Contemplating what to pen a few thoughts on this week, a couple of ideas immediately sprung to mind.
Number one, if every football report going is to be believed, was Wayne Rooney’s impending return to his boyhood club, Everton, after a stellar career a few miles down the road at Manchester United.
Of the polarised opinions such a deal has already created, there are those who can’t see anything but a footballer past his prime who will offer little to a team seemingly in the ascendancy while picking up a bucket load of cash along the way. Then there are those who can’t see anything but an excellent player with plenty still to offer, on a free transfer and with a desire to just do what he’s good at and succeed where it all started.
For what it’s worth, I’d lean towards the latter. When there’s talk of £20m being splashed on Olivier Giroud, and no doubt a hefty wage packet to boot, getting Rooney on board looks to be a simple decision to make. He’s got a good couple of years left in him and Everton are hardly going to be worse off for his presence.
The second was to compare the third coming of Gary Ballance, recalled to the England team for the first Test against South Africa, with that of Usman Khawaja who, unless something untoward occurs, will most likely return to a place in the Australian middle order when the Ashes get underway in November.
Of a batsman, who began life at the top level in fine style, banished to the domestic game on the back of a drop in form precipitated by a handful of the international game’s foremost seamers exposing a glaring weakness in his technique, and his flaying of county attacks to the point where a recall was both deserved and unsurprising.
And of another who, following initial struggles at the top table, burst back onto the scene both wiser and more accomplished before being jettisoned when a trial against Indian spin was deemed to be beyond him and his vastly improved method.
And, by a nicely-timed coincidence, it was a picture of Khawaja at a press conference, neatly suited up with notes and microphones placed in front of him and others, just below a headline of ‘Australia pay dispute: South Africa tour off as Cricket Australia fail to agree deal’ that put paid to the aforementioned germs of ideas.
The latest development in a soap opera which has descended into complete lunacy. Primary school kids arguing in the playground over whether Iron Man is better than Spiderman would make more sense than the mess this particular saga has plunged into.
(AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
Two sides thinking they’re in the right, two sides not wanting to compromise, two sides so stubborn they’re unwilling to take a backwards step, two sides appearing increasingly stupid.
There are arguments which carry some logic on both sides of this divide, as have been made loudly and particularly clear in the vast amount of column inches inevitably given over to such a high-profile row, but if disagreements are allowed to fester, as this most certainly has been, then the result is escalation.
Watch any documentary about how wars start – no, this is hardly of that magnitude but the principle is the same – and you won’t fail to spot the idiocy surrounding the actions of individuals and the chain of events which, once set into motion, desperately required the intervention of someone with a sense of clarity as opposed to those who have impenetrable tunnel vision.
Clashes between workers and their bosses happen, of course they do and especially when money is the crux of the matter, but this stand-off between Cricket Australia and the ACA is one which should never have been allowed to occur.
A bit of diplomacy and sensible dialogue somewhere down the line, not the most difficult of things to engage in you may have thought but obviously tricky for those not inclined to be either diplomatic or prepared to talk, and there would’ve been no need for Khawaja to don his smart gear and serve up the respective party line.
And now there are tours being cancelled, players out of work and even more barbs being traded back and forth.
So, Cricket Australia and the ACA: Get in a room and sort it out as, and this is all there is to offer, it has now, if it wasn’t already, become ridiculous.
ches
Guest
Both sides are playing brinkmanship here to the edge. Cricket Australia "allegedly" has 200 Million the bank so to speak. If this gets out of control and 1. Cricket Australia have to compensate the BCCI 60 million for lost revenue of the one day tour 2. Channel 9 takes the advice of their consultants and decides not to pay as much for the TV rights. 3. Some third string team is fielded for the Ashes or the tour is abandoned. 4. Big bash field sub standard teams. Tournament is a complete ratings & attendance failure. What happens to that 200 Million. Another home Ashes tour is at least 3 years away. If the above happens and then CA gives in to the players in January next year. How they gonna pay them? Watch them moan about the "sharing" model not working when their share goes down. Big Big stakes here
ches
Guest
Again, taking out right or wrong here the silent killer here is the ever revenue increasing stream of T20 Franchised cricket. It is what the players are leveraging off if they don't win. They threaten they will go play as freelance players on the circuit as their fallback. 10 years ago when T20 was not as lucrative and some of these comps did not exist the players would no way have enough leverage to fight this. They would basically have no job and be really unemployed. Having said that it was the "boards" of the world and one country in particular who embraced it and made it what it is today. It came back to bite them on the butt. I wonder what all those who years ago said T20 & the money that goes with it would kill cricket are thinking now? It killed West Indies cricket.
