There has been much debate about David Gallop's leadership this week in response to this crisis. Let me say striaght up front, the actions of the management of the Melbourne Storm have put David Gallop in an unenviable and extremely difficult position. I do not believe the guy gets paid enough given the crap he has had to endure due to the game over many years which has been due to the actions of others (Bulldogs, Storm, Player behaviour etc).
Having said that I do want to make a point about Gallop's leadership style. Leadership is something that has plenty of theory surrounding it but its is best best exemplified by actions. Someone who knew a little about leadership once said: a leader is a dealer in hope (Nepoleon Bonaparte).
That's my biggest gripe about how Gallop has dealt with the Storm. His verdict leaves little hope for the future. In fact it almost denies it. Without a doubt he had to take drastic and forceful measures in relation to past cheating. This he did and he did it effectively. He then needed to focus the blame on those who were clearly guilty and then devise a way to give hope to those innocents who now seem to be guilty by association. This is easier said than done but critically essential. Unfortunately Gallop's response has been to make anyone associated with both the club and the game in general (fans of other clubs who must now play the Storm) suffer for a prolonged period. Gallop said on the footy show that his action were taken so as to be as fair as possible to the other teams. He is thinking like a judge/lawyer rather than a leader.
I'll use an example from history as a case in point that makes this crisis look like childs play by comparision. At the end of WWI the allies insisted that Germany pay reparations (compensation/damages) because they were the aggresors in the war and therefore it was fair that they pay for the damage they had caused the world. This seemed reasonable at the time and if you think about justice and fairness then I'd say that was pretty fair. Except what this did is that it made every German guilty for the war (even if they were a soldier just obeying orders or not) and it also penalised future generations and thereby took away any hope they had as a nation for rebuilding a better future once they had gotten rid of their poor leaders who had led them astray. We all know the outcome of that approach and the immense tragedy that followed. After WWII the (western) allies tried a completey different approach. They vigourously pursued the corrupt leadership and then actively led the rest of the German people on a route to a new, better future for those Germans that remained. The difference in outcomes between these two methods was monumental. The difference put simply was that one method offered hope while the other prolonged suffering for those guilty by association. The difference IMHO was that one insisted on 'fairness' while the other displayed real leadership.
That's what worries me about Gallops leadership. As a lawyer he is so worried about fairness for the other clubs (and also displaying that the NRL is free of any undue association with News Ltd) that he is not able to display true leadership (which the association with News Ltd may also be hamstringing).
What we needed this week was someone who showed without doubt that cheats will not prosper. We had that. But then what we needed was someone who could then deal us (all RL fans and the innocents who are guilty by association) some hope so as to allow the healing to begin ASAP. What we have to look forward to now is prelonged suffering.
David Gallop cannot be blamed for the fraudulent actions by the Storm's management just as much as storm players and fans who did not know about this cannot be blamed. However David Gallop can be questioned about his actions as the games leader in response to this crisis. IMHO his focus on fairness rather than on leadership is not in the best interests of the game overall in both the short and long term.
Your thoughts?
Having said that I do want to make a point about Gallop's leadership style. Leadership is something that has plenty of theory surrounding it but its is best best exemplified by actions. Someone who knew a little about leadership once said: a leader is a dealer in hope (Nepoleon Bonaparte).
That's my biggest gripe about how Gallop has dealt with the Storm. His verdict leaves little hope for the future. In fact it almost denies it. Without a doubt he had to take drastic and forceful measures in relation to past cheating. This he did and he did it effectively. He then needed to focus the blame on those who were clearly guilty and then devise a way to give hope to those innocents who now seem to be guilty by association. This is easier said than done but critically essential. Unfortunately Gallop's response has been to make anyone associated with both the club and the game in general (fans of other clubs who must now play the Storm) suffer for a prolonged period. Gallop said on the footy show that his action were taken so as to be as fair as possible to the other teams. He is thinking like a judge/lawyer rather than a leader.
I'll use an example from history as a case in point that makes this crisis look like childs play by comparision. At the end of WWI the allies insisted that Germany pay reparations (compensation/damages) because they were the aggresors in the war and therefore it was fair that they pay for the damage they had caused the world. This seemed reasonable at the time and if you think about justice and fairness then I'd say that was pretty fair. Except what this did is that it made every German guilty for the war (even if they were a soldier just obeying orders or not) and it also penalised future generations and thereby took away any hope they had as a nation for rebuilding a better future once they had gotten rid of their poor leaders who had led them astray. We all know the outcome of that approach and the immense tragedy that followed. After WWII the (western) allies tried a completey different approach. They vigourously pursued the corrupt leadership and then actively led the rest of the German people on a route to a new, better future for those Germans that remained. The difference in outcomes between these two methods was monumental. The difference put simply was that one method offered hope while the other prolonged suffering for those guilty by association. The difference IMHO was that one insisted on 'fairness' while the other displayed real leadership.
That's what worries me about Gallops leadership. As a lawyer he is so worried about fairness for the other clubs (and also displaying that the NRL is free of any undue association with News Ltd) that he is not able to display true leadership (which the association with News Ltd may also be hamstringing).
What we needed this week was someone who showed without doubt that cheats will not prosper. We had that. But then what we needed was someone who could then deal us (all RL fans and the innocents who are guilty by association) some hope so as to allow the healing to begin ASAP. What we have to look forward to now is prelonged suffering.
David Gallop cannot be blamed for the fraudulent actions by the Storm's management just as much as storm players and fans who did not know about this cannot be blamed. However David Gallop can be questioned about his actions as the games leader in response to this crisis. IMHO his focus on fairness rather than on leadership is not in the best interests of the game overall in both the short and long term.
Your thoughts?
