Allan Border resigns as national selector in apparent sponsorship dispute

Slow Love™ · 10-10-2006, 10:30 PM

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/...246130803.html

TO MANY, a beer at the cricket is one of summer's simple pleasures. But in the case of Allan Border, a conflict between his personal beer sponsor and that of Cricket Australia appears to have been the driving force in his decision yesterday to stand down from his role as a national selector.

The former Test captain recently fronted advertisements for XXXX Gold, owned by Lion Nathan, which is sponsoring beach cricket this summer in Sydney, the Gold Coast and Perth. Border will represent Australia in the tournament, alongside greats such as Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson and Dean Jones.

That, however, does not impress Foster's, a major sponsor of cricket. It recently announced a new deal with Cricket Australia, in which it would no longer be the naming rights sponsor of the triangular one-day series, but increase its commercial involvement at grassroots level.

Geoff Donohue, corporate affairs spokesman for Foster's, said the XXXX campaign involving Border was little more than ambush marketing.

"We think ambush marketing is fairly un-Australian," he said. "I will leave you to decide whether what they are doing with their current advertising campaigns is ambush marketing.

"I guess Allan has [resigned as a national selector] in pursuit of his own commercial interests. But we are thrilled with our association with Cricket Australia and the Australian cricket team, and we're more than happy with the access we have to the current players."

Mr Donohue's comments are an insight into what is expected to be a fierce turf war between rival companies during this most anticipated of Ashes summers. Already, Cricket Australia has sought flight-exclusion zones over major stadiums, following an incident at the AFL grand final which saw a Holden advertising blimp hovering over the Toyota-sponsored event at the Melbourne Cricket Ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assured exclusive sponsorship is IMO, a very poor way of doing things (for the sport, obviously, not for the companies trying to do it). That we lose a national selector over something so silly (that isn't even a conflict of interest) is only a sign of what's to come - what we will find (and have been given a preview in the West Indies) is that players (and maybe their selection) and obviously administrators will become hostage to group deals not necessarily made with their consent, and will no longer be able to make their own individual choices in the market.

As far as I'm concerned, companies should pay to be advertised, and that's it. You pays more, you gets more. The idea of everybody else being frozen out (particularly in a tangential way like this) is impractical and tips the balance of benefit right away from the sport.

The paranoia of this kind of stuff is really ridiculous, too. A couple of months ago, I was refused service at a cafe because I had a smoothie I'd bought elsewhere. I was willing to sit and have lunch with my family, and possibly spend $40-$50, and they refused me service because I had a $4.55 drink cup in my hand. Just stupid.

Sanz · 10-10-2006, 10:44 PM

When someone like AB leaves CA over something as silly as this, you know that the long awaited downfall of CA has begun . Now the next step for CA would be to hire Greg Chappell as their Coach.

If I were an Aussie or a beer drinker, I would have stopped drinking Fosters for this.

pasag · 10-10-2006, 10:50 PM

Lol at the use of "un-Australian"

Slow Love™ · 10-10-2006, 10:52 PM

Yeah. BTW, I understand the issue with ambush marketing - you as a company have paid for exposure, and you don't expect other companies to waltz in and get similar exposure for free (like the blimp incident referred to in the piece). But the lines have to be drawn reasonably. I can't really see how Border's thing would be defined as ambush marketing myself, and we heard stories in the last WC of people drinking the wrong friggin' brand of soft drink to either ditch them or leave the stadium.

EDIT: sorry, that should read "being told" to ditch them or leave the stadium.

vic_orthdox · 10-10-2006, 10:58 PM

Haha, Lion Nathan. Actually owns up to being responsible for XXXX and Tooheys New.

Nnanden · 10-10-2006, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanz

When someone like AB leaves CA over something as silly as this, you know that the long awaited downfall of CA has begun . Now the next step for CA would be to hire Greg Chappell as their Coach.

If I were an Aussie or a beer drinker, I would have stopped drinking Fosters for this.

