I'm concerned for the next player who breaks NRL biosecurity protocols.
The public outcry surrounding Latrell Mitchell, Josh Addo-Carr and Nathan Cleary was enormous, with talk of banning them for the season.
The NRL were very measured in deciding punishments for those players and I applaud them for that.
But the next player who stuffs up ... I think it's a season ban at minimum. Probably a big fine and if it's a case where there's absolutely blatant disregard for the rules, it wouldn't surprise me if a contract was torn up.
Like I've said, I think the penalties to Mitchell, Addo-Carr and Cleary were a line in the sand moment for the NRL.
By that, I mean that no player can now be unaware of the ramifications of breaching these protocols, which were put in place for the survival of rugby league. They've been made clear. If they put the game in harm's way, they will pay for it - big time.
I thought the fines issued in this instance were fair partly because of the extreme circumstances forced on to the players by the pandemic. Six weeks is a long time for an NRL player, used to routine and structure, to be away from his club. The NRL took that into account and acted accordingly.
Now, there's no ifs or buts for the players. They're back under the direct jurisdiction of their clubs, they know where the game stands on biosecurity protocols and they also know that if things go right, they'll be playing again from May 28.
Once the players have that in their head, once they have something to strive for, their mentality will totally switch around. Having been in limbo for weeks, they can focus entirely on what they have to do.
I just hope we don't see any more breaches. The game can't afford them.
It's going to be hard for the players to follow some of these NRL rules. I'm not sure that players will be able to stop for a coffee on the way to or from training. Little things like that which used to be part of their routine.
The rules will be strict and we're relying on the players to follow them for the long haul. We saw over the first few weeks of lockdowns in the general public, everyone was inside bunkered down ... and I've noticed myself as weeks have gone by around Cronulla, there's more and more people back out walking the streets. Going to the beach.
That's the danger for NRL players. There may be no easing of the biosecurity rules, so there can't be any easing of their behaviour.
There will need to be constant dialogue between the clubs and players to make that feasible. Almost to the point where I reckon clubs will need an official standing in the carpark as players arrive at training and leave, reminding them of the rules.
Go straight home. Don't go for a coffee. Don't go for something to eat. Go straight home.
I don't think they can pick their kids up from school. They'll need to change into different clothes and shoes when they arrive at stadiums. It's full on and I think that will be largely the clubs' responsibility.
Everyone will need to be constantly reminded of what needs to be done. Even to the extremes that we're discussing 'Corona Cops' - NRL-appointed officials checking that players are at home. Slip-ups under these extreme measures might be difficult to avoid, but we simply can't afford them.
And you know what else will be happening? Every man and his dog who wants to get a footy player in trouble will have their mobile phone out. We just saw Darius Boyd and Jack Bird filmed together in a Brisbane park; Darius was sitting with Jack and lending support after he suffered another season-ending ACL injury.
Now more than ever, members of the public will be looking for players to slip up. They will need to be wary of that.
FINES vs BANS, AND NRL OVERREACTIONS
NRL players need to be held to a slightly higher standard than everyone else. I accept that. The players mostly accept that.
Mitchell and Addo-Carr have to pay a $20,000 fine when $1,000 is the standard public penalty for a social distancing breach. They have been held 20 times more accountable by the NRL, having already copped the $1,000 police fine.
As I've said, any player who disrespects the NRL's biosecurity rules from here on can expect a far harsher punishment.
There's merit to both fines and suspensions as penalties, but a fine was the right call here.
Don't forget, we've spent the past couple of months talking about pay cuts and reduced future salaries. And we're only just restarting the competition, with no really big games for months.
Just missing the first game back into the competition wouldn't have affected them too much. It's not until you get a long suspension, where you're potentially missing rep games or finals footy, that bans become a major deterrent. Or a suspension near the back-end of the season, during games that really count.
The pleasing thing is, the NRL made a decision based on what they thought was right. They didn't listen to the media, didn't let the public outrage get out of control, didn't let Joe Public have his say on social media for days on end.
I have no doubt that the NRL has overreacted to public opinion in the past when it came to determining player punishments. No doubt in the world.
The ultimate example of that remains Mitchell Pearce.
That penalty was insane. A $125,000 fine ($50,000 suspended), plus an eight-week ban that clearly contributed to a poor season for the Roosters; a 15th-placed finish wedged in between a minor premiership and a runner-up.
I remember doing Sports Sunday that week after the pictures of the dog incident came out and asking, "Well, who has he actually hurt? What's he actually done wrong?"
I copped an absolute barrage from the public. But I also got a text message from one of Pearcey's family members, thanking me for offering some balance.
I got destroyed for it but then a few weeks later, it had all turned around and people were discussing how harsh the penalty was. How ridiculous.
People always go way over the top with their initial reactions to these things. And they need to be careful, because the NRL has been guilty of acting on those big statements.
Here, they evaluated everything, made a fair decision and got on with it, regardless of criticism. I think that's been one improvement recently in the NRL. It's certainly something we've seen from Peter V'landys as ARLC chairman.
The NRL have been proactive throughout this coronavirus lockdown, when the stakes have been huge for the game. Now, we're back on May 28, largely thanks to V'landys.
We've seen similar from him in racing, through the equine influenza crisis. He was really strong there, not caring whose noses he got out of joint.
But he doesn't make reckless decisions. We heard him on Sports Sunday, where he had an answer for every question thrown at him.
He evaluates the risks, gets expert opinion and makes his decisions accordingly. People think it's bullish, which it is, but it's also smart, considered and informed.
from WWOS http://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/paul-gallen-column-lockdown-breach-penalties-contract-torn-up/cafe4411-fa19-4121-9cc2-7b5a4b41dd5e
0 Comments