Ashes lockout with Aussie players on the front foot

Its a classic case where the administrators think that the sport exists for them rather than the players or the fans. Sutherland needs to be kicked in the nuts until he understands.

Word.

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/barmy-army-faces-bankruptcy-if-ashes-cancelled-cofounder-dave-peacock-says-20170710-gx7z7b.html

The Barmy Army weighs into the debate.

Red wrote:http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/barmy-army-faces-bankruptcy-if-ashes-cancelled-cofounder-dave-peacock-says-20170710-gx7z7b.html

The Barmy Army weighs into the debate.

Brilliant. The Australian strike can go for a while longer now.

tricycle wrote:

Red wrote:http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/barmy-army-faces-bankruptcy-if-ashes-cancelled-cofounder-dave-peacock-says-20170710-gx7z7b.html

The Barmy Army weighs into the debate.

Brilliant. The Australian strike can go for a while longer now.

Silver linings.... There's always an upside ... All we need is for the fanatics to go belly-up as well.

On the other topic of sponsors, huzzah if there no kfc ads...those prix always feature dubbers and allow the Colonel to select at least one player.

horace wrote:

tricycle wrote:

Red wrote:http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/barmy-army-faces-bankruptcy-if-ashes-cancelled-cofounder-dave-peacock-says-20170710-gx7z7b.html

The Barmy Army weighs into the debate.

Brilliant. The Australian strike can go for a while longer now.

Silver linings.... There's always an upside ... All we need is for the fanatics to go belly-up as well.

Couldn't be that lucky.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/cricket/malcolm-turnbull-calls-for-end-to-cricket-australia-pay-dispute/news-story/cae105f29b0bb0db87cb75f90e9fbec9

Tubby said that progress has been made this past week.

Also it's reported that some rich cricket loving businessmen have been supplementing the players' union fund to tide them over. The cricketers vow to pay these people back, but CA is adamant that there will be no back pay.

Red wrote:Tubby said that progress has been made this past week.

Also it's reported that some rich cricket loving businessmen have been supplementing the players' union fund to tide them over. The cricketers vow to pay these people back, but CA is adamant that there will be no back pay.

They have only been out on strike for 11 days, haven't they? How are the players out of money?

Interesting intervention from Truffles, who worked for Packer and wsc. Seems he is unsympathetic to CA.

Is this a new outbreak of the Tory wars?

Truffles speech was an effort to stake the Libs in the centre. Quoted the MMs comments about the sensible centre. The fascist faction will be apoplectic.

Maybe CA's Board line up withe Browns. Certainly Sutherland and Howard and others seem to have a born to rule approach The cricketers have not covered themselves in glory. Wanting a share of ALL gross revenue means every local and junior club through subs up the food chain contribute to CA's gross revenue. The concept of local cricketers subsidising rich low performance cricketers and bureaucrats is appalling.

taipan wrote:

Red wrote:Tubby said that progress has been made this past week.

Also it's reported that some rich cricket loving businessmen have been supplementing the players' union fund to tide them over. The cricketers vow to pay these people back, but CA is adamant that there will be no back pay.

They have only been out on strike for 11 days, haven't they? How are the players out of money?

In a few days they are due for their monthly cheque.

Red wrote:

taipan wrote:

Red wrote:Tubby said that progress has been made this past week.

Also it's reported that some rich cricket loving businessmen have been supplementing the players' union fund to tide them over. The cricketers vow to pay these people back, but CA is adamant that there will be no back pay.

They have only been out on strike for 11 days, haven't they? How are the players out of money?

In a few days they are due for their monthly cheque.

Exactly. So nothing has been paid out so far.

horace wrote:Interesting intervention from Truffles, who worked for Packer and wsc. Seems he is unsympathetic to CA.

Is this a new outbreak of the Tory wars?

Truffles speech was an effort to stake the Libs in the centre. Quoted the MMs comments about the sensible centre. The fascist faction will be apoplectic.

Maybe CA's Board line up withe Browns. Certainly Sutherland and Howard and others seem to have a born to rule approach The cricketers have not covered themselves in glory. Wanting a share of ALL gross revenue means every local and junior club through subs up the food chain contribute to CA's gross revenue. The concept of local cricketers subsidising rich low performance cricketers and bureaucrats is appalling.

Participation rates climb when the Oz team is successful and during the BaBeL

Last year the Scorchers held free junior clinics all over WA with players in attendance ...and all the local junior clubs were sitting there with their sign up sheets

Paris Behrendorf and Ebsary were at the one I attended

These appearances are part of their basic contract

I would think similar things were done all over Oz

Yep. But one hand golf clap. The least the players can do. The players demands give them a financial incentive to attend such sessions.

Personally I support giving the wages of both administrators and players a haircut, with savings to go to support local and junior competition.

