Fans get their game back

[Parra]

You should have stopped at um.

That is the only fact in your post. The rest is conjecture.

 

[Perth Red]

I'd let memebrs vote them in but the membership should be NRL clubs, each state body, the CRL and finally a fans group. I want to see the best businessmen in the country along side passionate RL followers making decisions that will take our game forward.

The state bodies + CRL should only have any say on jnrs and amateur leagues in their respective state. All funding and significant decision making for all levels of the game has to sit with the commision.

 

[maccattack]

I would burn them at the stake. If they survive. They're in.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

26. NRL enters into new media rights first and last with News for current term plus five years (i.e. extended to 31 December 2027) but rights limited to media rights in Australia and New Zealand.

This is from this document, im just curious what "first and last rights" means exactly.

http://resources.news.com.au/files/2009/12/08/1225808/419135-dt-file-nrl-restructure-outline.pdf

 

[Dogs Of War]

This is from this document, im just curious what "first and last rights" means exactly.

http://resources.news.com.au/files/2009/12/08/1225808/419135-dt-file-nrl-restructure-outline.pdf

Means they get to bid first, anyone else can then make a higher bid, but the NRL can't accept it until they allow News Ltd to try and trump it.

 

[ozjet1]

this whole commission thing that's been touted is flawed, IMO.

giving governing power of the game to the clubs will kill the sport.

what's required is a total restructuring of the governing body and it's affiliates. in it's current guise, the ARL is simply a puppet of the NSWRL & QRL.

it's absolutely essential that a new national governing body which controls and instructs the state affiliates what to do (not the other way round) is incorporated and has control of the game at all levels. It needs to attract high calibre board members & executives with a scope to develop strategic objectives and implement processes for the game at both the amateur and professional level through its affiliates. It would manage virtually every level of rugby league - from junior leagues to SOO & the national team.

let the clubs own & control the national competition only. set up an organisation with it's own board & executive which manages the day-to-day operations of the league in it's entirety. each club would have a 1/16th shareholding of the organisation to elect it's Chairman, board, & CEO vote on rules, resolutions, etc. the governing body should be involved in the organisation only as a special shareholder to veto any aspect of the above process, and receive a special dividend. but it would not have an involvement in the day-to-day running of the competition.

the

 

[Fein]

In the Daily Telegraph today, an article written by "journalist" Phil Rothfield outlines the "blueprint, fans and their clubs will regain 100 per cent ownership of the game for the first time since News Limited and the Australian Rugby League formed the NRL in 1997. Intriguingly, the dossier proposes a possible name change from the NRL to the ARL as the single brand for rugby league under one management umbrella.

It also proposes:

DAVID Gallop be appointed for four years as chief executive;
EACH NRL club to have an equal share and ownership of the game;
DISSOLVING and selling all the game's assets and copyright to the commission for one dollar;
TO offer Melbourne Storm a six-year subsidy worth around $20 million until they are self-sufficient;
NEWS Limited has first and last media rights until 2027 - a five-year extension on its current term; and
COLIN Love be appointed the first chairman for one year only."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...eague-revolution/story-e6frexnr-1225808415972

This is the one that really incensed me.

TO offer Melbourne Storm a six-year subsidy worth around $20 million until they are self-sufficient;

Why should the rest of the clubs fund this failed economic experiment by News Limited?

Why was such a proposal on the "4 page document" anyway?

In reading the story, we learn;

"The document was drawn up after 12 months of painstaking negotiations between News Limited executives, Gold Coast managing director Michael Searle and Nick Politis, an ARL representative on the current NRL partnership board."

I reckon Politis is well past his best, not sure who the ARL representative was but I'm glad they stalled the decision yesterday however,the more I read and see of this Michael Searle, the more I'm beginning to question if he has the game at heart or just Michael Searle.

What do others think about all of this?

 

[macavity]

the more I'm beginning to question if he has the game at heart or just Michael Searle.

he talks a good game, but at the end of the day he owns a team. he has a pecuniary interest in a team. he will be motivated primarily by what will put more money into his pocket - and that may not be all those things like expansion and grassroots that us (without pecuniary interests) are so passionate about.

I am not willing to dismiss him, but I don't see him as some sort of altruistic white knight either.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Is it just me or who the f**k is this blow in Michael Searle to be dictating terms?

 

[big country]

nice to see News will still have their snouts in the trough for another 17 years -what's the matter boys, still trying to recover the $1bil+ you lost during the S/L war? I'm afraid you'll need another 100 years before you even break even

 

[jasonstevenswedgie]

Whats to stop the clubs going it alone with out the qrl, nswrl and crl. Why cant we get rid of this duplication and waste of money.
Set up one office in Sydney that deals with everything and if need be set up an office in brisbane.
We need one central vision for the game.

