RL independence day arrives - NRL Independent Commission announced for November 1

[Brutus]

Why was a four-year term for Gallop a non-negotiable demand from News LTD?

He is obviously 'their man'.

 

[griff]

No, it's an unspecified time after the earlier of those two.

There is no definite date when they have to leave, that's the problem. We now have a proposal with definite dates on the table. News exit the boardroom immediately with the guarantee of Storm funding lasting another five or six years, and first and last expiring on a set date after that. Yes, it's a compromise but it's a delusion to think there won't have to be some sort of deal to bring this situation to a close.

The News leopard won't change its spots just because it's 2018. If we learnt nothing more from Super League, we learnt how much weight News put in contracts and legal agreements. They won't suddenly turn Mr Nice Guy just because a peice of paper suggests they should and they certainly won't leave without getting some final advantage for News out of the exit agreement. They'll happily stretch it out for years in the court room until they get the settlement they want.

All waiting will do is keep News in the game's corridors of power for another six or more years, with much the same horse trade occurring there after. In the meantime, News keep pulling the strings directly for their own benefit, screwing us out of much needed funding for yet another TV cycle and probably the one after that too.

Leigh

I agree, but as Colin Love said in the article above, that clause has to mean a reasonable time after. Clearly news got advice that was the likely interpretation the courts would take as well.

As an aside. I'm not a news ltd shareholder but if I was I would attend their AGM and ask them to explain why it is in their shareholders interests to walk away now.

 

[Parra]

Way to change the subject. Can I assume we've now put the "all we have to do is wait for News just walk with no strings in 2018" argument to rest?

Leigh

Not remotely. One article that implied it mat have even been sooner if News Ltd could recoup it's "investment" and didn't resort to accountancy tricks.

That implication raises more questions concerning the rush to the new model. Seems their exit might have been triggered even earlier than was anticipated.

 

[Quidgybo]

News will turn benevolent and start interpreting the exit agreements in our favour. Keep living the dream.

Leigh.

 

[Parra]

News will turn benevolent and start interpreting the exit agreements in our favour. Keep living the dream.

Leigh.

There are two sides to an agreement Leigh. It should not all be about what News Ltd wants. But they have been handed it again on a platter. They now have influence for much longer than anticipated.

 

[Quidgybo]

There are two sides to an agreement Leigh. It should not all be about what News Ltd wants. But they have been handed it again on a platter.

Yes, there are two sides to every agreement but the hardline no compromise stance taken by you and some others here shows that you just don't get that. If you want to play hardball, don't be surprised when News play hardball and stretch this out long past 2018. But if you're willing to swallow your pride and move on past the war then there's a deal on the table that sees them out of the boardroom immediately. They get some benefit for getting out now and we get some benefit by not prolonging the status quo for an unspecified time beyond 2018.

They now have influence for much longer than anticipated.

They have much less influence immediately and definite dates for the complete end of their influence. As opposed to a legally ambiguous open ended period of not just influence, but control of the highest levels of the game.

Leigh

 

[BDGS]

I'm confused, why is the fact that Melbourne will get more money from the NRL then any other club a problem?

If it was up to me, it would of happened from the time they came in and still going as of today.

No other club faces the challenges the Melbourne Storm do in regard to marketability and getting more of a regular support from the local community. I think Melbourne have done a great job in this area but it could be a whole lot better and if giving them more money to do so will help this then lets do it.

If the Melbourne Storm become strong in Melbourne, that means Rugby League becomes strong in Melbourne.

Or are some people to entrenched with hate against the club to see this obvious point?

when the WA Reds come in, i think they too should get more funding then any other club. They are in a different situation then the Storm and perhaps their funding would only last a few years due to it being easier to gain a foothold in WA then in Melbourne but so be it. Rugby League needs these clubs to be strong.

 

[bluesbreaker]

If what you say is true Leigh, then the clubs should all walk away from the NRL and form their own competition. Then what could News Ltd do?

 

[Quidgybo]

If what you say is true Leigh, then the clubs should all walk away from the NRL and form their own competition. Then what could News Ltd do?

Anything they want to do, including dealing with the new body or setting up their own rival comp.

Assuming News don't set up a rival comp, the new body formed by the clubs would control all the game's major revenue sources (television rights etc.), would run its own Origin without any input from QRL or NSWRL, and would provide the Australian representative team in all top level international competition. They'd fund the QRL, NSWRL, CRL and/or move in to run their own grass roots organisations as they see fit. They'll appoint a Commission that has all/some/none of the eight already agreed depending on how independent they want it.

In the end probably not that much different to where we'll end up anyway. Just a more formal recognition of the clubs' position of power within the game and elimination of any last protection/pretense for the position of the NSWRL and QRL within the game.

Leigh

 

[IanG]

Why was a four-year term for Gallop a non-negotiable demand from News LTD?

