Fans get their game back

[Canard]

Not wanting to continue the political theme (cause to compare this to National Socialism is such an over reaction cliche), this is like the republic debate.

The vote years ago should have been do we want a republic yes or no, not on the ins and outs of the system (that can be decided later).

Thats why I think we can't understate the importance of this move, the names are irrelavant at this stage, its the system thats being put in place.

Plus who trusts News Limited papers to report this in any factual or positive light anway??

 

[DaSuperHero2]

Wonderfull , now what we need is that the QRL and NSWRL join a commision and also decide that the grand finals will be hosted by the Origin winners

 

[BuffaloRules]

The answer is that u can't have a profit each year divided up by 16 clubs.

Pay the clubs a grant at the start of each year - obviously you would expect this to increase over time.

Leftover pays for internationals, jnr development and expansion teams. Long term stuff that will cost money iniatially but without it the game is stuffed.

Seriously, $6 mil a year to fund a Storm or Reds, or each team getting $300k as extra profit a year?

Maybe the clubs need to ask what their sponsors prefer.

 

[Ziggy the God]

Clearly there needs to be more information in regards to the powers of the Commission and those of the clubs.

That said, anything that has News out of the game is preferable.

 

[Goddo]

Spot on dude

The clubs wouldn't control the expansion: they would simply elect the board members. They weild the power. How many times in federal politics have we seen a government elected saying one thing and then doing another (eg GST)?
Even if the clubs elect yahoo serious to the board thinking he would want to expand into Minchinbury and Smithfield, he can then still promote somewhere completely different.
Anyway, its in the clubs best interest for expansion to be into new markets, as this increases profits.

The only power the clubs will have with the new board is they get to elect the representatives. The board then make the decisions... its a good move, don't stress.:crazy: <

 

[Brutus]

The clubs wouldn't control the expansion: they would simply elect the board members. They weild the power. How many times in federal politics have we seen a government elected saying one thing and then doing another (eg GST)?

Howard took the GST into that election and still won, albeit marginally.

People knew exactly what they were voting for in that particular election.

His infamous "never ever" call came several years before that.

On the commission, I worry about the clubs weilding power. Leave all the really important calls to the actual commission, not to self-interested clubs.

 

[maccattack]

Couldnt this be bad for expansion?

I mean: Why would the 16 clubs want to admore teams to take a slice of the pie?

Perhaps they will go to 18, but after that??

 

[m0nty]

Couldnt this be bad for expansion?

I mean: Why would the 16 clubs want to admore teams to take a slice of the pie?

Perhaps they will go to 18, but after that??

This is true. Instead of having to make a choice between Storm and a Sydney club, it could be a choice between Central Coast and a Sydney club.

The whole point of an independent commission, however, is to free the decision makers from ties to any vested interest. That means not only the Colin Loves of the world, but also the clubs themselves. In practice, the commission rules by consensus, which is garnered via back-room politicking by the commission executive to ensure a united front to the public. Or, if you want to take a glass-half-full view, it's like the commission is a mediator between stakeholders, with the power to make their decision stick. Thus, if you have a faction that opposes expansion because one or more busted-arse Sydney clubs are about to go to the wall, the negotiations as to how the organisation decides which faction's plan to back is done behind closed doors instead of through the papers. Theoretically.

 

[Pj,Rj,Hj]

2 valid points have been raised re: Clubs having power:

1) What does this mean for aspects apart from the NRL? (eg. Internationals - will players be released etc. or will it die?)

2) What does this mean for expansion? Teams will need to be initially supported so Clubs might be wary of this.

Hopefully, the situation is that the Commission basically makes the important decisions regarding rugby league in Australia. What the Clubs will actually get is input into the way the NRL operates as well as equal cuts of whatever money the Commission decides will go to the NRL - as opposed to international, affiliated states, grassroots areas, expansions etc, all of which will come out of the pie before Clubs get their share.

