Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The IRFU, is it time to replace the blazers?

24

Comments

  • #32
    Kayless
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 817 ✭✭✭Kayless


    Compared to the FAI the IRFU are doing a great job look at the amount of talent we have and most of them players are playing in Ireland the only thing I would hold against the IRFU is if they give Kidney another contract that IMO would be missed opportunity given that all of the provinces now have SH coaches


  • #33
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    JustinDee wrote: »
    totallegend wrote:
    But they do have very different objectives. Very different.

    So when you have the central branch doing the negotiating for a provincial player, or dictating who a province may sign, that's where the problems arise.

    Flagship pro teams and development teams leading promotion of game in clubs, schools and an expanding supporters market is the objective of both union and its branches, I would have thought.

    Superficially, yes. As two heads of the same beast, of course the overall objective of the national set-up and the provinces is the same.

    Where the problems arise is that the IRFU have decided that this objective can only be achieved through the success of the national side, to the detriment of the provincial set-up. It's both short-sighted and ignorant of the recent history and success of Irish rugby.

    I've been following Irish rugby for a lot longer than most posters on this board (I'd imagine). I was there on the terraces at the 1991 World Cup when rugby was obscure at best and a joke at worst. Things hadn't improved much by 1999, when the crowds for home World Cup matches were laughable. It's like 'Nam, if you weren't there, you don't know how bad it was.

    But I'd been at Lansdowne a few months prior to the World Cup as well; an atrocious game of rugby but the place was packed to the rafters and when the final whistle of the HEC final blew, the place went mental in a way I'd never really seen at a rugby game. This was uncharted waters for Irish rugby, you know the rest - Munster and their eight-year journey, Leinster becoming the best team in the history of the HEC etc etc.

    My point is that international rugby was the main focus of Irish game for, what, 120 years? And we chugged along in contented mediocrity for most of that period, happy in our little bubble and not really noticed by most of the world. I come from a part of Dublin where I got funny looks when I told people I was going to Lansdowne on a Saturday and even funnier looks when I told people that I actually played the game.

    Now where are we? Rugby has made great inroads into the huge swathes of the country in which it was a non-entity 15 or 20 years ago. The IRFU has done great work in developing underage rugby but it was the success of the provinces that drove the demand, the heroic exploits of Munster that sold jersey in their thousands and had kids in Tipperary and Waterford wanting to play rugby. Not the national team.

    Now, as the national team suffers thanks to the incompetence of its coaching staff and the administrators who renewed their contracts, the IRFU is only too happy to sacrifice the provinces on the altar of the national team.

    But the national team is the financial driver of the game in Ireland, isn't it? I have serious reservations about the veracity of that statement, but that's another argument. Certainly the provinces are closing the gap.

    What is pretty clear to me is that the improvement in the public profile of the sport in recent years has been driven by the provinces. Take Jonny Sexton as the example; he should be the lynchpin of any upcoming marketing or sponsorship deals. I would freely admit to being a one-eyed Leinster fan at times, but even I can see that Sexton has yet to really stamp his authority as an international fly-half; his reputation, his pre-eminence in the race for the Lions and his marketability have been built on his awe-inspiring performances for Leinster.

    The failures of the national team will see the provinces become less competitive as foreign players are hounded out or discouraged from coming in the first place. And now we face the spectre of losing our best home-grown players too.

    Should the IRFU have broken the bank to keep Sexton? No. Could they have engaged in some sort of cost-sharing deal with Leinster to keep him? I don't see why not. Having Sexton at Leinster means Leinster are more likely to qualify for HEC knock-outs which means more money for IRFU. A no-brainer? Well, apparently not.

    The fear is always that they'll set a precedent. B*llocks. Not every player is Jonny Sexton. If, next year, Rob Kearney (for example) says "you gave Jonny this deal, I want the same", the answer has to be "Sorry Rob, you're not as important to the team as he is". Isn't that the way of all negotiations?

    The IRFU simply weren't that pushed to keep Sexton; simple as that. This is a win-win as they see it. Someone else pays his salary, Ireland get to call him when needed, it's a two-year deal so he'll be back in time for the next World Cup. And now we hear that Sexton has additional releases in his contract, beyond IRB requirements, for Ireland camps. The IRFU will be delighted with that outcome.

    People are comparing the IRFU favourably with the FAI. Yes, absolutely, the FAI are a model of how not to do things. But the IRFU have one advantage; they have world-class players on show at the provinces week in, week out. If we no longer have that, either by fewer top-class foreigners coming here or by losing our native players, that advantage begins to disappear. If it comes to pass that the provinces become less successful or less attractive, it is inevitable that public interest in the team will suffer. And how is that good for the game?

