Why did it take the NRL a month to reveal Waterhouse had been dumped?

1 Submitted by on Wed, 22 May 2013, 10:34

We should be thankful for small mercies – just imagine how annoying and infuriating Ton Waterhouse would have been had he been appearing on NRL ads as well as on Nine’s league coverage?

But there is one question I must ask – why did it take the NRL a month to reveal the sponsorship deal with Waterhouse has been abandoned???

I just don’t get it – we have faced highly unfavourable collateral damage from the More Joyous racing inquiry because a. one of the game’s immortals was involved and b. the then apparent link between Tim Waterhouse and the NRL as a major sponsor.

If, as has been reported, the deal with Waterhouse was dumped a MONTH ago, then why did the NRL not announce it was not proceeding then, avoiding some of the damage from a fight we did not have a dog in?

Why did it take a Four Corners report on Monday night to get it out into the public arena?

If, and I stress “if” the talks with Waterhouse ended a month ago, the game should have moved to distance itself from him then, or at the very least when we were dragged into the media over a thoroughbred racing issue!!!

Talk about own goals!

The game’s administrators could recover some lost ground in the credibility stakes if they dump the idea of replacing Waterhouse with another betting operation – and begin the process of weaning the game off its current addiction to betting on the greatest game of all.

Or am I asking just too much???



Written by

1 Response to "Why did it take the NRL a month to reveal Waterhouse had been dumped?"
  1. Bondiman says:

    You are asking too much Matt.

leave a comment