What an amazing turn of events.
I think that the way this pans out will be quite interesting.
Whatever it is that Lote is alleged to have done, my uneducated guess is that John O'Neill sees an asset that is under-used, a very expensive one at that, and says....."let's cut it out of the inventory and save ourselves the mega bucks that my predecessor committed us to when we couldn't really afford it.."
Why?
It's a convenient time to do it, since all of the major footy codes (except Soccer, it seems) are running scared and trying to turn all of the players into choir boys, who are some sort of "role model" for .....who? Other choir boys, and violin players who don't play footy anyway?
I mean, if it's the mums who frighten those big, tough male administrators into this, why are they (the administrators) administering in the first place?
So, I think that Lote can become a hero out of all of this..Why? ...because now, if we believe everything that we read, he is taking the ARU on in the courts. He may well lose, on the facts and circumstances of his particular case, but this may well become a test case, especially with the media circling and ready to hop on the bandwagon of the bloke who has the best story, and who just may smell like a winner.
You see, I think that the media has backed itself into a corner where they have sensationalised every player misdemeanour and indiscretion to the point where everyone is running scared, so that the media might be almost have bitten the hands that feed them.....us, the public, the game(s) and their readership.
So, just maybe there are a few who are looking for an honourable "out" here and lo and behold, along comes John O'Neill and Lote.
You beauty! This might just be the way of getting things back on track.
How?
Well, it looks like Lote is fairly serious, otherwise the ARU would be huffing and puffing, but they are choosing to stay quiet, which means that their exorbitantly priced lawyers have advised them that Lote's exorbitantly priced lawyers are packing down with serious intent for a pushover try and, as far as Lote, the bloke (as opposed to Lote the figurehead) is concerned, this is bloody serious stuff. I mean, thanks to Gary Flowers, Lote can't earn what he would like to if he has to go back to the NRL, so he is forced to consider other possibilities.
As far as we, the great unwashed public, were concerned, as of two days ago, Lote's biggest problems were getting back into the Wallaby run-on squad and finding a matching pair of green and gold socks in the laundry basket.
Anyway, looks like this is the ticket. ARU, NRL and AFL players must have been waiting for someone to come along and take on the "employer".
How legal or proper are these sort of "3 strikes" clauses? How reasonable are they when tested against the employment norms or principles in other industries? How much of an influence on an employee's livelihood, should the "role model" issue be? Are these fair and reasonable restraints to place on employees? How far can an employer go when balancing the interests of the product against the interests of the employee? How long do you have to wait between "incidents" to justify giving someone the "flick"?
I'm no expert, but I reckon that these are some of the questions that will be asked and I think it's fair to ask them....and Lote's exorbitantly priced team will ask them, in spades, and more..!
The media must be salivating over this, which is ironic when you consider that the problem is one that they created. It's almost like the media has found the way to create perpetual motion.....create the problem then report on it ad nauseum....
In these troubled times (the "GFC") how many industries would love to be able to create a market and then exploit it to a hungry audience that they conditioned, in the first place? Pure genius.!
Lote, on a personal note, I wish you all the best.
You might be a bit of a tearaway, but that is what Rugby people understand and respect. You have never given anyone any concern about being involved in any funny business, sexually speaking and your greatest sins seem to be that you don't mind a late night drink (whoaa!!), when you have probably worked your guts out for a couple of days before playing a night game that finished around 9 pm..if we believed everything that the press tried to push on us, no Rugby bloke would be a drinker...imagine that?..there but for the grace of God.........(and the press!).
Talking of role models, blokes that play Rugby at the lower levels, the lower grades, the subbies, the bush players, the Services blokes, women, and many others might just hold you up as a role model whether you like a drink or not. We're not quite as judgmental as some would like people to believe....and those kids who everyone seems hell bent on protecting aren't as naive as some would think.
On a professional note, I hope that you push this to the limit and get some sanity back into the way that football players are treated. Dickheads need to be sanctioned, but not every footy player is a dickhead!
Of course, the irony in all of this is that you and the ARU will end up paying the legal costs and the press, as usuall will come out of it smelling of roses. However, we all know that the best roses are grown in the smelliest manure....I look forward to some well balanced reportage over the next couple of weeks, but I'm not holding my breath.. (anyway thats the best way to avoid the smell of the manure).
Hopefully, we'll see you back on the paddock (and hopefully playing Rugby) before too long. Better to be judged by the bloke with the whistle than the bloke in a funny wig!
Cheers,
Gatesy
