What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

PNG's back.

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,413
Despite the use of sports in building relationships and delivering development, it is difficult to justify the large financial contribution to facilitate a rugby team when grant levels in two important development sectors have fallen. Real (adjusted for inflation) health grants provided to PNG pre-Covid fell to be a quarter lower than 2011 levels. The fall in real education grants has been far worse, 44 per cent lower in 2021 than they were in 2010.

The violence and unrest in Port Moresby on 10 January also points to persistent issues with law and order that PNG is ill-equipped to address.
PNG’s development needs cannot be overstated. Extreme poverty defines the lives of 40 per cent of its population and the country has the lowest Human Development Index rating in the Asia-Pacific region. Further, PNG has the highest infant mortality rate, at 34 per 1,000 births, and the lowest pre-primary net enrolment rate in the region.
The violence and unrest in Port Moresby on 10 January also points to persistent issues with law and order that PNG is ill-equipped to address.

Care is also needed as rugby league can be leveraged for political gain, which would be hard for Australia to justify. This was evident in 2022 when a PM13 match held in Brisbane saw a PNG contingent comprising 72 members of parliament travel to attend the game. This trip, paid for by the PNG government, was seen to reward MPs for voting in Marape to the top job shortly following the country’s elections. Against more pressing development needs, the trip cost more than K3 million (A$1.2 million).

It is not difficult to see Australia’s support for PNG’s NRL bid scoring diplomatic points given many PNG MPs follow the sport passionately. But PNG’s development needs must remain the top priority in all of Australia’s bilateral programs with the country. This is important given PNG recently signed a security agreement with Australia, has increased labour mobility by establishing the Pacific Engagement Visa, and is currently pursuing a free trade agreement. In addition, the nature of official development finance provided to PNG is changing, with the majority shifting from grants to loans.
While many Papua New Guineans are avid rugby league fans, support (particularly financial) for an NRL bid by both the PNG and Australian governments may end up becoming a case of misplaced priorities. A recent survey of everyday Papua New Guineans found a desire for self-reliance and economic independence. Investment in human capital and opportunities for education and training for young people was cited as central to building PNG’s ability to be self-reliant in the future.
Partnerships such as the PNG NRL bid program, pushed at government-to-government level between political leaders, are not always what is needed elsewhere in PNG society. It is hard to put a price tag on the potential benefits that rugby brings in drawing Australia and PNG together, but clearly the social benefits of sports need to be captured at an affordable price.

 

MugaB

Coach
Messages
14,905
Everday papuans who want self reliance and economic independence, yet we send them billion in aid, ....thanks but no thanks is the answer hahaha
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,957
I'm pretty sure those people protesting also couldn't eat an upgraded stadium.
Yeah the people opposed to the Macquarie Point Stadium are generally also opposed to any significant upgrades at either Bellerive or UTAS in Launceston. They believe that Bellerive and UTAS are already capable of supporting an AFL side full time, and that the money should be invested into other services like health, education, etc, you know the usual stuff.

The reality is that both Bellerive and UTAS would still need relatively significant upgrades to be capable of supporting an AFL side full time, and that there's zero chance that any of the infrastructure funding that's earmarked for Mac Point would be redirected to health, education, or the public housing system in Tasmania, especially not the Federal portion, nor is funding alone going to address the problems with those systems in Tassie.
At the same time they've got a point when say that the Mac Point stadium is a ludicrously expensive luxury, because that kind of money is ridiculous for what will effectively be a glorified 23k boutique stadium.

So yeah it's complicated as at their core both sides have a point, but at the same time both are unwilling to compromise, which has created an all or nothing false dichotomy.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,564
$65M phase 1 funding of $200M upgrade already approved for Launceston


That Mac Point will cost ~$1B and only have 8 games a year, seems a shitful ROI
 

Iamback

Referee
Messages
20,242
Yeah the people opposed to the Macquarie Point Stadium are generally also opposed to any significant upgrades at either Bellerive or UTAS in Launceston. They believe that Bellerive and UTAS are already capable of supporting an AFL side full time, and that the money should be invested into other services like health, education, etc, you know the usual stuff.

The reality is that both Bellerive and UTAS would still need relatively significant upgrades to be capable of supporting an AFL side full time, and that there's zero chance that any of the infrastructure funding that's earmarked for Mac Point would be redirected to health, education, or the public housing system in Tasmania, especially not the Federal portion, nor is funding alone going to address the problems with those systems in Tassie.
At the same time they've got a point when say that the Mac Point stadium is a ludicrously expensive luxury, because that kind of money is ridiculous for what will effectively be a glorified 23k boutique stadium.

So yeah it's complicated as at their core both sides have a point, but at the same time both are unwilling to compromise, which has created an all or nothing false dichotomy.

