Should the wider public be aware of exactly how much money an athlete earns? It’s an interesting question, and not an easy one to answer.
The topic is somewhat relevant at present due to Parramatta Eels halfback Chris Sandow.
The Eels prized recruit has struggled for form with his new team, after Parramatta lured him away from the South Sydney Rabbitohs on a contract worth a reputed $550k a year.
Due to his salary and performances in 2012, many journalists and fans have labelled Sandow the “bust of the year”. Such has been the perception of him not living up to his contract that last week he was even dropped to Parramatta’s feeder club, Wentworthville.
Personally, I feel the dropping was an over-reaction by Eels coach Stephen Kearney.
There is no doubt that Sandow has yet to replicate the form he showed last year with the Bunnies, but I’m not sure he deserved the embarrassment of being dropped from first grade.
It’s unlikely Sandow would be under the same level of scrutiny from the coach, his teammates, the media and fans if it wasn’t for the massive contract he signed.
The same is true for the Wests Tigers big off-season signing Adam Blair, who has also had the ‘bust’ word associated with him.
The criticism of Blair has been somewhat over the top. He certainly hasn’t been in outstanding form, but he’s been far from terrible.
The issue is, while he hasn’t been outright dreadful he certainly hasn’t been worth the estimated $500k a year contract he signed.
I’m sure the assessment of Blair’s play would be more balanced and contain less vitriol if people weren’t aware of the money he was earning. I suspect if he was on a ‘mere’ $150k, the comments would be less about how he’s been awful and a dud, and slightly more positive.
I think we’d we’d hear more constructive phrases like “he’s yet to earn his straps”, “he’s taking his time to adjust to his new team” or “he’s been solid rather than spectacular”.
This discussion isn’t confined to rugby league – plenty of athletes are judged harshly due to the size of their salaries. With big money comes big expectations. And rightfully so.
Clubs don’t fork out big contracts in the hope that players will perform – the expectation is that players will earn their money.
In pure business terms, clubs want to see a return on their investment.
Yet even that business analogy brings us back to the original question.
Few other professions have their salaries so transparent. Most individuals would be mortified if their income was public knowledge.
For the most part, the right of privacy is honoured. Why should athletes be any different?
As an example, why should the amount of money Sandow and Blair earn, respectively, be made public knowledge?
Well, the reverse side of this equation is that there is actually a need for the information to be shared.
Coaches deserve to know how much of their salary cap or club budget is being spent. After all, their jobs are essentially in the hands of their players.
They’d definitely want a say in where the finances are being assigned. They therefore should know what players are being paid.
Meanwhile, fans are the lifeblood of most professional sporting teams. Without them, the athletes wouldn’t be in the position they are.
Fans, directly or indirectly, are the reason the players get paid. So they quite rightfully expect to know how their club is spending its money.
More specifically, they deserve to know how much the club’s players are earning.
As a by-product of those two audiences, teammates and the media will also be made aware of player salaries. Suddenly absolutely everyone knows everyone’s salaries.
An advertising agency in London had a novel approach to employee salaries. When new employees were interviewed, they were able to negotiate any salary (within reason) that they wanted.
The only caveat was that every single employee’s salary was posted in reception for the entire business to see.
As I mentioned before, with a large salary comes large expectations, and those employees that asked for a hefty salary suddenly found themselves needing to justify it to all their colleagues.
Long and hard hours were required to prevent the inevitable chat of so-and-so not earning their dollars.
In that instance, the transparency of salaries was used to motivate staff.
This is essentially the same model that exists with athletes – the big salary is both a reward and the motivation to perform better.
Yet players don’t intentionally under-perform. A number of factors normally contribute to a player not playing well.
Certainly the pressure of living up to their salary doesn’t help. So perhaps they might perform better if no one knew what they were earning?
Then again, there is a sentiment that says you should earn your dough and that you shouldn’t have signed a big contract if you were unable to handle everything that comes along with it.
So I ask the questions to Roarers; should athletes’ salaries be public knowledge?
Beardan
Roar Guru
This is easy to answer. No, of course not. Its none of our business.
all7days
Roar Guru
I don't think they should be public as with most jobs around the world, If it's for policing reasons then the people doing the policing should have access. Nobody else needed.
Adam
Guest
I just think more can be gained by having full transparency. It will help police the salary cap, it will probably make CEO's more responsible with spending, and it will prevent the media from 'guessing' but making it sound like fact. Yes there are negatives, but they're outweighed by the positives. The media speculates, and speculates on the 'up' side. Better to have the truth out there I reckon.
all7days
Roar Guru
So Salaries should be transparent because the media like to guess?