Rellum
Roar Guru
The issue is all about one thing. The revenue share model. The ACA wants it, CA doesn't. There can't be compromise on that. It is a binary problem. If the revenue share model isn't kept then the players will be seen to have lost and most likely loose any influence in the future. Hence why the stakes are seen as so high.
Alec Swann
Expert
ches When it gets to this stage, and if a deal is to be agreed, somebody is going to have to lose face and neither seem particularly keen. Pride and a fall and all that.
Alec Swann
Expert
jameswm That line isn't quite as clear as intended. Perhaps it needed '... carry logic, at least in the respective eyes of those involved, on both sides...' Or something like that. Logic does tend to get thrown out of the window when the shutters have been drawn.
matth
Guest
"Two sides thinking they’re in the right, two sides not wanting to compromise, two sides so stubborn they’re unwilling to take a backwards step, two sides appearing increasingly stupid." I thought you were talking about a code wars article on the football thread.
Bert
Guest
They are so far different. There is no way it can be solved. The actually pay and revenue sharing model would need to be agreed by either side and it is not happening.
davros
Guest
I would find a spot for Simon Katich in the running of the game ...and there are several others like him ...who would do a much better job than these power hungry ideolligically driven psychopath ego maniacs.
bear54
Rebellion = Mrs Pat Howard
bear54
Administrators can be found on any street corner. Sutherland and Howard et al can be replaced tomorrow but we need the very best 11 players in the country to play our national game. Punt the desk jockeys, give the players what they want and let's get on with the Ashes.
davros
Guest
ca troll ...spot em a mile awasy ...not even a very good one
Rebellion
Guest
"Players are the Product" - what absolute BS. The 'game' is the product, players come and most fans are made up of future, current and past players/participants. CA is the professional players boss, just as there is a hierarchy at every school or local club. The ACA is just the professional players 'union' and the greedy players are wanting to secure even more money (that's right - revenue is increasing so that means their salaries will continue to be inflated even beyond the ridiculous levels they are at now under the current model). This money could be reinvested into the foundations of the game however the player's greed and self-importance have warped their view into thinking they are entitled to it. I'd rather go without cricket for a few years than let the likes of David Warner cripple the sport to buy a few more houses. Watto, Warner, Clarke,Cowan....these jerks are not far off our beloved current batch of tennis players
elvis
Guest
I would assume it's a lot harder to get new cricketers than it is to get new management. There are plenty of big event firms that could run the ashes in a heartbeat if given the chance. I'm surprised the cricketers are letting the management off so easily, they could really smash them if they wanted to...
Chris Love
Roar Guru
Chui, the difference here is that unlike a business CA doesn't own the product they just administer it. The players ARE the product. Always have been always will be. This is the equivalent of Tennis Australia taking all winnings of players and having them sign a contract for a set amount each year based on last year's performance. The current model allows that if we the consumer decide that the product is good and more of us want to purchase it the players receive and equal increase in those profits. CA know that T20/Big Bash has lit a fire under Cricket in this country and want to make off handsomely from the huge increases in profits.
Chui
Guest
That argument is always flawed. This wouls mean that everyone is everyone's boss if all it takes is consumption of a product.
ches
Guest
Thoughts and opinions aside this is dangerous. Both sides have been thoroughly disappointing in the way they have handled themselves. Because it has gone on this long and both sides are so divided there cannot be clear winner here. If CA win 100% on their terms they will become even bigger dictators than they are now. If the ACA win 100% on their terms they will forever have it over CA and if anything they don't like happens they now know how to stamp their little feet and get what they want. The solution, whatever it is lays right in the middle with no "clear" winner.
Handles
Guest
Agree 100%. It is absolutely imperative that the party thay wants to make a drastic change to the prevailing system makes their case. CA are being too cute by half. They are relying on pressure from the public to make the players buckle. They are feeding the 'greedy high paid player' sideshow, and consistently failing to demonstrate or argue why the change is important. If l read one more comment about how much more a cricketer earns than the Prime Minister, or a soldier, l swear l will explode.
Jameswm
Guest
Who appoints the CA Board?
loclasss
Guest
Get rid of CA board as they just care about themselves and how much money they can squirrel away .It may be that they want to be able to control the players, for there own gains.Time to rebuild the CA board from the top down.
Chui
Guest
Sutherland's lack of involvement is particularly puzzling, being the CEO and all. I wonder if his real view is a little more moderate than the Board's. Maybe the board are using this as an interview for Sutherland's possible successor(s).