Like most employed people they can be paid for their time in amateur activities if the funder covers that cost. (Activities)
So Chris Greenacre is partly employed by the Phoenix, partly by the academy and his academy wages are covered by the gambling money? Isn’t that the exact point, gambling money is subsidising the academy (within the rules I’m sure, but doesn’t feel quite right).
but its within the rules, so why is there a news story about it?
that the rules need looked at is a different issue and it effects everyone
have they looked at how the NZ Racing Board that has a monopoly on betting outlets in NZ through the TAB have their own trust which allows them to spend a considerably amount on their own activities?
How many sports clubs, not just the Phoenix, have got some sort of thing going with the trusts - if you look at the lists published by the trusts of who gets grants, rugby is by far and away the biggest benefactor - why do we never see any stories about rugby clubs and pokie money?
The rules may not "feel quite right" but they are the rules that all clubs (and beneficeries of grants) have to play by, they are a lot stricter than they used to be, you generally have to show that the money you were granted was used for the purpose you said it was and if you can't you have to repay it