The Blacks Caps celebrate a wicket during a recent T20 match against Pakistan. Photo / Photosport
The Blacks Caps celebrate a wicket during a recent T20 match against Pakistan. Photo / Photosport
Goodwill has been dismissed back to the pavilion in a feisty contractual match between New Zealand Cricket and the New Zealand Cricket Players Association.
A dispute over the players’ name, image and likeness rights is proving an obstacle to compromise, with lawyers padding up to grind out a resolution.
The low-ebb in relations threatens what has largely been a cordial arrangement between the parties since 2001, barring a fractious start.
“We’ve had a really good relationship for about 23 years, but we are dealing with a new NZC now,” NZCPA chief executive Heath Mills said.
“That’s been made clear to us by their recent actions. We’ve received a number of legal letters towards the end of last year, as did our affiliate, the World Cricketers’ Association, where they are essentially claiming ownership of the players through their image rights.
“I can confirm there have been discussions between the two parties on this matter which are on-going, but it’s incorrect to say NZC has taken legal action against the players.
“Rather, both NZC and the NZCPA have engaged lawyers in an effort to resolve what’s an important contractual matter.
“Talks remain constructive, and both groups believe they’re seeking what’s best for the players. We’re hopeful of reaching a satisfactory resolution.”
The spat essentially pivots over whether players must be marketed exclusively under the NZC banner.
The NZCPA claims no one can own rights to the players without their permission, and they are only subject to the governing body’s constraints when wearing NZC’s trademarks and logos.
The catalyst has been NZC wanting exclusivity in licensing player rights to the Dream company, sponsors of the T20 Super Smash, for a digital mobile game.
In return, the governing body and the players are paid what is estimated as millions of dollars in revenue, which is split 50:50.
NZC is concerned the deal risks getting devalued, or at worst faces a lawsuit, if Dream decide terms of the arrangement are not being met and look to claw back some of their investment.
However, the NZCPA claim its members must be free to earn royalties from a wider portfolio of technologies and sponsors, provided they don’t use or wear NZC trademarks or logos in doing so.
“We need to make it clear New Zealand Cricket does not own players,” Mills said.
“That’s a fairly established principle in world professional sport. The governing body gets given the use of player images and their name for use with their team trademarks and logos, and that’s it.
Heath Mills: "New Zealand Cricket does not own players." Photo / NZ Herald
“What they are never given is ownership of those. You can get any fancy lawyer you want to make that argument through our collective agreement, but we will just point to 24 years of history, and every other case around the world.”
So how can the situation best be resolved without introducing mediation?
“New Zealand Cricket must align with every other sport in the world and, if they stop threatening litigation, I’m sure then we can sit down for a reasonable conversation,” Mills said.
“New Zealand Cricket have given Dream the right to use the player images with their trademarks and logos, which is completely normal, but the players must then be free to hand across their individual rights, without any association to the governing body, to other third parties.”
