The football season is around the corner and fans are relishing the prospect of watching the big guns go hard in the week to week combat of professional footy. Nervously, administrators of the major football codes in the country hope and pray that the season can kick off in style -and not be faced with an off-field scandal that threatens to derail the season opener of their respective leagues before a ball is kicked in anger.
Unfortunately, in recent seasons off-field misconduct has taken centre stage at untimely periods of the season. The most noteworthy was the situation of two seasons ago when the Brett Stewart incident cast a pall over the NRL and its launch of season 2010.
Behavioural misconduct from players is one of the biggest challenges for sporting organisations in professional sport. Protection of brand and reputation is paramount for administrators in the highly competitive world of sport. Behaviour or conduct from players that potentially damages or devalues the brand and value of a club are not going to be treated lightly by administrators. What positive measures do clubs take to ensure the value of their product is not diminished?
The terms and conditions of an athlete's contract often stipulate what constitutes a breach for behavioural misconduct. In certain sports, the governing body will use a grading system to determine the severity of the offence. For example, the International Cricket Council (ICC) grades misconduct on a scale of 1 to 4. Minor offences on the scaling system might be gesturing or verballing to the crowd by a player, and crimes like match-fixing are at the top end of the scale.
If the severity of the offence is sufficient, the sporting body will have grounds to sanction the athlete for a breach of their playing contract. In many cases, the right of an organisation to terminate the playing / employment contract is exercised. In recent times, the sporting public has observed decisions to terminate the agreements of NRL player Ryan Tandy for involvement in a betting scandal, swimmer Nick D'Arcy for misconduct from the Australian swimming team and swimmer Stephanie Rice and her sponsorship agreement with Jaguar Australia.
An issue that has proven difficult for sporting bodies to reconcile is how to act when a contracted athlete is charged with a criminal offence. One of the fundamental bedrock principles to the Australian legal system is the presumption of innocence. How does a sporting body sanction an athlete for misconduct when the athlete is facing an accompanying criminal charge? Whilst the two can be separated legally (contractual v criminal), the situation can provoke challenging circumstances. For instance, Ryan Tandy was required by his NRL club, the Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs, to appear before the Board for a show cause meeting to explain his conduct. Tandy, accompanied by his solicitor, declined to make a statement on legal advice - and subsequently had his employment terminated. It is a difficult situation as statements at this meeting from Tandy could have been used against him at a later date in his criminal trial.
The behavioural covenant that athletes contractually agree to in various sports can differ significantly depending on the sport. What is common though is use of the term 'disrepute' within the specific clause relating to behaviour. 'Bringing a sport into disrepute' will often give rise to a sporting body terminating employment for a culpable athlete. What exactly does 'disrepute' mean in the sporting context? Most sports do not specifically define this term - deliberately so! By keeping 'disrepute' as broad and wide-ranging as possible, a sporting body has the flexibility to determine each situation on merit and make decisions accordingly.
With professional sport facing ongoing battles with doping, gaming, behavioural misconduct and other misdemeanours, the right to penalise through contract has never been stronger and more likely to be utilised in modern day professional sport.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