    But I don't expect the blazers at IRFU to understand that.


  • #34
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    In what ways are the objectives counter-intuitive? Where does the conflict occur?


  • #35
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    In what ways are the objectives counter-intuitive? Where does the conflict occur?

    As per my post above; in the policies for signing and retaining players.

    There's also the player-welfare system which has seriously diluted the quality of a large percentage of Rabo games without delivering any improvement in national results.


  • #36
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    totallegend wrote: »
    As per my post above; in the policies for signing and retaining players.

    There's also the player-welfare system which has seriously diluted the quality of a large percentage of Rabo games without delivering any improvement in national results.

    In practice though, what are examples of the problems with player retention? Leinster certainly would never have been able to compete with Racing Metro on their own.

    I am no expert on the player welfare scheme. I don't know the extent of the advantages it offers so I have no idea if it's worth it. We might see an end to it if the Rabo changes perhaps.

    However the Player Welfare scheme really doesn't have anything to do with the blazers, does it?


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    CatFromHue
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,297 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    I don't know if you can say it was just the provinces who drove the game into being more popular as the national team itself was more successful in the early 2000's which would have gathered alot of attention as well.

    The lowest placed we finished between 2000 and 2004 in the 6N was third and we finished second three times. As you know yourself that would have been undreamed of in the 90's. I think now the provinces have taken over more so in the publics eye as they're more successful, certainly since 2009 but for me it was the success of the national team that really drove the emergence of rugby.

    The 02/03 HEC final in Dublin between Toulouse and Perpignan had only 28600 at it, which from memory actually seems like a bit of an exaggeration. As seen by the ticket demand for this years HEC final there's no chance there'll be such a poor attendance again. Yet at this time it was impossible to get tickets for big Ireland games.

    On the Sexton issue I don't think a pay share agreement between Leinster and the IRFU is a runner at all. As we've seen from football clubs in England that if you have bad financial management you will get into massive difficulties. I don't know the full ins and outs of the contract negotiations between the IRFU and Sexton but if it is reported that the numbers he's being offered in France are true it's just too much for us to compete with.


  • #38
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    On the Sexton issue I don't think a pay share agreement between Leinster and the IRFU is a runner at all. As we've seen from football clubs in England that if you have bad financial management you will get into massive difficulties. I don't know the full ins and outs of the contract negotiations between the IRFU and Sexton but if it is reported that the numbers he's being offered in France are true it's just too much for us to compete with.

    On that point, tbh I'd have said that a pay share agreement could well have worked.

    As I posted over on the other thread, the 3 main ways to match the shortfall would be:
    1 - Increase ticket/merchandise prices - probably a non runner given the state of the economy.
    2 - Try to get more sponsors in - possibly a runner, but difficult to do given the state of the economy.
    3 - Take money out of the amateur game - certainly a non-runner

    Now if you were to look at Leinster, as a brand they have businesses falling all over themselves to get associated with. Certain sponsorship contracts are up for renewal at the end of the year, I would have faith in the admins of Leinster Rugby being able to negotiate a successful deal making them able to match the price difference for the Sexton contract without breaking the bank.


  • #39
    CatFromHue
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,297 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    The thing, or one of the things, I don't like about that arrangement is that the club would be banking on getting itself some big sponsors and using their sponsorship money before they've got them. This is a very bad idea to me.


  • #40
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    totallegend wrote: »
    Superficially, yes. As two heads of the same beast, of course the overall objective of the national set-up and the provinces is the same.

