills down his spine.

What did he miss? What happened after dark? Which one of his boys is on the other end of the line?

Yesterday, Eels CEO Paul Osborne accompanied his star playmaker Jarryd Hayne to Parramatta police station.

The 23-year-old had been celebrating a friends birthday at the Beach Haus nightclub in Kings Cross when he allegedly retaliated to an assault, reportedly a headbutt.

A 25-year-old man sustained a cut above his eye and was taken to St Vincent’s Hospital, but left before receiving treatment.

The club says Hayne has done nothing wrong and the 25-year-old also claims he’s not to blame.

Advertisement

Hayne and Kings Cross have history.

In March 2008, he narrowly escaped injury when a man fired shots from the back of a taxi at around 4am. Those bullets could’ve ended his career and his life.

The first reaction of people I spoke to last night was why do footballers continue to venture into the area?

In 2008, the Roosters, Manly and Cronulla all barred their players from going to the party strip.

Willie Mason, part of the Roosters squad at the time, said it was just common sense.

Current Roosters CEO Steve Noyce, in charge of the Wests Tigers at the time, took a different view.

He wasn’t in favour of black listing Kings Cross as it was up to his players to deal with the difficulties that society can throw up.

Advertisement

So do players need to live and die by their own choices?

Or should those choices be made for them with the consequences spelled out?

Would your employer make it a condition of your contract that you couldn’t visit a certain area of the city?

How would you respond if they did?

If you would think it’s unreasonable should it be any different for football players just because they have a profile?

There’s a lot to be said for free will and an individual being responsible for where they are at any given time, but sometimes it sure can make life difficult.

close