 

[Bulldog Force]

My question is how the hell do they expect the Storm to be self sufficient in 6 years time, when, after 11 years, they have won 3 comps, been in 5 grand finals, been gifted a BRAND NEW state of the art RUGBY LEAGUE Home Ground on a platter, AND have had the privilege (not right) of hosting State of Origin games? If 11 years off success has done f**k-all for their fan base, then I doubt the next 6 will do anything, especially considering all their current superstars will be past their best by then!

 

[Jankuloski]

You said that they got a new stadium and that did nothing for their fan base. The stadium is not open yet. They're not the bottom team crowdwise in the NRL. They did not have to cut back their expenses when they knew News would cover their losses - would any enterpreneur do that?

Stop hating the Storm in every possible topic.

 

[Paulie Jay]

Seems to be nothing at all 'independent' about the proposed commission.

The commission is appointed by the current power brokers.

It is exactly like claiming that David Gallop is an independent.

Bring back some democracy to the game. Members elect their boards and it all flows up from there.

In this age where marketing terminology rules supreme, "independent", just like the words "organic" and "natural" can mean anything you want them to mean. Tell people that a poduct is "organic", if they believe you then you never have to define what "organic" is. Tell people that a commission is "independent" - if they believe you, then it is.

 

[backdoor]

I tend to agree with Parra, some of the names which have been mentioned are the biggest leeches since Arko and Bullfrog.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...eague-revolution/story-e6frexnr-1225808415972

Dinosaurs hold up league revolution

* Exclusive by Phil Rothfield
* From: The Daily Telegraph
* December 09, 2009 12:00AM

THE Daily Telegraph can today reveal the plan for the most dramatic restructure of the game since the Super League war. A plan that will hand the game of rugby league back to the people - for the grand total of one dollar.

The landmark four-page document, obtained by The Daily Telegraph, outlines the most dramatic restructure of the game since the Super League war and reveals the competition could revert to its old name - the ARL. The only problem is that the dinosaurs of the Australian Rugby League continue to frustrate and stall attempts to deliver independence.

Yesterday, at an ARL board meeting in Brisbane, directors had the chance to make history by rubber-stamping a plan that would modernise the game and position it to take the fight to the AFL. Instead the meeting gave only conditional support to the commission, but stopped short of giving it a final stamp of approval.

Under the blueprint, fans and their clubs will regain 100 per cent ownership of the game for the first time since News Limited and the Australian Rugby League formed the NRL in 1997. Intriguingly, the dossier proposes a possible name change from the NRL to the ARL as the single brand for rugby league under one management umbrella.

It also proposes:

DAVID Gallop be appointed for four years as chief executive;

EACH NRL club to have an equal share and ownership of the game;

DISSOLVING and selling all the game's assets and copyright to the commission for one dollar;

TO offer Melbourne Storm a six-year subsidy worth around $20 million until they are self-sufficient;

NEWS Limited has first and last media rights until 2027 - a five-year extension on its current term; and

COLIN Love be appointed the first chairman for one year only.

The document was drawn up after 12 months of painstaking negotiations between News Limited executives, Gold Coast managing director Michael Searle and Nick Politis, an ARL representative on the current NRL partnership board.

Politis has lost support of many of the ARL blazer wearers because of his role in negotiations, which will effectively end years of lavish functions, free tickets, business-class air travel and overseas junkets.

There were even suggestions Queensland directors would put forward a motion to remove Politis from his role as an ARL representative on the NRL partnership at yesterday's meeting. This would stop Politis from having future negotiations with News Limited and also prevent him from being part of the selection process for four of the eight commissioners.

However, ARL chief executive Geoff Carr said Politis's position was not discussed at the meeting. In a carefully worded statement, the ARL offered support for the commission, knowing that a complete rejection would cause a massive public backlash.

The statement read: "The Australian Rugby League has today expressed its ongoing support for the establishment of an independent body that would oversee all aspects of the code. The board believes that the right structure could be an important step in the game's future development.

"Given the far-reaching nature of any decision, the board has today reinforced the need to properly consider all implications of such a change, including the ongoing protection of the game's grass roots and representative competitions and the interaction between NRL clubs and the wider sport.

"The board has today said that it will continue to discuss the issue with its NRL partner News Limited."

With backing from the 16 clubs, News Limited, sponsors and players, and senior officials had hoped ARL chairman Colin Love would deliver a stronger endorsement at yesterday's meeting. Instead, he confirmed the process would be stalled until after Christmas and well into next year.

"There is general acceptance that the current structure could be improved and any suggestion that the ARL is somehow trying to block change is simply incorrect," Love said. "It is in everyone's interest that we invest the necessary time to get the process right."

Full details: NRL restructure document

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ut-on-hold-for-2010-season-20091208-khp2.html

Commission to be put on hold for 2010 season
December 9, 2009

AN INDEPENDENT commission now appears unlikely to be in place before the start of next season after a meeting of the ARL board yesterday vowed to take as long as necessary to ensure the structure of the code's new governing body is right.

While pledging ''ongoing support'' for an independent commission to oversee the code, the ARL decided more talks were needed with News Ltd about the structure of the new body and safeguards for representative football and junior development.

