If nice guys are meant to finish last, then someone forgot to explain the rules to Tiger Woods. Woods is one of the least controversial figures on the planet. He’s likeable, handsome, humble, seemingly well balanced and a consummate sportsman. This year he racked up his 60th PGA tour victory, his second consecutive PGA Championship and became only the second golfer to win five PGA tour events in eight different seasons

As a consequence of all this niceness, corporations line up at his door with large wheelbarrows full of cash, hoping that he’ll smile and say their company name in an approving manner. While those of us who work our butts off in a “normal” job find this somewhat bemusing, we can at least be comforted by the fact that Tiger is also a philanthropist, giving away millions to his foundation and other charities. It’s guys like him who make it so bloody difficult to get praise from our wives after we take out the garbage.

Roger Federer, too, continued to dominate world tennis and, in doing so, continued to suck the life out of the game that produced characters like John McEnroe, Ille Nastase, Andre Agassi and John Newcombe. Despite being devoid of personality, Federer sets new standards for tennis perfection and there seems little chance of that changing soon. He also gives generously to good causes, making it even more difficult to hate him.

‘Somehow, by comparison, performance enhancing drugs don’t seem so bad – at least there is a logical reason for their use.’


Of course, every sportsman with a tax problem has a trust or foundation set up in their name to hide their income, but these guys actually deliver and so do many others. Sadly, however, some take their newly-gained wealth and use it to destroy their lives.

Down here in Australia, we have an exceptionally gifted footballer by the name of Ben Cousins. Cousins was one of the highest-earning players in the AFL, but it seems that most of his earnings went up his nose in powder form, flushing both his career and credibility down the toilet.

Cousins is merely a “celebrated” example of a good guy gone bad. Though it is vehemently denied by the AFL, there is widely understood to be a drug culture amongst AFL players.

The AFL is not alone in having problems. Rugby League and Union international Wendell Sailor destroyed his career by using Colombian marching powder. League legend Andrew Johns also succumbed to the temptation of “recreational” drugs. Somehow, by comparison, performance-enhancing drugs don’t seem so bad – at least there is a logical reason for their use.

While most of the guys who go off the rails get into self-destructive behaviour that usually only affects themselves, occasionally they will cross a line to something much, much worse.

Such was the case with Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick. Here is one of the planet’s most highly-paid athletes and he’s used his wealth for one of the most despicable purposes imaginable. Vick was involved in dog fighting and gambling, and personally killed dogs who didn’t perform by hanging or drowning them. As disgusting as that is to most humans, the NFL only really got upset with Vick when it was revealed that he was involved in gambling.

So why do we pay our top athletes so much money? They earn well in excess of presidents, prime ministers, surgeons, lawyers or any other useful member of society. What is it about the ability to run, jump, kick or catch better than most of the population that makes it so valuable?

Is it fair to the athletes to pay them so much? They have little real world experience and have no concept of how to deal with new-found wealth. The useful life of an athlete is so short that they need to make more in the time available, but that alone can’t explain the amounts involved. Vick, as an example, was paid a $37million signing bonus on top of a multi-million dollar base salary. It’s a mad world that we live in.

Would it make more sense to pay out their salaries over their lifetime instead of the lump sums that they receive annually? That way, at least, they could be sure of still having some money left when they are 50. And that means at least it won’t be my taxes that are used to support the ageing, drug addict former sports stars.