If you were an Aussie, you`d have realised how crap Fosters is and wouldn`t be drinking it in the first place.

vic_orthdox · 10-10-2006, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nnanden

If you were an Aussie, you`d have realised how crap Fosters is and wouldn`t be drinking it in the first place.

That's why it's exported. Duh.

Slow Love™ · 10-10-2006, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vic_orthdox

That's why it's exported. Duh.

Yeah, I was actually wondering to myself whether more expats/foreigners drink Fosters than locals...

marc71178 · 11-10-2006, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanz

If I were an Aussie or a beer drinker, I would have stopped drinking Fosters for this.

If you were a beer drinker you wouldn't have started drinking Fosters in the first place!

BoyBrumby · 11-10-2006, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vic_orthdox

That's why it's exported. Duh.

Crap we get over here is brewed in the UK.

I think this whole issue is just cricket catching up with other sports. As far back as the 1996 Olympics we had the frankly pathetic sight of the basketball Dream Team collecting their inevitable golds with stars & bars flags obscuring their tracksuit manufacturers logos because they had personal sponsorships from rivals.

Nike's involovment with the Brazilian national football team includes the company being able to dictate which friendlies they play & where, although they stop short of excluding players who wear rivals' boots!

Nnanden · 11-10-2006, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marc71178

If you were a beer drinker you wouldn't have started drinking Fosters in the first place!

Hmm... Marc and I think alike.

Matt79 · 11-10-2006, 08:10 AM

Problem is that Fosters makes many more beers than just Fosters. That means dropping VB, Carlton, Crownies...

Still, there's Boags and Cascade left.

BTW - pathetic if that's truly the reason why Border left, as opposed to the Foster's bloke scoring cheap points...

Jono · 11-10-2006, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pasag

Lol at the use of "un-Australian"

Haha I know.

How the hell is ambush marketing un-Australian?

Mister Wright · 11-10-2006, 10:08 AM

It makes it even more ridiculous that even last year when the ODI series was the VB series they still served XXXX at the 'Gabba. QLDers wouldn't have it any other way!

TBH I wouldn't have made the link between Border being selector of Australia and his support for XXXX and the Australian cricket team's sponsorship deal with Foster's until reading that article. Shooting themself in the foot IMO.

BTW, I'm proud to be the only Australian who enjoys Foster's.

howardj · 11-10-2006, 04:26 PM

Worst cricket comments of the year?

Firstly, there are no longer any ‘unfair dismissal’ laws.

Secondly, when leaving an Aussie player out of a cricket team, it's arguable as to whether you're ‘dismissing’ them – they still have their contract of employment.

Thirdly, how does the amount a selector is paid have any bearing on whether an ‘unfair dismissal’ claim would succeed?

Anyway, I think $40 000 / year (plus expenses) for a selector is reasonable.