Good points to raise. Sorry, but I'm quite ignorant to how RL is administrated, I only know the bleedy obvious.
Will this Commission be setup in a similar manner to the AFL Commission?
The AFL clubs elect the members but have limited power after that. I believe the clubs need 75% agreement to veto the Commission. This being the case there is little power to resist what the Commission believes is in the best interest of the code, and often protects the code from the clubs themselves.

I guess problems that have come out of it is the total focus towards the premiership season saw the break down of representative football which many AFL fans miss. A Rugby League Commission would no doubt be aware of this. They would have to arrange it that clubs have to release players for rep duties.

 

[Rastus_in_Melbourne]

Welcome to the English Premier League, where the richest 4 clubs run the game as they see it.

 

[LESStar58]

Great news all around.

I'm okay with Gallop staying as CEO if News farks off. At least he won't be their mouthpiece any more. And I hope those on the commission have some ticker about them when it comes to promoting and selling the game so they can light a fire under Gallop's arse!

Work on Melbourne as well seeing as our funding is going to effectively be gone. We have the succesful foundations on the field so the emphasis has to be a full on assault of the Melbourne market. The AFL take massive hits with Sydney and Brisbane, why shouldn't the NRL take a hit promoting the Storm.

Two new clubs will be added by 2013 to increase bargaining power when the commission negotiates the next television deal.

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[innsaneink]

Yes, I think so too...short term pain for long term gain.
I just think RL fans are very very skeptical, and rightly so.
Believe it when we see it.
Good news.

See....

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[LESStar58]

Despite all this, I doubt very much that we'll get $1billion from the next tv rights deal, but it sounds good!

Neither the NRL nor the AFL will... even Demitreiou has privately admitted they won't get a billion!

 

[Goddo]

If Cronulla disapear between now and then, I wonder if it will be 3 clubs introduced by 2013

 

[ByRd]

This is a very positive step and will push our game into the right direction

 

[innsaneink]

If Cronulla disapear between now and then, I wonder if it will be 3 clubs introduced by 2013

Cant see that happening anytime soon with their development plans

 

[LESStar58]

Behind this deal is the fact that News were uncomfortable reporting ugly things about their game. It was a decided conflict of interest.

This will liberate the anti-league forces in News to keep on spoiling it and make even more money out of it. Thats the down side.

Like letting a wild boar go free so you hunt it down. Nice touch.

I am OK with Gallop. He doesnt get everything right but at the end of the day, he has the games best interest at heart.

Not that news is the devil incarnate, they do some good things too.

Important news, good post.

I'm looking forward to reading what the doomsayers have to say about this. There's going to be no end of criticism but this move is still the best thing for our game.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I think that this actually could damage the Bears bid, but I can see how it will damage the Reds bid too.

At the moment, the game and the clubs need cash, adding the Bears and Qld4 will guarentee rating success, especially in those markets. Those two clubs are also in proven areas and are more then likely to be self sustaining.

Perth and NZ2 on the other hand would need help and propping up and this goes against the current clubs desire and need for money. However, if the commission is feeling brave.confident, they may take the risk on the expansion sides because in the long term (and short too I suppose) they could bring in more money then the CC or Qld4.

Very interesting times ahead but one thing we can 100% be assured of now is that the game is safe and that no clubs will die unless its for the good of the game. (matter of opinion, but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few)

 

[m0nty]

Expansion is going to be dictated by the next rights contract. If it's a big bucks no whammies cash extravaganza, then it's all sweetness and light and the Perth Reds will get a guernsey. If the GFC bites and money's too tight to mention, it's back to the Bears.

 

[Ray Mosters]

Actually, just on the survivability of clubs, there is one thing the independent commission and the sale of the rights does in this regard...

Once you sell the rights to 8 games a week you are then contractually obligated to guarantee that there are always at least 16 clubs!

That means that the only way that the ARLC can allow the sharks or storm to die is if there is another expansion club ready to step into the fold immediately.