There is much unrest at a host of NRL clubs, infuriated at Bulldogs general manager of football Phil Gould’s unfiltered commentary around so-called ‘live’ issues in the NRL.
Whether it be the departure of Joseph Suaalii to the 15-bodied game, head knocks, concussion, hip-drop tackles or decisions made by the judiciary on them, Gould is rarely backward in coming forward.
Most recently it was the referees under his microscope, as he mounted a rather unconvincing defence of Canterbury veteran Josh Reynolds, after the five-eighth lost his cool and clearly crossed the line when it comes to appropriate language used towards officials.
Whilst the passion and commitment to the cause is admirable, other clubs have grave concerns around Gould commenting on matters that are live and fearful that his words could well have a significant impact on their own players involved in the judicial process and future refereeing decisions.
Possessing a considerable rugby league brain and widely respected as one of the most astute scholars of the game, Gould appears to be reading his own press, somehow now believing a brilliant coaching and football directing career leads directly to an untethered right to comment on all matters, when and where he chooses and without any true consideration of the consequences.
NRL boss Andrew Abdo met with Bulldogs CEO Aaron Warburton to discuss the issue, yet watered down the meeting as the kind that takes place frequently with all clubs, saying that his “conversation with the Bulldogs was just around registered club officials not breaching the rules”.
Phil Gould addresses the media in 2022. (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
Such a description is somewhat confusing, especially considering Abdo was firm in stating no punishments were being considered for Gould and even openly suggested the 65-year-old was in no way, shape or form to be muzzled or silenced by the governing body.
Frankly, the two simply do not marry up. Effectively, Abdo has admitted a meeting took place to discuss officials’ public commentary, Gould is undoubtedly the subject, yet there are no sanctions or subsequent repercussions.
Abdo was categorical in saying: “There’s a reason why club officials aren’t able to comment when a matter is live because we don’t want the perception of that influencing the decision-makers.”
Gould has obviously breached this guideline and officials are clearly permitted to comment on live issues, as he is doing so constantly.
The feeling in clubland is that should others take the same aggressive stances on issues, they would be treated a little differently to Gould.
The situation reeks of a powerful rugby league figure, liberally using his broadcast platforms to comment on controversial matters, and those relating to Bulldogs players raising plenty of eyebrows thanks to a pervading perception of bias.
There has also been a blended line between the official statements made by the Bulldogs board, chairman John Khoury, Warburton and the informal commentary undertaken by Gould on his Twitter account.
Frankly, it is an unprofessional and potentially problematic situation, with much of the brilliant work done by Khoury and Warburton in rebuilding the club being placed in jeopardy by a man who appears to have become a law unto himself.
In a nutshell, other clubs are far from happy with Gould’s commentary around live issues, have subsequently brought it to the attention of the NRL and from the outside, it appears the governing body has attempted to manage and massage the situation, rather than address it with a firm hand.
Should an NRL television or radio broadcaster lose their lollies and lament what they perceive as an appalling decision, a questionable hip-drop or a ludicrous suspension, I guess that all adds to the theatre and drama of the coverage.
Colour and theatre in commentary is one thing from the broadcasters, yet very different when it emanates from club officials. (Photo by Ian Hitchcock/Getty Images)
It is essentially their role to add discussion points and get people talking about them. However, it is not for club officials to do the same, especially when matters still need to play out from a due process perspective, in the immediate days that follow the event.
Gould has shown a keen awareness of theatre throughout his playing, coaching and administrative career and a cynic might suggest that he is currently employing it to defend the Bulldogs’ position, whilst also using his intimidating reputation to avoid any serious repercussions along the way.
Abdo should have made it abundantly clear to Gould via the Bulldogs CEO, that his comments and criticisms are not seen in a good light by other clubs that are concerned by their impact.
However, not even a slap over the wrist has been administered, something Phil Gould is becoming very used to receiving and ignoring.
Adam
Roar Guru
I actually have at times used the ABC listen app and just listened to the footy. The commentary is certainly better and more than makes up for not seeing it
Adam
Roar Guru
I’m admittedly not following things very closely but if he said that he’s betting on the footy that’s terrible and he should be thrown out. It’s tantamount to insider trading. That certainly makes Gould seem like a choir boy in comparison.
