Rugby Australia accused of showing a lack of class
Sydney Roosters coach Trent Robinson has rubbished reports Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii could be released to rugby union a year early while lashing Rugby Australia chair Hamish McLennan for recent comments about the club's salary cap.
In March, Suaalii signed a three-year, $4.8 million contract to switch codes from 2025, eyeing the chance to represent the Wallabies against the British & Irish Lions and at the World Cup two years later in 2027.
The contract, richer per season than any in NRL history, has since become the subject of protracted media and public interest.
The Roosters had originally been adamant Suaalii would honour the final year-and-a-half of his NRL deal but with the 19-year-old down on form, reports emerged this week the Tricolours could save around $700,000 by releasing him at the end of 2023.
Suaalii's future Super Rugby club the NSW Waratahs indicated this week they would be open to welcoming the young gun from 2024 if financial speci fics could be ironed out.
Roosters chair Nick Politis deferred the final say in Suaalii's contract situation to Robinson, who shut down rumours of an early switch on Thursday.
"He won't be (released early)," Robinson said.
"Those reports haven't come from inside this club. That's been speculation outside. It's not even been a discussion inside this club."
Speaking to News Corp this week, RA boss McLennan questioned whether salary cap issues were behind reports the Roosters wanted to offload Suaalii early.
Robinson took exception to the jibe, the latest entry into a public and increasingly childish war of words between the codes.
"He's doing that for certain reasons," Robinson said.
"I can imagine rugby people aren't excited about the way that's been handled either.
"There's usually a bit more class in the discussions and all of that. I don't really want to get into it. I've got my job to do here."
Ahead of Friday's clash against Penrith, Robinson stressed the distinction between interest in Suaalii's form and ongoing commentary about his future.
"We play a game that is televised and we get to do what we do because people have opinions on it," he said.
"That scrutiny and that interest is on him and he has to perform.
"As far as putting pressure on about whether he's going to be here or not, I feel like that's unfair. Because that hasn't come from inside these walls."
Panthers five-eighth Jarome Luai doubted whether the headlines would be impacting his Samoan international teammate.
"Knowing how much of a professional he is, I don't think much gets to him," Luai said.
"He's got a good support group as well. Obviously some things have happened where he's leaving the game (at the end of) next year, so I think that's why he's targeted a bit.
"He's going to be on this weekend and he's a big focus point for us as well to win this game this week."
Latest Comments
Who got the benefits out of Schmidt, Lowe, Aki, and Gibson Park?
Go to commentsI’m all for speeding up the game. But can we be certain that the slowness of the game contributed to fans walking out? I’m not so sure. Super rugby largely suffered from most fans only being able to, really, follow the games played in their own time zone. So at least a third of the fan base wasn’t engaged at any point in time. As a Saffer following SA teams in the URC - I now watch virtually every European game played on the weekend. In SR, I wouldn’t be bothered to follow the games being played on the other side of the world, at weird hours, if my team wasn’t playing. I now follow the whole tournament and not just the games in my time zone. Second, with New Zealand teams always winning. It’s like formula one. When one team dominates, people lose interest. After COVID, with SA leaving and Australia dipping in form, SR became an even greater one horse race. Thats why I think Japan’s league needs to get in the mix. The international flavor of those teams could make for a great spectacle. But surely if we believe that shaving seconds off lost time events in rugby is going to draw fans back, we should be shown some figures that supports this idea before we draw any major conclusions. Where are the stats that shows these changes have made that sort of impact? We’ve measured down to the average no. Of seconds per game. Where the measurement of the impact on the fanbase? Does a rugby “fan” who lost interest because of ball in play time suddenly have a revived interest because we’ve saved or brought back into play a matter of seconds or a few minutes each game? I doubt it. I don’t thinks it’s even a noticeable difference to be impactful. The 20 min red card idea. Agreed. Let’s give it a go. But I think it’s fairer that the player sent off is substituted and plays no further part in the game as a consequence.
Go to comments