Damo
Guest
Yes
Damo
Guest
And what's wrong with doing it to police the cap? That's a great idea.
Adam
Guest
I think they should be. It's got nothing to do with fans 'deserving' anything. The fact is that player salaries are going to be discussed in the media anyway, no matter what, so you might as well have the truth out there. If you're playing bad the scrutiny comes no matter what you're pulling in. If you can't handle the pressure of living up to your contract you don't deserve the money anyway. Simple.
Michael
Guest
No
Australian Rules
Guest
Very true. Though I suppose if we all knew what they were on, the mystery and scuttlebutt about player performance (a la Sandow) might be LESS of an issue. Ultimately, the players still have a right to contractual confidentiality, as we all do. I think if a decision was made to publish them, it should be for policing the salary cap, not just for the sake of our own inane curiousity.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
I don't think it's too much of a stretch, and I totally see your point. The emotional attachment is what makes the situation unique and why people feel they have a right to know.
Australian Rules
Guest
I think the obligation privately-owned clubs have to fans is to perform, entertain and engage with them where possible. Fans turn up to games for enterainment. They may have an emotional attachment to a particular club and cheer for them every weekend, but that doesn't extend into them having a right to know how a club is spending its money. Members are arguably different on that front because they pay lump sums at the start of the year, and other rights then attach to that status. It's almost like (and I stress almost) someone going to the ballet each week and demanding that the theatre company tell them how much they're paying the dancers. It's just that in Australia we're more passionate about sport than ballet.
PLANKO
Guest
Ryan would not mind seeing them either but unlike the dogs and the dragons the Manly League's is not the cash cow once it once was . The Manly League's club actually sold it's shareholding in the team recently. People say it is strange that Manly lost 1 million last year with no grant at all from the leagues club. Whereas year in year out the Bulldogs and St George get 4 to 5 million from the leagues club. Effectively what I am saying is Manly can't afford to break the cap. I really believe some clubs big note what they pay and say they are near the cap but actually are not. Someone in Manly decided I think to save money on the coach eg Let Hasler go replace with Toovey who would be a lot cheaper so they actually spend the cap ! I don't think Manly or Cronulla has actually spent the cap in YEARS !
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
True AR, they have no legal right to know what players are earning. But perhaps there is an obligation to let your fans (who are the key to gate takings, merchandise, sponsorship, memberships, ratings, etc) know how you're spending your cash.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
HAHA, yes PLANKO, I vaguely remember interest in some Kiwi half. . . Speaking of, I'd love to have a look at Manly's books.
Australian Rules
Guest
Public companies are requried to disclose executive salaries and board remuneration because they are PUBLIC companies. Investment in stock that is managed/governed by the executive and the board is partially protected by these legal disclosure requirements. However, the players don't represent the executive or the board...they represent the actual investments that the club is making to make the business 'profitable'. If BHP was making a $10M offer to buy an asset offshore, this would be disclosed at shareholder meetings and in the annual report. The public company example is the equivalent of member-owned clubs. So there MAY be an argument to that if someone pays $200 for his/her membership, they have a right to know how the club is spending that money (the difference of course, is that club membership is not an 'investment', it is payment for a bundle of rights that attach to a particular club...eg ticketing, merchandise, information etc). The key benefit of membership, of course, is that if the member is not satisfied with how the club is being run, he/she can vote at the members meeting and sack the board. Privately-owned clubs are different. There is no investor protection at play, nor is there a broader public interest to reveal salaries of assets (players). Simply put, the public have absolutely no right to know what players are paid in the private-ownership model.
A1
Guest
Then just release the facts, so there is no doubt. As Brett said, it might police the salary cap.
Matt F
Roar Guru
True Ryan. I was feeling very, very, very charitable when I called Keating mediocre! PLANKO - I thought Gary Freeman retired quite a while ago ;)
Matt F
Roar Guru
You'll never be able to stop the media producing rumoured or "ballpark" figures. It's a large part of the general media coverage now. I can see and agree with the point about players privacy etc but when there's so much interest around these issues, you'll never be able to keep it quiet. I think we have to accept it as part of the game. We all just need to remember that the fee that's reported by the media isn't necessarily the true figure.
PLANKO
Guest
There was Kiwi guy I cannot remember his name F something . Some other team signed him
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
I think you're being generous to Keating in calling him mediocre. He was dreadful. Wright was pretty good earlier in the year, but he's been quiet the last 3 or 4 matches. I think the Dogs are one more top notch player, preferably a 'creator', from being a consistent top 4 side.