Paul Kent has changed his tune since he wrote this item almost a month ago.
Daly Cherry-Evans transfer: NRL’s transfer system is to blame for the mess, not DCE or the clubs
May 16, 2015 2:57pm
Paul KentThe Daily Telegraph
THE language surrounding Daly Cherry-Evans is one of insult and misunderstanding. It reveals the unfairness of the NRL’s round 13 rule. We need to cut him a break.
It also highlights how poorly the whole Cherry-Evans fiasco was handled. The line for who to blame starts to the left.
But how much can we really attach to Cherry-Evans? Why is the hate so strong? And what will happen if he stays at Manly?
Instead of being praised for being loyal, it will invite more criticism.
The doubt over DCE’s Titans switch has sparked huge criticism.
CHOICE:
Why Myles won’t talk DCE into staying
Other Stories
NRL Late Mail: DCE’s shock comeback
Landlords demand sex for lodging
The war on body hair: pubes fight back
COOL:
Titans playing it patient with DCE
Greg Inglis left Melbourne and signed with Brisbane, then flipped on the Broncos to sign with Souths, yet Inglis looms a modern folk hero.
Luke Lewis was the first to exploit the round 13 rule, signing with South Sydney before reneging to stay in Penrith.
James Tedesco reneged on Canberra to stay at Wests Tigers.
Josh Papalii reneged on Parramatta to stay at Canberra.
None of them were condemned like Cherry-Evans, who has not even exercised the clause yet.
That Cherry-Evans is considering a “backflip” has brought out unprecedented hate.
Where was it for the others?
A listener called 2KY’s
Big Sports Breakfaston Thursday morning and, complaining of Cherry-Evans, he started talking about “honouring his word”.
He wanted to know how Cherry-Evans could change his mind and stay at Manly given he signed a contract with Gold Coast.
Didn’t he know he signed a contract, he asked?
He then pointed out that normal people buy houses for hundreds of thousands of dollars, the biggest financial decision of their lives, and get just a five-day cooling off period before the contract is legally binding.
Why did Cherry-Evans have until round 13, he wanted to know, when normal folk can make equally as big a decision and have just five days to change their mind?
The answer, without trying to sound patronising, is because he can.
Cherry-Evans is perfectly entitled to reverse his decision right up until round 13 because the rules allow it.
Yet he has come under pressure unlike anyone else has seen. Again, it’s the fault of the rules and not the player.
When Trent Merrin announced he was leaving St George Illawarra for Penrith earlier this year the Dragons shook his hand and wished him all the best.
Negotiations barely paused when Cherry-Evans signed with Gold Coast before round one.
They were supposed to end.
But managers have now finely honed the round 13 clause so it is now just another step in negotiations.
Greg Inglis backflipped on the Broncos but it didn’t hurt his reputation.
The round 13 clause allows players and their managers to call a club’s bluff.
In other words, Manly’s “best offer” is put forward and Cherry-Evans rejects it, signs with the Gold Coast, and the Sea Eagles now know that unless they mortgage the farm. None of this is Cherry-Evans’ fault.
Blame belongs with the NRL for not blowing up the system.
Cherry-Evans is in no different a place today than he was before round one. Manly have come back with a fresh offer and he is said to be tempted.
Earlier this week Manly told him they needed a decision, once and for all, on their new offer “within the next week or so”. The Sea Eagles don’t want to wait until round 13 because if they lose Cherry-Evans for good they need to get into the market as soon as possible to start filling some of those very large gaps in the roster.
The problem for Cherry-Evans is the constant chipping at his character.
It should not be part of his decision, but it will be because he is the kind of man that likes to please others.
He just needs to remember that when you try to make all the people happy all the time, you end up making none of them happy.