After having my rant yesterday and this morning, this is where I see things.
There's a fair bit in the media today about the players not wanting Galvin around anymore, but with no direct quotes aside from Fonua Pole liking a social media post bagging Galvin. I think Benji should get the team together this morning, minus Galvin, and clear the air about this. If it's true and they don't want him around (who could blame them) he can't be picked or included going forward. Parra have failed to get started since Brown signed with Newcastle, and Manly have fallen off a cliff since DCE said he was leaving. Sure, both these teams have their most important player sidelined with injury, but these sort of things can tear a team apart. We don't want to undo all the good work we've done and accomplished so far. Aside from this, it seems the Tigers are a very tight unit.
This means getting rid of Galvin as a priority, or getting him away from the team environment. We need to copy Melbourne's playbook here and only do a player swap if it benefits us. They've tried to set stuff up in the past and the counter offer from the other club hasn't been a joke, but wasn't what they were after so didn't pursue it. So if we can't arrange a swap on our terms, that greatly benefits us, where does that leave us?
It seems in hindsight that the comments made about Marshall's coaching ability, or lack of it, could be a seed that has been planted to entice us to fire Galvin. This would certainly benefit Galvin and his team as he could go anywhere else immediately, and at the same time sue the Tigers for unfair dismissal by backtracking and saying that he (Galvin) never actually said this about Marshall, and it was a media beat up.
Unfortunately rugby league is a business. I'm not sure if any of you have worked in a corporate environment, but if you have, you'll be familiar with a term called 'gardening leave.' This usually relates to employees who are on fixed term contracts so it is similar to the situation we currently face with Galvin. What this term means is that you have someone you either can't or don't want to fire, but don't want around the other employees. It's usually an embittered person who if kept around, would drag down morale and productivity. So what you do is send them home on full pay, with no duties or expectations, and there they stay there until their contract expires. Hence the term gardening leave. You also give them full access to the company's mental health entitlements so that they can't come back to you with that complaint. You've covered your arse legally, and you don't have the embittered person around anymore, dragging down the club from within.
Of course, if the rest of the team are willing to keep him around and work with him, and the media reports are the usual rubbish, then keep him in the system. I'd certainly be prioritising the development of other players though and use him as a cover player only.
www.foxsports.com.au
