Ss Daly Cherry-Evans has done exactly what he lambasted the media for speculating he would do.
There are many people defending DCE after he decided to renege on a contract with Gold Coast and stay at Manly. They say most readers would have done the same thing.
I’ll tell you what I wouldn’t have done: I wouldn’t have belittled others for saying I might do something that, in the back of my mind, I knew I might actually do. That is where, to me, the trust is lost, where Cherry-Evans comes off looking disingenuous at best.
The media that annoyed DCE so much turned out to be right. Player transfers are the bread and butter of rugby league beat reporters and always will be – and thankfully they didn’t lay off just because Daly asked them to.
This is the sort of expedient behaviour we see creeping into the game now – like using the “personal reasons” cover-all to hide bad behaviour. Reporters deliberately drop off “personal reasons” out of respect – respect and trust which is betrayed when it is discovered the personal reason was a bar fight.
The wider issue is that rugby league keeps coming up with bandaid solutions to gaping wounds.
The June 30 deadline was introduced because the NRL accepted it couldn’t police negotiations between players and clubs. So all contracts signed before that date were rendered null and void.
On the surface, a smart move.
Players – led by DCE – then turned the signing of a contract into the beginning for a defacto trade window where the heat of negotiations was just turned up.
Think about that: the signing of a document that in the real world was legally binding because a declaration that you were available to the highest bidder.
Given this rather unfortunate development, the rules have now been changed to a “cooling off period”. Can someone please tell me how this is any better?
The signing of what is otherwise a legal document is still a giant ad in the paper for an NRL player! Hello, I signed a contract you’ve got a few days to come and get me! Sale! Limited time only!
Surely when one party signs a contract with another, there is an implied commitment that goes beyond how that contract is viewed by a third party.
Anyway, there’re only two true solutions to the transfer mess. One is the Integrity Unit becoming a sort of police force, with fines and expulsion for players and agents who negotiate outside of the agreed period.
The other is a draft, pure and simple. Then there are no negotiations and the roles of the player agents are greatly reduced.
Daly Cherry-Evans can take some short term pleasure in being one of the players who forced a change in the game’s rules. But he won’t be remembered for it because the change he prompted won’t be around for long.
mycall
Guest
No, Manly didn't want to give him the 2 year option after the 6 years, but DCE "Mr Loyalty", would not sign without it and was prepared to keep his deal with the Titans. He played the rules of the game perfectly, but just a little dishonestly.
mycall
Guest
He didn't need to sign the contract with the Titans when he did... there was no deadline. He could have simply said that the Titans are his favoured choice at the moment but I'm not going to sign anything until I'm ready. He created the fanfare, he "played" the Titans and the media when it wasn't necessary to do so. The sooner he owns up to it, the sooner he can start to earn back people's respect.
mycall
Guest
Maybe morality isn't the right subject for it, but he can no longer say that he is a man if his word whether what he did was technically within the rules or not. He and/or his management deceived the media, the public and most importantly, the Titans. They did it wilfully and as such deserve the criticism they are receiving. DCE did not say when he signed the Titans contract that it was only subject to the round 13 rule. When he signed, he said it was definite, he signed for his family blablabla, he then categorically denied that he was considering a backflip 6 weeks later saying that he is extremely happy with his decision but behind the scenes or in his head, he was thinking that if Manly give me a better offer, I'll backflip. He criticised the media for the speculation when the speculation was right on the money. He then lied or at least purposefully deceived everyone after signing the Manly contract by saying that he only started thinking about it 48hrs beforehand when, as Toovey confirmed, he had been "agonising" over the decision for weeks. What he did was within the rules, but it was not honourable in any way shape or form. The sooner he admits that and stops his bull story of naivety the better. His actions may well cost him his after football career in the media that he so despises and disrespects!
mycall
Guest
I agree that there should be compensation paid by the player/agent for breaking a contract "within the rules". The minimum being legal costs. DCE used the Titans to up the offer from Manly and Manly didn't give him an offer until they had to. The problem is the interpretation of the cooling off period. It is not supposed to be a case of, "OK, I now have until Round 13 to get a better deal than the one I signed" it is supposed to be used in the case of a player realising it's a wrong decision (eg Tedesco). Manly had an unfair advantage once the Titans had lodged the contract with the NRL because Manly could change their offer to DCE where as the Titans were no longer allowed to negotiate. That is the aspect of the Round 13/10 Day rule that doesn't make sense. A player should be able to change there mind on a deal because he realises it's not the best option for him, but clubs should not be allowed to offer new deals or alter their offer once the player is in the cooling off period. In saying that the whole scenario might have played out differently if DCE wasn't allowed to sign a worthless contract with the Titans without impunity. If DCE paid $150k compensation to the Titans, I think that would change everyone's outlook. SBW was one of the most hated people in Australia when he walked out on the Bulldogs for lots of €€€ but when he paid $700k in compensation to the Bulldogs, at least in my mind, that brought some order back to the world of sporting contracts. Even if a nominal fee that covers the contract expenses is charged for renegging on a contract within the cooling off period, that at least gives back legitimacy to the contract.
