Roosterphin
Juniors
- Messages
- 938
Should Walker be playing?
Opninion by Ray Chesterton
October 2, 2003
IF THE Roosters win Sunday's grand final Souths should join them in the lap of honour.
For without Souths' unbounded generosity and historic decision to release Chris Walker last May, the Roosters might have struggled for reliability on one their wings.
Along the way, Walker has made himself a significant footnote in rugby league history.
Statisticians are certain he is the first player to ever appear with the wooden spooners (Souths) and a grand final team (the Roosters) in the same season.
Hopefully, Walker's situation will remain as a unique and painful reminder to Souths, and clubs generally, that it should not happen again.
It is no fault of Walker's that he finds himself in the privileged position of being 80 minutes away from a premiership win. He, or his advisers, simply made the most of opportunities that came their way.
And, of course, they were helped by Souths' abysmal understanding of the very basics of ending contracts.
Chris and his brother Shane joined Souths this year from the Broncos.
By May, Chris, for whatever reason, had decided he did not want to stay. Souths concurred, agreeing to release him.
It was a remarkable decision considering Souths were rebuilding and had a serious shortage of class players.
Other clubs, perhaps more experienced in the ways of disgruntled footballers, might have negotiated a workable truce with Chris. Souths could not, or would not, do that.
What Souths forgot, and it was a memory lapse of major importance, was to include a clause in Chris' release prohibiting him from playing for another NRL club this year.
It is bad enough not having the services of a key player you have just signed.
It is acutely compounded when you set him free to play against you.
There was a precedent so Souths' tyro administrators cannot plead inexperience.
In 2003 the Dragons agreed to release unhappy winger Nathan Blacklock from his contract with the proviso he not join another NRL club.
He switched to rugby union before returning to the Dragons this year.
Souths imposed no such conditions on Walker.
Running around Aussie Stadium this week as the Roosters prepared for Sunday's game, Chris was grateful for his release and the opportunity it presented.
He is on the verge of fame and fortune (well at least an increase on the $45,000 he accepted to join the Roosters for this year).
No one has done anything wrong. In fact, the Roosters and Chris can be praised for their ingenuity. If you see things their way.
Why then is there a feeling of disquiet about what happened? As if the game has again suffered a circumstance that does not reflect its true ideals.
Should Chris Walker be playing in the grand final?
You would think that in Grand Final week there would be an abundance of quality stories available. Obviously not! :roll:
Opninion by Ray Chesterton
October 2, 2003
IF THE Roosters win Sunday's grand final Souths should join them in the lap of honour.
For without Souths' unbounded generosity and historic decision to release Chris Walker last May, the Roosters might have struggled for reliability on one their wings.
Along the way, Walker has made himself a significant footnote in rugby league history.
Statisticians are certain he is the first player to ever appear with the wooden spooners (Souths) and a grand final team (the Roosters) in the same season.
Hopefully, Walker's situation will remain as a unique and painful reminder to Souths, and clubs generally, that it should not happen again.
It is no fault of Walker's that he finds himself in the privileged position of being 80 minutes away from a premiership win. He, or his advisers, simply made the most of opportunities that came their way.
And, of course, they were helped by Souths' abysmal understanding of the very basics of ending contracts.
Chris and his brother Shane joined Souths this year from the Broncos.
By May, Chris, for whatever reason, had decided he did not want to stay. Souths concurred, agreeing to release him.
It was a remarkable decision considering Souths were rebuilding and had a serious shortage of class players.
Other clubs, perhaps more experienced in the ways of disgruntled footballers, might have negotiated a workable truce with Chris. Souths could not, or would not, do that.
What Souths forgot, and it was a memory lapse of major importance, was to include a clause in Chris' release prohibiting him from playing for another NRL club this year.
It is bad enough not having the services of a key player you have just signed.
It is acutely compounded when you set him free to play against you.
There was a precedent so Souths' tyro administrators cannot plead inexperience.
In 2003 the Dragons agreed to release unhappy winger Nathan Blacklock from his contract with the proviso he not join another NRL club.
He switched to rugby union before returning to the Dragons this year.
Souths imposed no such conditions on Walker.
Running around Aussie Stadium this week as the Roosters prepared for Sunday's game, Chris was grateful for his release and the opportunity it presented.
He is on the verge of fame and fortune (well at least an increase on the $45,000 he accepted to join the Roosters for this year).
No one has done anything wrong. In fact, the Roosters and Chris can be praised for their ingenuity. If you see things their way.
Why then is there a feeling of disquiet about what happened? As if the game has again suffered a circumstance that does not reflect its true ideals.
Should Chris Walker be playing in the grand final?
You would think that in Grand Final week there would be an abundance of quality stories available. Obviously not! :roll:
