Karmichael Hunt charged with cocaine supply.

[Thinker]

Papers today saying the ARU contract started on Jan 1.

All very odd. Can't fathom why Suns would let Hunt train with another team for 4 months while under contract.

 

[Thinker]

Karmichael Timeline

This doesn't take into account all the photo ops or the fact he was appearing on every NRC home game poster from September 25 onwards, raising questions about the right to use his image I guess as he was apparently not affiliated with the Reds.

28 AUGUST- Hunt announces he’s leaving The Suns/AFL. Rules himself out of future games, essentially “retiring” from the sport.

29 AUGUST- Hunt signing announced by Reds

31 AUGUST- Hunt farewelled at Suns Home game with ceremony type thing

1 SEPTEMBER- Beginning of period in Question

18 SEPTEMBER- Hunt’s first session with Reds, promotional photo and training session with Brisbane City

20 SEPTEMBER- Hunt buys house at Hendra

28 SEPTEMBER- Hunt at Reds signing session during NRC

3 OCTOBER- Quade confirms on Rugby HQ that KH had been training for last 2 weeks and going well.

3 OCTOBER- End of period in Question

20 OCTOBER- ABC reports “Six weeks of rugby union training at the Queensland Reds have been enough to convince the ex-Brisbane Bronco that he made the right choice when he ended his 44-game AFL career at the Gold Coast Suns in August.”

24 NOVEMBER- “Official” pre-season starts


1 JANUARY- Hunt Contract starts

 

[TOCC]

It's fairly standard that the players contracts runs for the calendar year, it's also accepted that players will move to their new club and commence pre-season with new clubs whilst contracted to their old club. It would make sense for contracts to run Oct - Oct but for whatever reason they don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cat_A]

They used to run Oct to Oct but the transition to calendar year happened January 2014. It is interesting though that legally, for any newly contracted player, they are essentially required to train full-time without pay between start of preseason & January, and if they get a season-ending injury the contract can be removed at any time up to the start date.

For any player coming from another franchise, there's a gentleman's agreement where players are allowed to leave earlier (assume paid out) to start training with the other team. I'd be interested to find out which of the two sides would have to fork out for any surgery etc. for injuries sustained while contracted to the previous franchise but training with the new.

Off topic, but I am curious.

 

[2bluesfan]

For any player coming from another franchise, there's a gentleman's agreement where players are allowed to leave earlier (assume paid out) to start training with the other team. I'd be interested to find out which of the two sides would have to fork out for any surgery etc. for injuries sustained while contracted to the previous franchise but training with the new.

Hmmmm that's an interesting point and a potential minefield. Gentleman's agreements are the playthings of lawyers but one would hope that the welfare of the player would be prioritised.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Hmmmm that's an interesting point and a potential minefield. Gentleman's agreements are the playthings of lawyers but one would hope that the welfare of the player would be prioritised.

All of the rugby players would be contracted and registered with the ARU though wouldn't they? At the least you'd think all of the Super teams would all have the same insurance arrangements.

Cross coders and is players are more interesting......

 

[Cat_A]

Yeah, it's a strange one because even though the contracts run Jan to Jan, I believe players are generally paid from day 1 (year 1 $$ divided by 14 or 15 months rather than 12). Again, an agreement, but not a written requirement.

I'm not a lawyer, but I have employed staff before and I'm flummoxed as to where that sits employment-wise (especially in terms of protections extended to and behavioural requirements of players).

I'm keen for professional rugby to embrace true professionalism; a professional game is more than players who are paid. Professionalism makes rugby a workplace, where both the franchise and everyone in the team itself, the travelling and non-travelling support staff, the administrators and all other paid hangers on, are subject to workplace law and entitled to workplace protections.

As it is I think we're stuck in a dual mindset: players vs. employees. I think that duality is playing out in this thread (most threads actually). Rugby turned professional in 1995 but rugby as a workplace is still incredibly (disturbingly) amateur. I see this as a monstrous HR nightmare waiting to happen.

