'Sucked in beautifully': Neale, Lions goaded into two off-ball frees, then tries to win one himself
Things heating up in Canberra!
Either Phil Scully’s recruitment role at Greater Western Sydney is legitimate and outside the salary cap, or it’s part of his son Tom’s playing contract and sits inside the salary cap. That’s the plain and simple truth. Yet somehow the whole issue has become murky.
AFL salary cap investigations officer Ken Wood said: “Really what has happened is that the club and the AFL have agreed that for the avoidance of any doubt it should go in the cap. I guess unfortunately what that’s done is create this perception that there’s something about it that’s not bona fide.”
Indeed it has. If there’s nothing to hide, why put Scully Snr’s salary in the cap?
GWS CEO Dave Matthews added on SEN Radio earlier this week: “Can you be more transparent than actually putting something in the cap that you may not even have needed to?”
The problem is it’s one way or the other. If the AFL or GWS can’t explain that, then there’s always going to be a perception something isn’t right.
Of course, this wasn’t a big deal until GWS realised Phil Scully’s reported $680,000 six-year deal would become an issue in a few years time when their young assets begin to demand better contracts. There will be salary cap pressure and they’ll end up losing good players.
Now there’s some talk GWS want his contract taken off the salary cap, with Matthews hinting at it and coach Kevin Sheedy forthrightly stating it.
Sheedy said this week: “I think there’s been an over-reaction. I think we’ve got the right to pick any person that we want to recruit for us. It could be Andrew Demetriou’s cousin, it doesn’t matter, it’s irrelevant.”
Of course, the question remains over the legitimacy of Scully Snr’s role at GWS. That decision itself goes back to Wood.
But Scully Snr’s previous employer, the Sydney Swans, backed him as a recruiter on Wednesday.
Swans manager of player personnel Kinnear Beatson said: “I’ve always found him to have a good eye for it (recruiting). If we had the budget for a full-time position, I would have no hesitation in approaching Phil.”
It’s worth noting, Scully Snr held a part-time role with the Swans where he was paid $10,000 per year. GWS’s contract is quite the increase, even if it is a full-time role. Some may say that’s evidence of an inducement.
The reality is, from afar, that’s hard to assess. But surely someone can make a decision one way or the other. That’s the best way to eradicate doubt; make a decision.
Either it’s legitimate or it’s not.