Queensland directors also believe discussion needs to take place about whether any official associated with an existing body should be allowed to serve on the independent commission, a move that would prevent ARL chairman Colin Love becoming the first chairman of the new organisation.

Love, who has been conducting negotiations with News Ltd's Peter McCourt, showed the meeting a document he had obtained from the media company on Monday containing points for discussion if the two NRL partners are going to exit the game.

The Herald was told the document was not a draft proposal for an independent commission and no time frame was put on when a deal should be finalised.

''The board saw the proposal today from News Ltd. We had a discussion on it and it was agreed that it required further talks with its NRL partner News Ltd,'' ARL chief executive Geoff Carr said.

''There's no question, though, that the board believes that the right structure could be an important step in the game's future development.''

Love agreed that the sooner negotiations were finalised, the better - but he said the main priority was putting in place a structure to serve the game for the next 100 years.

''I don't want to put any timeframe on it,'' he told reporters after the meeting in Brisbane.

''Because it is so important and it's so important we get it right, I don't think we should shackle ourselves with any time constraints. With everybody working towards the same objective, hopefully it will be done in a very speedy time.''

Asked whether there had been tension at the meeting between the Queensland and NSW directors, Love said: ''We had a very healthy and constructive discussion.

''The ARL board supports the introduction of a single organisation to control rugby league throughout Australia. There are a lot of issues involved and we've got to consider the interests of the game as a whole, from the grass roots to the elite level. That's being done. ''It was very constructive and there will be further discussions going forward.''

He also rejected suggestions that the QRL was the main stumbling block to a deal being done that would see the 16 NRL clubs given greater control over the running of the game by electing the eight independent commissioners.

''Those sort of discussions are for the boardroom and for discussions with our partner.

''I've made a policy not to discuss them publicly,'' Love said.

''It's not them, it's us. We've got to agree on things going forward and hopefully we'll be able to get there.

We just talked generally about the right structure for a single body to run the game as a whole.

''Everybody wants to see what is in the best interests of the game and that's what we're working towards.''

Brad Walter, Greg Prichard and Phil Lutton

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/the-key-to-our-next-100-years/story-e6frfgh6-1225808402911

The key to our next 100 years

* By Darren Lockyer
* From: The Daily Telegraph
* December 09, 2009 12:00AM

RUGBY league has been the greatest game of all for more than 100 years now, and an independent commission would guarantee the game succeeds and thrives for another century.

A commission is an absolute must.

It would ensure rugby league keeps growing and expanding and that the game's financial side is more secure and viable.

Having an eight-member commission comprising respected businesspeople and community leaders would be a wonderful thing and allow us to compete on the same levels as our major competitors.

They would be forward thinkers and generate additional cash flows. We also wouldn't be hamstrung by political motivations.

The game's value would increase on all levels.

I am sure the process will take a little time, though, and that is understandable.

As much as fans want the matter resolved ASAP, I am sure all parties will want to explore all options and ramifications before signing off on a commission.

I saw an ARL board meeting yesterday agreed to give "ongoing support for the establishment of an independent body". It seems everyone is on the same page.

I have spoken to several players about this issue and it seems all agree the commission must be approved.

This isn't just for 2010 but for players who will come through in years to come.

It has to happen. And it will.

Rugby league will be alive, kicking and thriving for centuries to come. A commission will see to that.

 

[ozjet1]

expecting every member of the board to be independent (which is quite subjective without prescribed guidelines) is naive.

the commission isnt going to be entirely independent, and never will be. it will require a continuity from what exists now which means it's essential that people with the current intellectual knowledge of the operation are retained - Love & Gallop. Whether they are the best candidates from a performance viewpoint is another matter.

The important thing is to ensure the the board as a whole has a majority of independent directors with no material conflicts of interest.....now and in the future. This is the test of board independence in governance.

 

[Quidgybo]

In this age where marketing terminology rules supreme, "independent", just like the words "organic" and "natural" can mean anything you want them to mean. Tell people that a poduct is "organic", if they believe you then you never have to define what "organic" is. Tell people that a commission is "independent" - if they believe you, then it is.

If the members of the commission are not financially beholden to any club, state league or other corporate organisation then they will be as independent as can be reasonably expected. What we have had in the past under the NSWRL, ARL and NRL is current club CEOs, current chairman and board members of state leagues, and employees of current major sponsors and media partners. These people aren't just appointed or elected by these bodies but continue to be actively employed by these other bodies. Even if the individual wanted to act independently in good faith they have an employer with a nice tight grip around their financial balls who can dictate their actions.

But if each Commissioner can hold no other position within the game (or its direct partners) at the time of their nomination or during their tenure on the commission then at least they won't be on anyone's financial leash if they are presented with unpopular choices. And if each Commissioner can only serve a single term of say five years then they'll be able to take unpopular decisions without having to worry about keeping a support base on side for when they face re-election. We aren't asking for judges here, just that the Commission be composed such that it at least has a chance to act independently if that's what the game really needs.

Leigh.