10-10-2006, 10:30 PM	#1 (permalink)
Slow Love™ International Captain Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 6,079	Allan Border resigns as national selector in apparent sponsorship dispute http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/...246130803.html TO MANY, a beer at the cricket is one of summer's simple pleasures. But in the case of Allan Border, a conflict between his personal beer sponsor and that of Cricket Australia appears to have been the driving force in his decision yesterday to stand down from his role as a national selector. The former Test captain recently fronted advertisements for XXXX Gold, owned by Lion Nathan, which is sponsoring beach cricket this summer in Sydney, the Gold Coast and Perth. Border will represent Australia in the tournament, alongside greats such as Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson and Dean Jones. That, however, does not impress Foster's, a major sponsor of cricket. It recently announced a new deal with Cricket Australia, in which it would no longer be the naming rights sponsor of the triangular one-day series, but increase its commercial involvement at grassroots level. Geoff Donohue, corporate affairs spokesman for Foster's, said the XXXX campaign involving Border was little more than ambush marketing. "We think ambush marketing is fairly un-Australian," he said. "I will leave you to decide whether what they are doing with their current advertising campaigns is ambush marketing. "I guess Allan has [resigned as a national selector] in pursuit of his own commercial interests. But we are thrilled with our association with Cricket Australia and the Australian cricket team, and we're more than happy with the access we have to the current players." Mr Donohue's comments are an insight into what is expected to be a fierce turf war between rival companies during this most anticipated of Ashes summers. Already, Cricket Australia has sought flight-exclusion zones over major stadiums, following an incident at the AFL grand final which saw a Holden advertising blimp hovering over the Toyota-sponsored event at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assured exclusive sponsorship is IMO, a very poor way of doing things (for the sport, obviously, not for the companies trying to do it). That we lose a national selector over something so silly (that isn't even a conflict of interest) is only a sign of what's to come - what we will find (and have been given a preview in the West Indies) is that players (and maybe their selection) and obviously administrators will become hostage to group deals not necessarily made with their consent, and will no longer be able to make their own individual choices in the market. As far as I'm concerned, companies should pay to be advertised, and that's it. You pays more, you gets more. The idea of everybody else being frozen out (particularly in a tangential way like this) is impractical and tips the balance of benefit right away from the sport. The paranoia of this kind of stuff is really ridiculous, too. A couple of months ago, I was refused service at a cafe because I had a smoothie I'd bought elsewhere. I was willing to sit and have lunch with my family, and possibly spend $40-$50, and they refused me service because I had a $4.55 drink cup in my hand. Just stupid. __________________ "Youre known for having a liking for men who look like women." - Linda "FFS I'm sick and tired of having to see a bloke bend over to pick something up or lean over and see their arse crack. For christ's sake pull your pants up or buy some underpants you bogan because nobody want's to see it. And this is a boat building shed (well one of them) not a porn studio." - Craig

10-10-2006, 10:50 PM	#3 (permalink)
pasag RTDAS Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Looking for milksteak Posts: 31,679	Lol at the use of "un-Australian" __________________ Rest In Peace Craigos 2003-2012

10-10-2006, 10:52 PM	#4 (permalink)
Slow Love™ International Captain Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 6,079	Yeah. BTW, I understand the issue with ambush marketing - you as a company have paid for exposure, and you don't expect other companies to waltz in and get similar exposure for free (like the blimp incident referred to in the piece). But the lines have to be drawn reasonably. I can't really see how Border's thing would be defined as ambush marketing myself, and we heard stories in the last WC of people drinking the wrong friggin' brand of soft drink to either ditch them or leave the stadium. EDIT: sorry, that should read "being told" to ditch them or leave the stadium. Last edited by Slow Love™; 10-10-2006 at 11:00 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Allan Border vs Courtney Walsh	aussie	Cricket Chat	28	17-09-2006 10:39 PM
Surrey 2002: A Cricket Captain Diary	SIX AND OUT	General	6	17-02-2005 08:25 AM

10-10-2006, 10:44 PM	#2 (permalink)
Sanz Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: USA Posts: 16,228	When someone like AB leaves CA over something as silly as this, you know that the long awaited downfall of CA has begun . Now the next step for CA would be to hire Greg Chappell as their Coach. If I were an Aussie or a beer drinker, I would have stopped drinking Fosters for this.

10-10-2006, 10:58 PM	#5 (permalink)
vic_orthdox Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 24,363	Haha, Lion Nathan. Actually owns up to being responsible for XXXX and Tooheys New.

11-10-2006, 04:26 PM	#15 (permalink)
howardj International Coach Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: brisbane Posts: 12,099	Worst cricket comments of the year? Firstly, there are no longer any ‘unfair dismissal’ laws. Secondly, when leaving an Aussie player out of a cricket team, it's arguable as to whether you're ‘dismissing’ them – they still have their contract of employment. Thirdly, how does the amount a selector is paid have any bearing on whether an ‘unfair dismissal’ claim would succeed? Anyway, I think $40 000 / year (plus expenses) for a selector is reasonable.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)