NATHAN Tinkler’s capacity to maintain control of Newcastle will dictate whether Wayne Bennett stays beyond this season, amid speculation an impending Brisbane Broncos takeover bid could entice the super coach home a year early.With Bennett confiding to friends that his future is clouded because of uncertainty surrounding Newcastle’s ownership, The Daily Telegraph can reveal his four-year deal was done directly with Tinkler’s Hunter Sports Group (HSG) — not the Knights football club.
That means Bennett will become a free agent should HSG relinquish ownership of the Knights — a possibility that remains after Tink¬ler and the members club yesterday negotiated HSG’s $10.5 million bank guarantee to be placed into a joint account.
The Knights were yesterday unable to guarantee that HSG would retain control of the club into the foreseeable future, with the current model only guaranteed to persist throughout discussions with the members and the NRL.
Putting HSG out of the picture will trigger a get-out clause for Bennett, who has spent six years away from his family in Brisbane.
Although his salary and superannuation have been paid on time, the seven-time premiership winner is not ignoring the speculation that surrounds Tinkler’s stewardship.
Sources close to Bennett have confirmed he has expressed private concern over the ownership imbroglio, telling close friends — including a captain from a rival club — that his future beyond this year cannot be guaranteed.
Bennett returns to Brisbane as often as possible to visit his wife and children, and a fairytale finish at the Broncos has been widely mooted.
Rival powerbrokers believe Brisbane are ready to appoint the 64-year-old as a director of football operations, similar to the roles Phil Gould and Daniel Anderson perform at Penrith and Parramatta, respectively.
But there are two primary hurdles blocking Bennett’s path back to the club he helped establish in 1988: One financial, one personal.
With head coach Anthony Griffin still on the books next year, it’s unlikely Brisbane will be able to match the $1 million-plus salary Bennett receives at Newcastle.
Then there’s the question of whether Bennett can bring himself to return, given the fall-out with major shareholder News Corp (publisher of The Daily Telegraph) before he left in 2008.
News Corp controls around 60 per cent of the Broncos, although Queensland property developer Phil Murphy has upped his stake to 25 per cent in the past year after buying out minor shareholders Tony Scanlon and John Geaney.
Should Murphy decide to tackle News Corp for the major shareholding, Bennett’s conflict of conscience could be removed. Murphy is also close to two of Bennett’s favourite sons from his 20-year tenure at the Broncos — Andrew Gee and Shane Webcke.
What appears certain is Bennett will not coach a Sydney-based club. According to Dragons players, he promised that much upon leaving St George Illawarra in 2011.
South Sydney might have been an option — as they were when Bennett signed with Newcastle — because of the club’s rich history and 43-year premiership drought. But the Rabbitohs’ decision to re-sign Michael Maguire ended any chance of Bennett heading to Redfern.
Regardless of the ownership tussle, sources close to Bennett maintain he will stay in Newcastle so long as his bank account is satisfied in accordance with the current contract.
While several players and other staff have complained about skipped superannuation contributions and delayed wage payments since Tinkler took over, Bennett’s accounts have been carefully attended.
Tinkler might be struggling to maintain his empire, but he didn’t create one by being neglectful of his top assets.
What remains to be seen is the desire of members to keep Bennett, should Tinkler fall. The $10.5 million injection would no doubt help pay his contract, but it would also be needed to satisfy creditors.
One is Newcastle Wests Leagues Club, which is owed money for use of training facilities. Then there’s the murky situation surrounding star players being out of pocket for third-party deals, such as Darius Boyd, who is owed $200,000.
It is understood third-party deals have been struck with companies and figures close to Tinkler, who are refusing to pay on principle because they are owed money from other dealings.