The Barry
Roar Guru
I agree with jimmmy on all of that… Don’t let them get you down. Kayo is money well spent if you can swing it. I’m not in love with the Fox commentators but listen to them pretty much exclusively over 9 Danika Mason is the one I miss most…
The Barry
Roar Guru
That I get and no way will I try and defend Gould’s manner He can be an absolute jerk when he talks about things going on in the game I’m still yet to hear what he’s said that’s so bad? The Josh Reynolds defence gets brought up but what he said was Reynolds shouldn’t have spoke to the ref like that but the ref over reacted. Is that a conflict of interest? He bagged Newcastle players going to Bali. I listened to the podcast and he wasn’t as harsh as the extracts made it sound. But again, so what? Plenty of people bagged that situation Gould’s a jerk. No doubt. But that doesn’t mean there’s a conflict of interest - which is becoming 2023’s misused phrase, like “freedom of speech” and “found innocent” have been in recent years… :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Maybe hipdrop will overtake conflict of interest… :laughing:
The Barry
Roar Guru
Well V’Landys recently announced he likes betting on the footy… I think that’s more of an issue than what Gould has to say Are Gould’s interests not declared? Is it a secret that he’s employed by the Bulldogs? To be a parallel to your politician / CEO conflict scenario, Gould would need to be on the NRL Board or employed at the NRL while working at the Bulldogs, where he was responsible for making decisions that could directly benefit the Bulldogs, not just spruiking in the media. It’s not the same at all
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
To be fair though if Kevvie said things in exactly the same manner as Gus he would get the fine . Thats why he said he would not go further because he didn't get a big enough pay cheque. Gus raising issues about Bulldogs players doesn't bother at all me . it's the manner of the complaint.
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
I'm sorry to hear that Adam , you are one of the most reasoned contributors on the forum. I am lucky enough to have Kayo and while I get a little antsie about a couple of the commentators ( yes you Michael Eniss) overall they are fine . If I have to go Ch 9 I listen but usually turn the sound off at some point so I do understand your position on Gould . Some guys seem to watch and listen to the radio . I'm not sure if it syncs though or even if you can get radio coverage in Tassie.
Adam
Roar Guru
It's a conflict of interest once you start receiving money from multiple sources and use one paid platform (media/podcast) to potentially influence your other paid role (or at least allow that impression to be there). It's not always that they are influenced, it's the impression that influence has occurred. It's why people like politicians or CEO's need to declare possible conflicts of interest. It's not they have affected their decision making, it's acknowledging that the public image is important and transparency with these things remain. Put it this way if V'Landys starts wearing St George Illawarra scarves to board meetings is that appropriate?
Adam
Roar Guru
I've basically stopped watching this year because of the quality of commentary. I know it's immature to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but making time in my schedule just doesn't appeal if I have to listen to Gould et al
The Barry
Roar Guru
Still not quite sure what the conflict of interest actually is? Seen a few of these articles lately but all a bit light on in defining what the actual conflict of interest actually is Plenty of coaches and officials comment on ‘live’ issues. EG Walters was talking about the Carrigan hip drop tackle at the post game press conference The MRC hadn’t ruled on that yet. So should Walters not be allowed to comment in case he influences the MRC? You could pull out dozens of these issues every week So what’s the difference when Gus does it? Because he’s got a bigger platform and profile? Well that doesn’t make it a conflict of interest If NRL officials, MRC etc can be so easily influenced by a coach or official making public comments, the problem ain’t the coach or official…
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
I tend to agree. I think he was good for the Panthers overall. Was starting to have an effect at the Warriors and will be there for the rise of the Dogs. It's not all coincidence . He does know footy and is the best political manipulator since Bullfrog Moore. As for his commentary , I can't express to you how bad it is. Last night on the Coates no try where the ball came off Olams head , he goaded the bunker to step in , like a kid picking a fight in the playground ( even though he knew the bunker could not rule on it ) . It was hand over the face cringeworthy and I was embarased for my game.
farkurnell
Roar Rookie
Gustos Rants for Ratings reflect poorly on his previous achievements an respect from the games stakeholders and fans
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
He has Easts connections so he's safer than most :thumbup:
Maxtruck
Roar Rookie
Don't think Anasta is going to have to worry about conflict of interest much longer I thought NRL360 with Ben Ikin was quite good and watched regularly but the Anasta version only gets a run on our TV if its a cold wet night and nothing else is on the box
ScouseinOz
Roar Rookie
Gould still has it as a football manager and getting the pathways sorted for a club. Like Bennett coaching I don’t think he ll lose that ability. As a media pundit he’s long past it. He’s even lost his ability to shock as he is so predictable. In a perfect world, he’d retire from the media and do his current job for bulldogs for few more years then go Dragons and Tigers.
Mike
Roar Rookie
Conflicts of interest is what the NRL is all about
Redcap
Roar Guru
Phil Gould: oracle, living legend, greatest coach in the history of rugbah league, not so closely followed by daylight. Long may he pontificate. :rugby:
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
very good point :thumbup:
Succhi
Roar Rookie
Always hilarious when Gus rants about the media - not realising he is one of them!
Muzz Manyana
Roar Rookie
Gould will always push boundaries. That's just what he does. He's always had little to no respect for those that run the game.