Not a zac should go to rich private schools. Would like to know whether Scotch College where Sutherland's kid attends receives financial or in kind assistance. There is a case for Oz govt intervention, not in resolving the dispute - they'd dark it up - but in driving greater transparency of CA financials and performance.

Peever publicly advertises the true greed and utter quntitude of CA ...

OK I give in - what's this Peever's actual name?

NSR immunity cloak donned ... David Peever


on another note ... the Gangas seem to have resolved their own player/board impasse.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/content/story/1110424.html

It all seems to depend on which corner you miss ...

The Guardian today gives Combet a chance to repudiate (don't) leave it to Peever.... Reasonable article.

A Board Chairman being a qunt - now there's a surprise. Appalling timing by Peever to slag off the ACA just as Tubby is saying progress has been made.

"The Australian Cricketers' Association (ACA) has hit back at Cricket Australia (CA) chairman David Peever, saying his intervention into the pay dispute has done "nothing to further any progress" in finding a resolution.

Peever has written a column in The Australian newspaper, defending CA's approach to the pay negotiations and criticising the ACA for being "reckless".
...
"The imputation that the players and the ACA are sabotaging the game is wrong," the ACA said in a statement.
...
Peever is a former managing director of Rio Tinto's Australian operations and he once made a speech publicly campaigning for "direct engagement between companies and employees … without the competing agenda of a third party, constantly seeking to extend its reach into areas best left to management".

Many observers see the fingerprints of this philosophy in CA's approach to the current pay dispute, particularly in its attempts to bypass the ACA and offer senior players individual contract offers."

---------------------------------------------

And where is that useless prick Sutherland in all this??

Where he's probably most useful....ie not within cooee.

Just looked up 'peeve' in Entymology On Line, half expecting a 'peever' to have been the bloke that rode from village to village around the time of the Crusades fomenting unrest, a kind of (slightly more) Mediaeval Mark Latham, but apparently it's only an early 20th century word.

Still it's enough for the players to be the peevees...if this shitfight never resolves, maybe they could form their own T20 side, called the Hermans of course

skully wrote:A Board Chairman being a qunt - now there's a surprise. Appalling timing by Peever to slag off the ACA just as Tubby is saying progress has been made.

"The Australian Cricketers' Association (ACA) has hit back at Cricket Australia (CA) chairman David Peever, saying his intervention into the pay dispute has done "nothing to further any progress" in finding a resolution.

Peever has written a column in The Australian newspaper, defending CA's approach to the pay negotiations and criticising the ACA for being "reckless".
...
"The imputation that the players and the ACA are sabotaging the game is wrong," the ACA said in a statement.
...
Peever is a former managing director of Rio Tinto's Australian operations and he once made a speech publicly campaigning for "direct engagement between companies and employees … without the competing agenda of a third party, constantly seeking to extend its reach into areas best left to management".

Many observers see the fingerprints of this philosophy in CA's approach to the current pay dispute, particularly in its attempts to bypass the ACA and offer senior players individual contract offers."

---------------------------------------------

And where is that useless prick Sutherland in all this??

With that attitude he should leave industrial relations to the unions and the the employees.

Fred Nerk wrote:Where he's probably most useful....ie not within cooee.

Just looked up 'peeve' in Entymology On Line, half expecting a 'peever' to have been the bloke that rode from village to village around the time of the Crusades fomenting unrest, a kind of (slightly more) Mediaeval Mark Latham, but apparently it's only an early 20th century word.

Still it's enough for the players to be the peevees...if this shitfight never resolves, maybe they could form their own T20 side, called the Hermans of course

The players can't be the PV's ... CA already have a strong claim on 'stuck up qunts'.

About ferkin time

"Sutherland key but is he too late to end the bitterness?

James Sutherland’s involvement in the cricket dispute may have come too late to save the unfortunate fallout since most Australia players were forced into unemployment, but it appears to have finally got negotiations moving with reports the two parties held a marathon meeting in Melbourne that extended late into last night.

The Cricket Australia chief executive and his opposite number Alistair Nicholson, along with both their negotiating parties, finally made it to the table in an official capacity in the second week of the lockout. There are more talks scheduled for today.

Players had signalled they were willing to concede ground within a revenue-sharing model, but there is no indication in which direction the talks are heading. They had been stalled since before Christmas over both side’s contrary opinions on the revenue share issue.
...
The “optics” of alienating the entire group of Australian cricketers is terrible for the administration. Worse, is the commercial reality felt in recent weeks as sponsors who have committed millions for the rights to exploit the images of players like Meg Lanning and Steve Smith find themselves unable to use the cricketers whose images are now controlled by the Australian Cricketers’ Association."

---------------------------------------------

You took your sweet time, Forrest.

It shits me that an excellent working relationship between CA and the players has been soured by Board pigheadedness.