He is obviously 'their man'.

Exactly. News Ltd obviously owed him a favour for getting Super League off the ground.

Proves to me that they're doing whatever they can to sabotage this whole thing. Too many bodies have vested interests in maintaining the status quo. To hell with the good of the game as long as these fat cats keep their cushy jobs

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

We need you on the IC, Ian.

 

[Brutus]

I'm confused, why is the fact that Melbourne will get more money from the NRL then any other club a problem?

If it was up to me, it would of happened from the time they came in and still going as of today.

No other club faces the challenges the Melbourne Storm do in regard to marketability and getting more of a regular support from the local community. I think Melbourne have done a great job in this area but it could be a whole lot better and if giving them more money to do so will help this then lets do it.

If the Melbourne Storm become strong in Melbourne, that means Rugby League becomes strong in Melbourne.

Or are some people to entrenched with hate against the club to see this obvious point?

when the WA Reds come in, i think they too should get more funding then any other club. They are in a different situation then the Storm and perhaps their funding would only last a few years due to it being easier to gain a foothold in WA then in Melbourne but so be it. Rugby League needs these clubs to be strong.

Yippee! I agree with you 100 percent on this one.

 

[Brutus]

Exactly. News Ltd obviously owed him a favour for getting Super League off the ground.

Proves to me that they're doing whatever they can to sabotage this whole thing. Too many bodies have vested interests in maintaining the status quo. To hell with the good of the game as long as these fat cats keep their cushy jobs

It's amazing that Gallop's four-year extension was such a make or break part of the deal.

I'd love to see an in-depth doco on Super League to see just how instrumental Gallop was in getting breakaway competition off the ground.

Anyone got any photos of Dave in his Superleague/News LTD lawyer days?

 

[Perth Red]

I'm confused, why is the fact that Melbourne will get more money from the NRL then any other club a problem?

If it was up to me, it would of happened from the time they came in and still going as of today.

No other club faces the challenges the Melbourne Storm do in regard to marketability and getting more of a regular support from the local community. I think Melbourne have done a great job in this area but it could be a whole lot better and if giving them more money to do so will help this then lets do it.

If the Melbourne Storm become strong in Melbourne, that means Rugby League becomes strong in Melbourne.

Or are some people to entrenched with hate against the club to see this obvious point?

when the WA Reds come in, i think they too should get more funding then any other club. They are in a different situation then the Storm and perhaps their funding would only last a few years due to it being easier to gain a foothold in WA then in Melbourne but so be it. Rugby League needs these clubs to be strong.

Whilst I agree that having a strong Storm can only be good for the growth of the game in a new area I would rather see extra money spent there (and in WA) ringfenced for development beyond 1st team. ie the VRL should get $2million a year of it to develop jnr, schools and grass roots RL in Victoria. The Storm should get $1million for marketing and promotion and $2million to run a HM, SG Ball and NSW cup team and $1mill for running costs recognising the frontier nature of the club. This way the IC's money is being used to actually grow the game at all levels, not just prop up an NRL team and will have much stronger long term benefits for the game as a whole. I would say exactly the same for the WA Reds inclusion and extra payments that should support that.

 

[Randy_Marsh]

I'd love to see an in-depth doco on Super League to see just how instrumental Gallop was in getting breakaway competition off the ground.

If the ARL produced it, it would be typical nazi propaganda.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Development money for junior or other grassroots football has nothing to do with the running of an NRL club. Victoria should get more money for development but not at the expense of Melbourne. The two are separate.

 

[Perth Red]

But not under the new IC they shouldn't be seperate any longer. Part of Storms justifications in the past for extra $'s has been that it has had to fund all the RL development in the State. That should be the VRL's role funded through the new IC in an expansion fund grant system. Aside from marketing, rtunning jnr/reserve sides and a bit of top up for lower crowds I don't see why Melbourne would need a larger grant than other clubs, what will it be spent on? All clubs should be able to generate enough income to cover operating costs ie around the $16-18mill mark with recogntion that new clubs may need some extra whilst they get established in AFL territory but not $6million.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Nonsense. The VRL is funded by the ARL, not the Storm's NRL grant. The Storm should be funded by the IC and the VRL should be funded by the IC but there should be no correlation beteween the two.

 

[Perth Red]

Were talking about $6million of NRL IC money that will be spent in Victoria. personally I think the VRL should get a slice of it and the Storm have the extra ringfenced to provide a long term sustainable development for the game as a whole in Victoria. Maybe if they had done this 10 years ago the Storm wouldn't have had the $'s to be buying players speedboats and we would be watching 1/2 dozen Victorian trained players running out for them by now!

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The extra money has to go to the Storm. That's the deal. It has nothing to do with funding of grassroots football in Victoria or anywhere else. That will be dealt with separately, as it is now. If the IC wants to put more money into Victorian grassroots football they can.