It is a lot easier to swallow a $200m upgrade than a $1bn new Stadium
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,957
It is a lot easier to swallow a $200m upgrade than a $1bn new Stadium
Yet they're protesting the UTAS upgrade as well...

Bellerive would require hundreds of millions in upgrades as well if Mac Point was scrapped. So the actual investment would be more like $200mil for UTAS, probably around $300mil for Bellerive, plus a couple hundred million more in necessary infrastructure in both Launnie and Hobart (training facilities, PT links, amenities, etc), and all those budgets would inevitably blow out. So TAS would end up spending Mac Point levels of money anyway, it'd just be spread between more facilities.

The AFL is refusing to budge on the Mac point development anyway, and they'd be more than happy to scrap the expansion completely if they could get away with placing the blame on Tasmania. Public pressure is the only reason that they're expanding to Tasmania in the first place, and they've built themselves a very comfortable win-win scenario as a result; either the Tasmanian team gets the best start possible at the taxpayers expense or it doesn't happen at all, either way the AFL wins.

The quickest and easiest way to cut costs would be to not split venues and cut Launceston out, but TAS won't even consider that because of internal politics and business interests.
 
Last edited:

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,957
$65M phase 1 funding of $200M upgrade already approved for Launceston


That Mac Point will cost ~$1B and only have 8 games a year, seems a shitful ROI
Nah mate, it's a "multipurpose" lol.

Their delusional business plan banks on the Hurricanes relocating their matches there, attracting a fulltime A-league team, potentially the JackJumpers playing big games out of it, multiple NRL, RU, concerts, and other events a year, plus semi regular international sporting events like the Boomers, touring soccer teams, the UFC, and WWE.

Of course none of that is likely to happen with any regularity except for the Hurricanes moving from Bellerive.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,294
Funny how he never
Yeah the people opposed to the Macquarie Point Stadium are generally also opposed to any significant upgrades at either Bellerive or UTAS in Launceston. They believe that Bellerive and UTAS are already capable of supporting an AFL side full time, and that the money should be invested into other services like health, education, etc, you know the usual stuff.

The reality is that both Bellerive and UTAS would still need relatively significant upgrades to be capable of supporting an AFL side full time, and that there's zero chance that any of the infrastructure funding that's earmarked for Mac Point would be redirected to health, education, or the public housing system in Tasmania, especially not the Federal portion, nor is funding alone going to address the problems with those systems in Tassie.
At the same time they've got a point when say that the Mac Point stadium is a ludicrously expensive luxury, because that kind of money is ridiculous for what will effectively be a glorified 23k boutique stadium.

So yeah it's complicated as at their core both sides have a point, but at the same time both are unwilling to compromise, which has created an all or nothing false dichotomy.
and
Yet they're protesting the UTAS upgrade as well...

Bellerive would require hundreds of millions in upgrades as well if Mac Point was scrapped. So the actual investment would be more like $200mil for UTAS, probably around $300mil for Bellerive, plus a couple hundred million more in necessary infrastructure in both Launnie and Hobart (training facilities, PT links, amenities, etc), and all those budgets would inevitably blow out. So TAS would end up spending Mac Point levels of money anyway, it'd just be spread between more facilities.

The AFL is refusing to budge on the Mac point development anyway, and they'd be more than happy to scrap the expansion completely if they could get away with placing the blame on Tasmania. Public pressure is the only reason that they're expanding to Tasmania in the first place, and they've built themselves a very comfortable win-win scenario as a result; either the Tasmanian team gets the best start possible at the taxpayers expense or it doesn't happen at all, either way the AFL wins.

The quickest and easiest way to cut costs would be to not split venues and cut Launceston out, but TAS won't even consider that because of internal politics and business interests.
It’s probably true afl are bluffing as they likely sold team 19 as part of their tv deal and failure to deliver tasmania would see the deal renegotiated
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,294

Noted for their league coverage the public accountant weighs in
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,957

Noted for their league coverage the public accountant weighs in
Notice how all of the arguments about how it'd be good for political relations and leverage, and not about how it'd benefit the NRL?!

It isn't the NRL's job or place to wade into geopolitics, and it'd only be a matter of time before it blew up in the NRL's face if does.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,294
Notice how all of the arguments about how it'd be good for political relations and leverage, and not about how it'd benefit the NRL?!

It isn't the NRL's job or place to wade into geopolitics, and it'd only be a matter of time before it blew up in the NRL's face if does.
How is developing rugby league in png not to the benefit of the nrl

via increased nrl players and more money from test match rugby league

just imagine back to when you fell In love with John ribots vision for rugby league in China and carry that to png
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,564
How is developing rugby league in png not to the benefit of the nrl

via increased nrl players and more money from test match rugby league

just imagine back to when you fell In love with John ribots vision for rugby league in China and carry that to png
International RL doesn't generate any money now, why would a third world country generate anything
 
Messages
14,822
Notice how all of the arguments about how it'd be good for political relations and leverage, and not about how it'd benefit the NRL?!

