Todd Carney has had a disrupted career up until now, having been sacked by two previous NRL clubs due to off-field indiscretions.
Now, after an unsavoury photo of Carney went viral on twitter, the Cronulla Sharks have sacked their superstar five-eighth, all but ending the career of the infamous bad boy from Goulburn.
In this instance, there is another culprit – the so called ‘mate’ who has left Todd out to hang by taking the photo and posting it on social media.
>> PRICHARD: What next for Carney?
>> Was Carney’s punishment too harsh?
>> How do you solve the Carney problem?
>> Andrew Johns, Todd Carney and the modern day footballer
Clearly Todd isn’t influenced by the best group of people, but the 28-year-old just doesn’t seem to learn from his past mistakes. Unfortunately for Carney, he will be remembered first and foremost as an imbecile and as a side note, an amazingly gifted rugby league player.
The other talking point in all of this is the quick decision from the Cronulla Sharks to terminate their star playmaker’s five-year contract mid-way through the first year. This isn’t the first time the Sharks have acted strongly against such acts and although it’s the right decision, what benefit do the Sharks gain from it?
Players the Sharks have sacked previously have gone on to be successful at other clubs. Is there really a point for the Sharks to take a hard stance when other clubs don’t?
Greg Bird had his contract torn up in 2008 only to return to the NRL to play for the Titans. The Sharks also terminated the contract of their halfback Brett Seymour in 2009 only for him to join a rival club afterwards.
Right now the Sydney Roosters are in talks with the game’s administrators to register a contract for Blake Ferguson, who has just been found guilty of indecent assault.
This moral stance taken by Cronulla isn’t helping the club on the field nor off it as they struggle to attract a major sponsor. The year the Sharks have suffered this season is probably the worst I’ve seen any club go through – ASADA, the suspension of their coach Shane Flanagan, the appointment of an interim coach who doesn’t want the job, and the horrific injury toll they’ve endured has seen the club struggle throughout 2014.
The decision to sack their most naturally gifted player may be the final nail.
The Sharks’ loyal supporters have stayed true, as they have every time the club has faced adversity, but even they will struggle if this further affects the on-field performances.
It’s debatable whether this decision by the Sharks was right or wrong. As far as integrity goes, the Sharks have made the right call, however in a time where all clubs are trying to gain whatever advantage they can, being the good guy isn’t exactly paying off.
steveng
Guest
Exactly right Casper, the Sharks should have had a full time physiologist (which they should really have at the club after what has happened at the Cronulla club in recent years), they knew what troubles they were getting when they employed Carney, if they were a professional club then they would have treated Carney (who btw is their best player bar none) with kid gloves (because Carney is after all a kid after all that has never grown up) and nurtured him and cured his alcoholism and really should have made him an important part of their squad and given him some serious responsibilities. But NO, the Sharks just took the easy way out or they probably had too many problems at the club with ASADA and coaching that they thought that Carneys problems will just heal its self, and the rest is history. If I was a CEO of another club that is willing to give Carney another chance that is what I would be doing and not just employ him and feed him to the media mad rage that he will be under and just forget and think that he can sort his problems out. Carney is a very talented player that can be on the verge of being one of the greats of this game but that is only if he will be employed and taken over by a club that is prepared to put in the ground work and perhaps Carney will be well advised to change his manager too who has all the responsibility of his client being a fit, willing and able worker. Simple as that. The NRL is still being run by armatures, selfish money hungry mongrels, nothing has changed.
The Barry
Guest
Your point only stands if it's fact that only three clubs have ever sacked players for disciplinary reasons which is clearly not true. The broncos axed Seymour - you must remember that the sharks picked him up as a reject on the cheap. They also let costigan go. The bulldogs axed reni maitua in his first spell at the club. The sharks picked him up as well. Penrith sacked arona. Actually most clubs have sacked arona at some stage. I'm pretty sure The sharks picked him up as well. These are examples off the top of my head. I'm sure all clubs could provide a list of players that have been axed for disciplinary reasons. You're argument that the sharks are somehow being dudded because they are the only club disciplining players is full of holes. The sharks are actually one of the worst offenders at picking up players who have been sacked at other clubs. Carney, Seymour, arona, maitua...
The Barry
Guest
Agreed. On field performance is the ultimate goal but clearly not the only consideration otherwise carney, Dugan, ferguson,etc would never get sacked.
Renegade
Roar Guru
But isn't how they perform on the field the ultimate goal of the club as an NRL franchise? Sure i appreciate there are many other things the club must do for the game but the KPI for on-field performance is what people pay to see and really everyone associated to the game truly measures.
The Barry
Roar Guru
The clubs are making their decisions based on factors that include off field influence in terms of culture, sponsors, reputation, etc. You're judging the outcome solely on what happens on the field. We'll never know but if the Roosters had kept Carney it may have cost them sponsorships, Jake Friends career and the big name signings they made before the 2013 season. They may have spent a lot longer 'in the wilderness' than two seasons. The same thing goes for the Raiders. They didn't HAVE to sack Dugan and Ferguson and Carney they chose to because of the impact they were having off the field. Just because the Roosters, Dragons and Sharks picked these guys up on the cheap doesn't mean they have been disadvantaged. The benefits of getting rid of these guys isn't quantifiable by what happens on the field.
Renegade
Roar Guru
Ok, so there's 3 clubs who have acted out of 16.... I think my point still stands. If you have a look at the list posted above which is only a small sample.... every other club seems to turn a blind eye. Carney has a poor off-field record but plenty have done worse.