Jackson Henry
Roar Guru
I would say you can't really have a 100% factual story, because an opinion is actually a combination of fact and interpretation - like, "so what do these facts mean"? To me, I'd rather have reporting based on facts, yes, and even ones that contradict each other...but then have the interpretation be informed and fair. You're never going to be 100% objective, human nature just doesn't allow it as none of us are perfect. But a result of "I probably disagree with what this bloke's saying, but it's a well-argued peice and he has credibility because he's an honest broker" is good enough for mine. Without p!ssing in anyone's pocket or anything, I get this vibe from Mascord's articles much more than I do from anyone at the Faily Telegraph for example. I just don't think you could call Rothfield, Kent, Ricthie Riccio and all those other "journalists" honest brokers.
Jeremy
Guest
Lol! The dopey NRL media, dinosaur ex players and just as silly fans all hysterically cried that there was no loyalty in NRL anymore & this was a bad look for the game, so the NRL answered by having a rule that gave a current club an extra chance to retain a player by giving us the Rd 13 deadline, but then the dopey NRL media, dinosaur ex players and just as silly fans all hysterically cried that this encouraged backflippers & it was all a bad look for the game, so the NRL answered by getting rid of the rule that gave a current club an extra chance to retain a player by giving us the Rd 13 deadline, repeat, repeat, repeat. NRL must be dumbest and whiniest collective group of media and fans in world sport.
peeeko
Guest
I really like Steve's stories about RL as compared to other journos. What i would like to see is some factual reporting of contracts instead of made up figures that we see printed. In America on NFL,NBA salaries are public info
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
Even beyond that, the way that the public went along with the story lines advanced by the media and then blamed DCE for their indignation at his actions is nuts.
P.Marlowe
Guest
Agreed - his word was always expressed to be subject to the Round 13 backflip rule. In that situation, its not an unconditional promise to join the Titans.
Sylvester
Guest
Nothing changes though. All you do is trade two months of de facto player auction for 10 days. Why can't you just sign a contract and accept that it's a done deal. It's not like being talked into buying an expensive vacuum cleaner you don't need on your doorstep and immediately wishing you didn't.
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
It's nutty that players are expected to be the guardians of public morality. So many cry honour, and a man's word is his bond and all of that jazz but stick $500,000 in front of their noses and the vast majority would jump at the chance to change their companies. The only thing wrong about the DCE case is that the media latched onto his story more so than Tedesco's etc and that the public went along with it and fell for the drama of it.
Freighter
Guest
I agree- he has done nothing wrong.... But for me, he is playing the naivety card to much- this was always the end outcome he wanted and good on him... But let's not treat everyone like idiots as if he had nothing to do with any decisions or discussions.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
I agree with your comments but most contracts now have at least a 10 day cooling off period.
bigbaz
Roar Guru
Love it when a journalist takes the high moral ground.
Tucker
Guest
Stop carrying on like the sky has fallen in.. You Mascord make a living on stories like this, hence the constant barrage DCE copped from the media, with DCE stating that, "at this stage, nothing has changed and I'm still going to the Titans...". His current club were the only ones that could try and beat him to the round 13 deadline. As you're well aware, a player of his stature & projected future was always going to be contested if the $$ were there. Backflips have happened plenty of times before DCE, but because he treated himself like a business (clubs/nrl etc), a short term one considering he plays the toughest game on the planet, he's bring crucified.. Toughen up folks, this is rugby league we're talking about here..
Tom
Guest
My opinion is that Daly did intend to go - he did buy a house on the Gold Coast. Manly made an offer too good to refuse, and he took it. Given the job security of the average NRL player, he would be insane not to take such a long term deal with so much guaranteed money.
Emcie
Roar Guru
Seriously, it feels like every year the media have to find some player to play the Villain for the year... Was DCE made the Face of League and I missed it?
Emcie
Roar Guru
Not sure Mascord got the response he was after from this article
P.Marlowe
Guest
Chris I sort of struggle to understand this idea of 'morality' here. He signed a contract with the Titans with both parties being fully aware this contract would not become unconditional until the Round 13 window closed. The Titans plainly knew there was a risk he could exercise his right to exit before this period if Manly were to better their offer. Its sort of akin to someone offering to buy your house with the contract being conditional on them selling their house. You know if the condition precedent isn't satisfied, your house sale isn't going to go ahead. You wouldn't expect them to continue with the contract to buy your house in that situation. I sort of struggle to understand where the morality part comes in. PM
Bomb78
Guest
As soon as I heard DCE was staying at Many I thought the same thing Mike. Given the amount of coin Manly are outlaying for him, it would surprise me if he didn't get 'consulted' regarding his opinion on the coach. You'd hate for your #1 star to be in open conflict with the club legend coach.