EDIT: By 'this' I mean all employment-related issues: aside from pay rates and specific contract variations, all other policies MUST apply to the team as much as they apply in the office.

 

[stampy]

#makewayforthebadguy

 

[Cat_A]

All of the rugby players would be contracted and registered with the ARU though wouldn't they? At the least you'd think all of the Super teams would all have the same insurance arrangements.

Cross coders and is players are more interesting..

I believe each franchise covers the out of pocket expenses of contracted players injured playing rugby. I'm 90% confident of that. So no, it's a big question (and potentially huge expense) that just hasn't come up yet.

 

[TOCC]

I believe each franchise covers the out of pocket expenses of contracted players injured playing rugby. I'm 90% confident of that. So no, it's a big question (and potentially huge expense) that just hasn't come up yet.

Surely RUPA wouldn't let a player train with a club without some of insurance covering them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stoff]

Don't know if it has been mentioned in this thread previously, but The Age down here are reporting that AFL contracts run to end October, and that on that basis any WADA sanctions stemming from a conviction, or admission of guilt, would need to be instigated by the AFL. Ban for supply of drugs has a maximum of life, again to be determined by the AFL. Other codes would need to then enforce that ban.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I believe each franchise covers the out of pocket expenses of contracted players injured playing rugby. I'm 90% confident of that. So no, it's a big question (and potentially huge expense) that just hasn't come up yet.

Do you mean rehab costs to get them back on the field or living costs?

Who's paying if someone breaks their neck and needs lifetime treatment?

 

[Cat_A]

Do you mean rehab costs to get them back on the field or living costs?

Who's paying if someone breaks their neck and needs lifetime treatment?

Costs to get them back on the field.

And there are some costs that aren't covered by medical insurance (and therefore ARU insurance) such as MRIs in some conditions (I could go into them but it's even more off topic) and other associated rehab stuff.

If you're relyimg on ARU insurance to help if you break your neck you're completely fucked. A death onfield only pays something like $100K. 100k for total permanent disability won't go far.

 

[Cat_A]

Surely RUPA wouldn't let a player train with a club without some of insurance covering them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If theyve registered with a club then they're covered under ARU insurance. It's a contractual requirement that they hold private health insurance and the smart ones hold income protection insurance.

You'd be surprised how completely vulnerable many players are.

 

[Blake]

It appears that you can take a player out of rugby league, but you can't take rugby league out of a player.

 

[wamberal]

It appears that you can take a player out of rugby league, but you can't take rugby league out of a player.

According to one report up to 100 footballers are implicated in this investigation.


I would imagine that a number as huge as this might mean that all sorts of people are caught in a rather unpleasant situation.

Let's wait and see before we start making simplistic statements. Who knows where the blame will spread?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Is illegal drug supply and use by up to 100 players, potentially across a couple of codes, a darker day for Australian Sport than the Official Darkest Day in Australian Sport as declared by some muppet Minister of Sport?

Dishlicker racing is doing its best to challenge for the title.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

It appears that you can take a player out of rugby league, but you can't take rugby league out of a player.

More like you can take the player out of the GC, blow capital of Australia, but you can't take the GC out of the player?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league...pair-may-be-bit-players-in-bigger-drugs-drama

 

[Slim 293]

According to one report up to 100 footballers are implicated in this investigation.


I would imagine that a number as huge as this might mean that all sorts of people are caught in a rather unpleasant situation.

Let's wait and see before we start making simplistic statements. Who knows where the blame will spread?

Exactly, it's a general Queensland problem...........

 

[TOCC]

More like you can take the player out of the GC, blow capital of Australia, but you can't take the GC out of the player?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league...pair-may-be-bit-players-in-bigger-drugs-drama

the Gold Coast is many things, likely the steroid and Botox capital, but Sydney is surely the cocaine capital of Australia...