Renegade
Roar Guru
You make a good case TB but i still disagree. How can you say the Rooster's were not disadvantaged? They were Grand Finalists in 2010 only to be absolutely woeful in 2011 and 2012. They had to wait 3 years to return to the big dance on the back of some superstar signings.... I would call that a set back. Even if the we were to agree that the Roosters were better off, how can you say the same for the Sharks and the Raiders?? The Sharks finished equal first in 2008 and sacked Bird just before the finals series.... they fell one game short of the GF and didn't return to the finals again until 2012. They sacked Bird, Seymour and Kelly during that time.... it took them 4 years to rebuild. The Raiders have CLEARLY been disadvantaged.... they sacked Carney, only for him to win a Dally M at the Roosters. They sacked Dugan, only for him to go the Dragons and get representative honours and they sacked Ferguson - who now the Roosters are trying to sign. Meanwhile the Raiders are without doubt the worst team in the competition right now. You can't argue they haven't been disadvantaged.... this is where the NRL needs to step in - if someone is sacked by a club, there needs to be something in place but i'm not sure what that is. Maybe they shouldn't be allowed back....
The Barry
Guest
You're completely off the mark that the sharks and raiders are the only clubs doing this. The roosters sacked carney and the sharks picked him up on the cheap. The sharks did to the roosters what you're bagging the roosters for. The sharks are not victims here. They picked up the worst behaved player in the history of the NRL because they thought it would benefit their team. Surprise surprise it's gone pear shaped. Surely when they signed carney the must have planned for the fact that they'd only get a couple of years out of him.
The Barry
Guest
But your basic premise is wrong that clubs are somehow being disadvantaged by cutting these bozos. Clubs look at it from a cost benefit type analysis comparing what benefit they get on the field vs the cost that player may have culturally and financially via their actions off it. Therefore if they make the call like the roosters did that Carney's performances on the field didn't cover the bad influence he was having on guys like jake friend they make the decision to axe him. The roosters haven't been disadvantaged in any way by sacking a reigning dally m player of the year and him being picked up by the sharks.
Renegade
Roar Guru
TB, I agree it's about setting a standard and upholding values, that's why I still think the Sharks made the right call. Hopefully the decision brings more positives than negatives for the club.
The Barry
Guest
In this case he'll be deregistered so it won't be an issue. I disagree that generally the NRL is obliged to support clubs when they make a choice to axe a player. The roosters sacked carney because they felt that the cost of having him at the club outweighed the benefits his footballing ability provided. So even though they lost a star player they weren't disadvantaged by him signing with another club. The sharks felt that his ability to play was worth the risk of him playing up so signed him. should the NRL have stopped him signing then so the roosters weren't 'disadvantaged'? To answer your question of what is the point...it's about setting standards for your club. The roosters have won a comp since axing carney so they weren't too ripped off by having another club sign him after they axed him.
Jackson Henry
Guest
Muzz - I'm a bit late to the party here, but what is that about Lockyer? I'm keen to hear.
Renegade
Roar Guru
Appreciate all the different views from Roarers above.... I must admit after seeing some of the responses, there's a fair argument that maybe Cronulla have made the wrong call on this one. Todd Carney is a great person when he isn't on the drink..... he has done plenty of great things for the community in his time at Cronulla over the past two seasons. He certainly does do stupid things when under the influence of alcohol and clearly that is his major flaw. Based on how other clubs have handled incidents worse than what Carney is guilty of (a prank in front of mates - the term mate being used loosely), The Sharks could have went down the alternative approach and handed down a massive fine and suspension for the rest of the year but stuck by him. Ensuring he went through rehab and came back a better person in 2015 and for the rest of his 5-year term at Cronulla. Either way it was certainly a tough predicament for the club. But what's done is done and the main focus for Todd Carney will be assessing what's important in his life at the moment rather than the abuse and embarrassment he is facing throughout the internet and social media. The biggest focus should be on what role alcohol plays in his life and also who he hangs around with and is influenced by..... the Sharks on the other hand need to finish the year on a positive and focus on rebuilding for 2015. I certainly hope if Carney is given a lifeline by the NRL, the door isn't closed at Cronulla.
JGK
Roar Guru
I disagree with the sacking (assuming it was only for the photo). In the end it was harmless, legal and clearly not meant for the world to see. The fact that he wasn't even given an opportunity to explain himself makes it look more like a vendetta against him. I am no fan of Carney (or the Sharks) but I think he has a decent legal action here.
V.O.R.
Guest
ha, ha ;) I knew I could count on you
Muzz
Guest
I thought Moga was a done deal? We also signed Stapleton from the Sharks today as cover for our 3/4. Big day.Time for a beer and to watch Slater get smashed.
V.O.R.
Guest
Ferguson put back in his box, Moga on his way back to the heartland....It's been at tough day for you Muzz so I'll take it easy on you lad ;)
Muzz
Guest
Fair enough mate. 2 - 0 : )
V.O.R.
Guest
"Have you heard the great Locky loves too party when in Sydney?" Why do I feel like I'm back in the school yard..... It's not personal judgments along team lines Muzz...it's fundamentally how our game is going to be run...stewardship. The messages that are sent to the kids, the fans and the greater community.
Muzz
Guest
I'm just a fan of a club i love VOR.I don't get a say on who we sign but i'm glad we stuck by Jake Friend who will be QLDs next hooker and today agreed to stay at the club until the end of 2018. Have you heard the great Locky loves too party when in Sydney?