It isn't the NRL's job or place to wade into geopolitics, and it'd only be a matter of time before it blew up in the NRL's face if does.
You want the ARLC to waste hundreds of millions of dollars propping up unwanted teams in Adelaide and Perth.

You hate it when rugby league is successful in Brisbane and Sydney. Especially when it's a traditional BRL club succeeding in ways that put the parasitic Melbourne Storm to shame. Dolphins 32k averaged at Lang Park in their first season. Storm's best ever season drew a lousy 17k average at MRS. Raiders are a pissant compared to the Dolphins.
 

Titanic

First Grade
Messages
5,935
How is developing rugby league in png not to the benefit of the nrl

via increased nrl players and more money from test match rugby league

just imagine back to when you fell In love with John ribots vision for rugby league in China and carry that to png
Well we know how that ended up ... it's fair to say though that China does have novelty potential as an exhibition destination.

Not the AFL, "rely on the fickle market", model. How farcical those attempts were. Paying lip service to developing a players market in a country that doesn't embrace personal contact at all. BUT, the Chinese do like to watch action. Manly and the Raiders missed a great opportunity to give it a crack in Shenzhen and if only the late Paul Broughton had listened to local Chinese promoters' advice rather than the Shanghai dreamers, we could have had games in cities where the people crave international exposure in any form.

Sponsorship money in China is available at ridiculous levels for the right attractions. Chinese aren't a new player market at all, maybe touch but probably not, but as I have mentioned they love a good piece of action. Ticket sales, shmicket sales, sponsorship and broadcast revenue where millions of viewers is the prize.

No 18th team for the mainland, but an imported 9's comp properly introduced would get a very response. Short, fast, easy for novices to follow.
 
Messages
12,480
Notice how all of the arguments about how it'd be good for political relations and leverage, and not about how it'd benefit the NRL?!

It isn't the NRL's job or place to wade into geopolitics, and it'd only be a matter of time before it blew up in the NRL's face if does.
I don’t disagree with you but if there’s a positive, I’m loving the fact that for the first time in my life or perhaps ever, we finally have a seat at the big boys table in the corridors of power while the other two codes are seated at the kids table and we have the prime minister’s ear no less! Whether or not we’re smart enough to work this opportunity to our advantage is another matter but I’m not gonna let that spoil my enjoyment for now. Best off season in years!
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,294
I don’t disagree with you but if there’s a positive, I’m loving the fact that for the first time in my life or perhaps ever, we finally have a seat at the big boys table in the corridors of power while the other two codes are seated at the kids table and we have the prime minister’s ear no less! Whether or not we’re smart enough to work this opportunity to our advantage is another matter but I’m not gonna let that spoil my enjoyment for now. Best off season in years!
Afl still way ahead of us re govts

eg qld stadium spend for Olympics afl get gabba nrl gets minor upgrades to Sunshine Coast

afl has one billion for a team in tassie yet a team in png receiving just over half is a terrible use of taxpayers moneys apparently

afl got very sweet deal to keep gf in Melbourne including 125 million to a privately owned afl stadium yet similar deal in nsw for publically owned stadia is a mess

afl working on further scg upgrades

gws got 100 million for 3 stadia and training grounds

pvl has the contacts via racing but we haven’t seen full benefits yet
 

Colk

First Grade
Messages
6,750
Afl still way ahead of us re govts

eg qld stadium spend for Olympics afl get gabba nrl gets minor upgrades to Sunshine Coast

afl has one billion for a team in tassie yet a team in png receiving just over half is a terrible use of taxpayers moneys apparently

afl got very sweet deal to keep gf in Melbourne including 125 million to a privately owned afl stadium yet similar deal in nsw for publically owned stadia is a mess

afl working on further scg upgrades

gws got 100 million for 3 stadia and training grounds

pvl has the contacts via racing but we haven’t seen full benefits yet

Did you ever think that people are against both?
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,413
You want the ARLC to waste hundreds of millions of dollars propping up unwanted teams in Adelaide and Perth.

You hate it when rugby league is successful in Brisbane and Sydney. Especially when it's a traditional BRL club succeeding in ways that put the parasitic Melbourne Storm to shame. Dolphins 32k averaged at Lang Park in their first season. Storm's best ever season drew a lousy 17k average at MRS. Raiders are a pissant compared to the Dolphins.
IMG_1652.jpeg
 

Latest posts

Top