    Where the problems arise is that the IRFU have decided that this objective can only be achieved through the success of the national side, to the detriment of the provincial set-up. It's both short-sighted and ignorant of the recent history and success of Irish rugby
    I don't see how you can qualify this claim of seperate goals at all.
    totallegend wrote: »
    I've been following Irish rugby for a lot longer than most posters on this board (I'd imagine). I was there on the terraces at the 1991 World Cup when rugby was obscure at best and a joke at worst. Things hadn't improved much by 1999, when the crowds for home World Cup matches were laughable. It's like 'Nam, if you weren't there, you don't know how bad it was
    I was there for both of those RWCs. You're saying that crowds were paltry? Lansdowne road was at a minimum half-full for the Japanese and Zimbabwean games in 1991. For the QF v Australia, it was packed to rafters and the crowd hit the roof when Hamilton went over for the try. For the NZ v Australia semi-final, it was also packed.
    In 1999, Ireland v Australia at Lansdowne road was in fact the first game in that RWC to sell out. At least 30,000 were present at the Romanian game and the house was almost full at USA game to see Keith Wood score four tries. Thomond Park was packed out for USA v Australia. I believe Argentina v France at Lansdowne was also very well attended (I had returned to Australia where I was living at the time, by then). What was laughable about all that??
    totallegend wrote: »
    But I'd been at Lansdowne a few months prior to the World Cup as well; an atrocious game of rugby but the place was packed to the rafters and when the final whistle of the HEC final blew, the place went mental in a way I'd never really seen at a rugby game. This was uncharted waters for Irish rugby, you know the rest - Munster and their eight-year journey, Leinster becoming the best team in the history of the HEC etc etc
    And?
    People go loopy when their team wins, especially a trophy. Cardiff on March 21st 2009 for example and rugby followers. Even the local GAA club here was stuff to rafters for that match. The effects of the Grand Slam win from what I witnessed, or took part in myself even, was unprecedented. The reach of that win went wider than any other team, national or otherwise.
    totallegend wrote: »
    My point is that international rugby was the main focus of Irish game for, what, 120 years? And we chugged along in contented mediocrity for most of that period, happy in our little bubble and not really noticed by most of the world. I come from a part of Dublin where I got funny looks when I told people I was going to Lansdowne on a Saturday and even funnier looks when I told people that I actually played the game.

    Now where are we? Rugby has made great inroads into the huge swathes of the country in which it was a non-entity 15 or 20 years ago. The IRFU has done great work in developing underage rugby but it was the success of the provinces that drove the demand, the heroic exploits of Munster that sold jersey in their thousands and had kids in Tipperary and Waterford wanting to play rugby. Not the national team
    Again, this is quite a subjective claim to make. Of course, provincial success is instrumental in spreading the game (Tipp has always been a great North Munster region, by the way, but that's another matter), that's why a particular programme/assistance gets put in place for areas in schools, clubs, referee, medical, coaching training etc.
    totallegend wrote: »
    Now, as the national team suffers thanks to the incompetence of its coaching staff and the administrators who renewed their contracts, the IRFU is only too happy to sacrifice the provinces on the altar of the national team

    But the national team is the financial driver of the game in Ireland, isn't it? I have serious reservations about the veracity of that statement, but that's another argument. Certainly the provinces are closing the gap
    Yes, it is and in tandem with provincial game revenue, it boosts coffers to run and promote the sport in Ireland.
    Remember the make-up of the IRFU and its provinces. Clubs elect members to provincial boards, provinces elect members to national board level. The IRFU is made up of the clubs. To claim that it laughs at or gains satisfaction from some purported dig at its own provinces is ludicrous.
    totallegend wrote: »
    The failures of the national team will see the provinces become less competitive as foreign players are hounded out or discouraged from coming in the first place. And now we face the spectre of losing our best home-grown players too
    So now the national level of the game does affect the success of the provinces?
    totallegend wrote: »
    Should the IRFU have broken the bank to keep Sexton? No. Could they have engaged in some sort of cost-sharing deal with Leinster to keep him? I don't see why not. Having Sexton at Leinster means Leinster are more likely to qualify for HEC knock-outs which means more money for IRFU. A no-brainer? Well, apparently not.
    You, and I, for that matter, have not one jot of an iota of any detail in contractual negotiations of any player, what was said or how they went on.
    totallegend wrote: »
    The IRFU simply weren't that pushed to keep Sexton; simple as that . . .
    I find this ridiculous and entirely baseless.
    I see your argument about his inclusion meaning Leinster succeed etc. He's a truly great player in an important position. No single player is a team however.
    totallegend wrote: »
    People are comparing the IRFU favourably with the FAI. Yes, absolutely, the FAI are a model of how not to do things. But the IRFU have one advantage; they have world-class players on show at the provinces week in, week out. If we no longer have that, either by fewer top-class foreigners coming here or by losing our native players, that advantage begins to disappear. If it comes to pass that the provinces become less successful or less attractive, it is inevitable that public interest in the team will suffer. And how is that good for the game?
    Quite.
    Do you include Jonathan Sexton in that list of world class players? Even though you "can see that Sexton has yet to really stamp his authority as an international fly-half"?
    Just asking.

    Thanks for reply all the same. Was a read.
    Respectfully, I disagree with your claims or interpretations of the whys and why nots with my reasons in this post.
    If the IRFU didn't care about player signings, there would have been an exodus years ago. French rugby didn't just find private money overnight or last week.


