Rocky Elsom on the blower, Monday evening.
The call had been arranged by a mutual friend in the Wallaby community, who had worked closely with the former Wallaby captain and knew him well.
Rocky Elsom as a Waratahs player.Credit: Getty Images
As one who had also played in French rugby for many years, and understood how French rugby clubs worked, would I be happy to chat to Elsom, who had been convicted in absentia in a French court last week and sentenced to five years imprisonment for embezzling money while president of the Narbonne Rugby Club last decade?
I would. Send me his number.
And now, here was the man himself, coming through loud and clear from somewhere in, or just outside of, Dublin – not from under the bed, but more likely resting comfortably upon a hotel bed. We agreed he would give me a background briefing which I would tape, though nothing would go on the record.
We talked for half an hour. He was calm, and not nearly as shaken as I would expect of one who had such a conviction and sentence against his name, let alone being something close to the focus of an international manhunt.
In his situation, I would have been whispering in the manner of a man indeed hiding under the bed, but he was not remotely like that. Far from sounding like one in fear of imminent arrest, for whom every knock on the door right now surely sounds like thunder, he had the air of a man who wanted to do what he could to clear up some grave misunderstandings that had so very unfortunately been put against his name.
As gently as I could, I put it to him that, mate, you are really in deep trouble here, and I am surprised your tone is not more . . . tense. He did not bite. He just wanted to calmly explain.
The broad thrust of his remarks was that, while he respected the French legal system, he had had no knowledge of the charges, or the case, had not been asked to appear, and the news of his conviction was just that to him – news – as much as it was to everyone else.
He was insistent that whatever mistakes had been made while he was in charge of Narbonne, they were not criminal mistakes.
He was particularly insistent on making the point that not even the French court – as far as he could see, as he had not yet seen any detailed account of his charges and conviction – were alleging that he had been personally enriched by the decisions he took, while in charge of Narbonne.
He remained lucid and calm throughout the chat, if rambling and getting away from what I really wanted to talk about – the very specifics of the charges he had been convicted of.
When I tried to bring him back to answering those specific questions he very politely, if insistently, demurred. After going back and forth, we agreed the best thing would be for him to put together a statement to set his thoughts out clearly, on exactly what it was that he wanted to say.
We signed off, with him committing to putting together the statement overnight my time, while I said I would send him my questions immediately, and it would be great if by the time I woke up at dawn on Tuesday in Sydney, I could have his statement, and the answers to the questions.
That statement arrived at 11am via another Sydney intermediary late morning Sydney time. Some of it covered a few of the issues we had discussed, which is why I am happy to refer to them above, though the initial chat was off the record.
I have received no answers yet to the other questions, but remain hopeful.
Watch this space.
