Ron E. Gibbs
First Grader
At this point I think it's safe to say that everyone in the world is aware that the Manly club buggered up the implementation of the Everyone In League jersey to the point that it will be used as a case study in how not to do things in a rugby league club for years to come. And one of the results will be that we'll play a very important game this Thursday night with seven of our best players missing. I'm at peace with that and will be happy to support the 17 players who want to wear the jersey, play footy and represent the club.
But was that the only way this could have ended?
I know the club couldn't back down and say, "Bad idea. We'll scrap the jersey." And I know the players didn't want to back down either. But would it really have been so hard for the NRL to get involved and try to broker a solution?
As many people have noticed, there's not a huge difference between the Everyone in League strip and the regular maroon and white hoops strip. Really, at a distance you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference, and on the field all you'd really see is a block of maroon. There's no way it would have confused or disadvantaged the Roosters team in any way if the players had been allowed to "mix and match". It would not have been an ideal solution (that's why it's a compromise), but it would have allowed the players to get their point across and to play. Nobody really wins, but nobody really loses either.
The NRL, weirdly enough, doubled down on the importance of inclusion and even promised to look into a "Pride round" for next season (whether they actually meant to follow through or not is up for debate). But they didn't offer to help Manly or the seven dissenting players involved in any way. They could have said something like, "We understand the players were not given an opportunity to voice their concerns, and we want to understand those concerns and work through those issues with them and others ahead of the implementation of a Pride Round next season. Given the short time frame, we are prepared to allow them to wear their regular jerseys and support their club and teammates on this occasion." So you acknowledge the issues and pledge to work through them so that something like this never needs to happen again. And you make it clear to everyone that players being allowed to wear slightly different strips is a one-off.
Instead, it seems like the NRL has said, "This is your stuff-up, you fix it." They've also pretty much given players the green light to refuse to play if they find anything objectionable on their jerseys, so good luck with that going forward.
Given that you can't change the mistake, what could have been done to fix it?
But was that the only way this could have ended?
I know the club couldn't back down and say, "Bad idea. We'll scrap the jersey." And I know the players didn't want to back down either. But would it really have been so hard for the NRL to get involved and try to broker a solution?
As many people have noticed, there's not a huge difference between the Everyone in League strip and the regular maroon and white hoops strip. Really, at a distance you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference, and on the field all you'd really see is a block of maroon. There's no way it would have confused or disadvantaged the Roosters team in any way if the players had been allowed to "mix and match". It would not have been an ideal solution (that's why it's a compromise), but it would have allowed the players to get their point across and to play. Nobody really wins, but nobody really loses either.
The NRL, weirdly enough, doubled down on the importance of inclusion and even promised to look into a "Pride round" for next season (whether they actually meant to follow through or not is up for debate). But they didn't offer to help Manly or the seven dissenting players involved in any way. They could have said something like, "We understand the players were not given an opportunity to voice their concerns, and we want to understand those concerns and work through those issues with them and others ahead of the implementation of a Pride Round next season. Given the short time frame, we are prepared to allow them to wear their regular jerseys and support their club and teammates on this occasion." So you acknowledge the issues and pledge to work through them so that something like this never needs to happen again. And you make it clear to everyone that players being allowed to wear slightly different strips is a one-off.
Instead, it seems like the NRL has said, "This is your stuff-up, you fix it." They've also pretty much given players the green light to refuse to play if they find anything objectionable on their jerseys, so good luck with that going forward.
Given that you can't change the mistake, what could have been done to fix it?