  • #41
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    The thing, or one of the things, I don't like about that arrangement is that the club would be banking on getting itself some big sponsors and using their sponsorship money before they've got them. This is a very bad idea to me.

    Well the idea would be that they should know what offers are there on the table before committing to that sort of deal.

    Remember that the people who look after that sort of thing are very good at what they do and wouldn't be gambling on bringing in the big contract as such.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    liammur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,461 ✭✭✭liammur


    Kayless wrote: »
    Compared to the FAI the IRFU are doing a great job look at the amount of talent we have and most of them players are playing in Ireland the only thing I would hold against the IRFU is if they give Kidney another contract that IMO would be missed opportunity given that all of the provinces now have SH coaches

    Correct.
    Some of the posts blaming the IRFU are completely absurd. A bit like blaming the FAI if a player leaves Sligo Rovers for Everton.

    Facts are, we can't compete money-wise. Never have been, and never will be.

    We've done a damn good in keeping the likes of POC/ROG/O Driscoll etc here for the duration of their careers. The players themselves too deserve credit of course.


  • #43
    jamiedav2011
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,906 ✭✭✭jamiedav2011


    liammur wrote: »
    Correct.
    Some of the posts blaming the IRFU are completely absurd. A bit like blaming the FAI if a player leaves Sligo Rovers for Everton.

    Facts are, we can't compete money-wise. Never have been, and never will be.

    We've done a damn good in keeping the likes of POC/ROG/O Driscoll etc here for the duration of their careers. The players themselves too deserve credit of course.

    Is it now?


  • #44
    thomond2006
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    liammur wrote: »
    Correct.
    Some of the posts blaming the IRFU are completely absurd. A bit like blaming the FAI if a player leaves Sligo Rovers for Everton.

    Facts are, we can't compete money-wise. Never have been, and never will be.

    We've done a damn good in keeping the likes of POC/ROG/O Driscoll etc here for the duration of their careers. The players themselves too deserve credit of course.

    Not it's not, at all. The FAI don't own Sligo Rovers. IRFU has full control here. For what it's worth I don't blame the IRFU either.

    However if the IRFU used the 'saved money' to extend the international contract of an international level has been, then it's ****ing stupid.


  • #45
    liammur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,461 ✭✭✭liammur


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Not it's not, at all. The FAI don't own Sligo Rovers. IRFU has full control here. For what it's worth I don't blame the IRFU either.

    However if the IRFU used the 'saved money' to extend the international contract of an international level has been, then it's ****ing stupid.

    What do you mean by that?


  • #46
    thomond2006
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    liammur wrote: »
    What do you mean by that?

    The IRFU have saved €500k on Sexton. That money should be used to keep appropriate players who could leave in a similar fashion (the likes of Healy, Kearney, Murray) , not players who are coming to the end of their careers where the IRFU have the leverage of the tax rebate.


  • #47
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    liammur wrote: »
    Correct.
    Some of the posts blaming the IRFU are completely absurd. A bit like blaming the FAI if a player leaves Sligo Rovers for Everton.

    Facts are, we can't compete money-wise. Never have been, and never will be.

    We've done a damn good in keeping the likes of POC/ROG/O Driscoll etc here for the duration of their careers. The players themselves too deserve credit of course.

    I see where you're coming from but your example is a bit off the mark IMO.

    To give an example of where I see the IRFU getting this wrong in relation to the Sexton example.

    Say you're bidding to buy a house, you have the money and are able to afford a bit of a bidding war with a 3rd party but effictively your father steps in and forbids you from getting into this bidding war even though you can afford it.

    In the Sexton example, Sexton is the house, Racing Metro are the 3rd party, the IRFU is your father and you are Leinster


  • #48
    CatFromHue
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,297 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    P_1 wrote: »
    Say you're bidding to buy a house, you have the money and are able to afford a bit of a bidding war with a 3rd party but effictively your father steps in and forbids you from getting into this bidding war even though you can afford it.

    In the Sexton example, Sexton is the house, Racing Metro are the 3rd party, the IRFU is your father and you are Leinster

    To be directed by M. Night. Shyamalan :pac:


  • #49
    liammur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,461 ✭✭✭liammur


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    The IRFU have saved €500k on Sexton. That money should be used to keep appropriate players who could leave in a similar fashion (the likes of Healy, Kearney, Murray) , not players who are coming to the end of their careers where the IRFU have the leverage of the tax rebate.

    But they can't. That's the worry. If Toulouse came in with 750K for Murray, what can the IRFU do?


  • #50
    thomond2006
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    liammur wrote: »
    But they can't. That's the worry. If Toulouse came in with 750K for Murray, what can the IRFU do?

    Probably nothing, but at least try to use the money on the right players.

    If ROG gets an extension I'll freak out.


  • #51
    liammur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,461 ✭✭✭liammur


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Probably nothing, but at least try to use the money on the right players.

    If ROG gets an extension I'll freak out.

    On that point you are spot on.

    But IRFU should NOT get involved in bidding wars. They'll go bust if they do. They should be prepared to pay the players very well, but that's all.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Probably nothing, but at least try to use the money on the right players.

    If ROG gets an extension I'll freak out.
    That's unlikely, though I know people have been freaking out about the likes of Leamy getting a contract renewal when he was injured and in fact never returned to playing.

    However, I'm not one of those. I think it was fair enough even if they knew he was not returning because this was a guy who'd had his career cut short and deserved and needed a 'soft landing'.

    I'm strongly in favour of this, guys who pay the ultimate price for putting their body on the line for club and country need to be protected from the consequences.


  • #53
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    rrpc wrote: »
    That's unlikely, though I know people have been freaking out about the likes of Leamy getting a contract renewal when he was injured and in fact never returned to playing.

    However, I'm not one of those. I think it was fair enough even if they knew he was not returning because this was a guy who'd had his career cut short and deserved and needed a 'soft landing'.

    I'm strongly in favour of this, guys who pay the ultimate price for putting their body on the line for club and country need to be protected from the consequences.

    But surely it should be the club that compensates him and not the country if his skills are no longer up to the required standards of the country


  • #54
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    JustinDee wrote: »
    I don't see how you can qualify this claim of seperate goals at all.

    What I said was that they have the same goal but very different ideas as to how that can be achieved. The IRFU's clear opinion is that the game can be grown by giving priority to the national team over the provinces in all aspects of the pro game, my opinion is that they're wrong.

    I'm never going to convince you otherwise so I'm not going to clog up the board by replying to the rest of your post, except this bit:
    JustinDee wrote:
    totallegend wrote:
    The failures of the national team will see the provinces become less competitive as foreign players are hounded out or discouraged from coming in the first place. And now we face the spectre of
    losing our best home-grown players too

    So now the national level of the game does affect the success of the
    provinces?

    You're twisting my words, I didn't say the national level affected the success of the provinces and it's not a good sign for your argument when you have to resort to trying to trip up the other guy. But since you ask, the failure, and it has been nothing short of failure, of the national team has led directly to the 'Player Succession' policy. Fewer top-quality foreigners staying for a shorter time = less competitiveness for the provinces.


  • #55
    liammur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,461 ✭✭✭liammur


    P_1 wrote: »
    But surely it should be the club that compensates him and not the country if his skills are no longer up to the required standards of the country

    But as thomond said, isn't it all the 1 organisation. So rrpc is right, and it's a nice gesture player welfare.


  • #56
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    liammur wrote: »
    But as thomond said, isn't it all the 1 organisation. So rrpc is right, and it's a nice gesture player welfare.

    It's the 1 organisation with 4 sub organisations.

    By doing it with the Leamy example they benefited 1 sub organisations to the disadvantage of the 3 other suborganisations.

    Not exactly fair to the 3 other suborganisations now is it?


  • #57
    liammur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,461 ✭✭✭liammur


    P_1 wrote: »
    It's the 1 organisation with 4 sub organisations.

    By doing it with the Leamy example they benefited 1 sub organisations to the disadvantage of the 3 other suborganisations.

    Not exactly fair to the 3 other suborganisations now is it?

    No, no suborganisation benefited. 1 player did.


  • #58
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    liammur wrote: »
    No, no suborganisation benefited. 1 player did.

    I think the point is that by getting a central contract, that player is paid by IRFU so the province in question has more budget for other players.


  • #59
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    liammur wrote: »
    No, no suborganisation benefited. 1 player did.

    Yes they did, they got to keep a player of a very high standard for free, this obviously had an impact on the budgets of the other 3 suborganisations


  • #60
    liammur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,461 ✭✭✭liammur


    P_1 wrote: »
    Yes they did, they got to keep a player of a very high standard for free, this obviously had an impact on the budgets of the other 3 suborganisations

    rrpc's point was, even if they knew his career was over they should give him a contract for a soft landing. So the only 1 who gained there was Leamy. And I think they were right to look after him too.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    liammur wrote: »
    rrpc's point was, even if they knew his career was over they should give him a contract for a soft landing. So the only 1 who gained there was Leamy. And I think they were right to look after him too.

    True, it didn't make business sense though.


Advertisement