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

[East Coast Tiger]

You know when someone goes to such great lenths to misrepresent an argument that it's an argument they are losing.

 

[Jankuloski]

Warriors saying they were in favour of the IC because it meant they could not be thrown out of the competition no matter what they did because they would own a share in the NRL.

You don't find this ridiculous?

 

[skeepe]

Well said.

I find it amazing that people have forgotten these incidents, or fail to acknowledge that clubs will act - or instruct the commissioners (that they want exclusive power in appointing and reappointing) to act - in their own self interest.

And I find it amazing that people have just swallowed News Ltd's agenda in all this, hook line and sinker...

Yawn. More scaremongering.

The clubs cannot instruct the commission to do anything. They only have the power to vote them in or out. The commission will act according to its charter.

You know what I find amazing though? The sheer arrogance of those against this commission to assume that they are the only ones who have thought about it, and that anyone who is in favour of a commission is a mindless drone swallowing whatever they are fed.

Well guess what? I have thought long and hard about it, and this shake-up is EXACTLY what the game needs. And it needs it now.

Some of you are advocating that the ARL appoint 4 commissioners. Are you all ready to have John Ribot in a position of power again? Because that would be a logical result. He's already on the QRL board, and has been quoted as saying that he wants to go higher in the game.

Furthermore, allowing the ARL to appoint commissioners would lead to the removal of the word independent from the title. In fact, it would be no better than what we have now. The ARL wanted Colin Love appointed as chairman. Colin bloody Love! Seriously.

Oh and expansion? What makes you think the ARL will fight any harder for it than the clubs? This is the same organisation (through the QRL) that fought tooth and nail against the inclusion of the Titans.

Quite simply, we need this commission, and we need it now. And it needs to be independent, not some quasi-compromise to appease an irrelevant organisation that has done absolutely nothing to look after the game for the last 12 years.

 

[Noa]

The clubs cannot instruct the commission to do anything. They only have the power to vote them in or out. The commission will act according to its charter.

.

And clubs never see eye to eye on certain issues. The group of Brisbane, Melbourne, NZ, Souths and the Titans will always ensure the commission isnt sacked because they're too ambitous,and likewise teams like The Tigers, Raiders and Cronulla will never vote to overhtrow a commision that is too conservative.

BTW this thread has become a massive circle-jerk. I typed circle-jerk into google images to find a funny picture, BIG MISTAKE :shock:. Please, kids, make sure safe-search is on before you do it.

Except you Wittyfan ;-).

 

[nadera78]

You don't find this ridiculous?

It's here in black and white for you, straight from the horses mouth. Assuming of course that Wayne Scurrah knows more about this deal than anyone on this forum.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/league/new...0621976&pnum=0

Independence and a guarantee of indefinite membership of the National Rugby League (NRL) are behind the Warriors' decision to back a new commission to run the competition.
March 12, the start to the new season, is set down as the deadline for the change when the current 50:50 owners - the ARL and News Limited - will hand over day-to-day control.
The Warriors are in unanimous agreement with the other 15 clubs and their delegates, representing players and coaches. With further negotiations, it looks set to be a 'Velvet Revolution' compared to the more brutal Super League war of the late 1990s.
"When the Super League came along, it caused a split in the game," says Warriors CEO Wayne Scurrah. "So to heal the wounds and resolve that, they [ARL and News Ltd] formed this uneasy partnership where they jointly owned the competition.
"There are still conflicts of interest with the grassroots body of the game - the ARL - controlling the professional side and the people who bid for media rights - News Ltd - actually owning the competition. They're paying themselves essentially.
"What the clubs are proposing is something totally independent of the clubs, as well as the other bodies working on it, like the Queensland and New South Wales rugby leagues and media entities."

The proposal took around 18 months to negotiate but the NRL club delegates finalised an agreed document in around 100 minutes.
"The 16 clubs are members but don't control the day-to-day running of the NRL," says Scurrah.
"We would have membership rather than licences. The only way we could then get axed is if we went broke or stopped playing the game."
The proposed structure aligns closely to that used in American sports such as the National Football League (NFL) and Major League Baseball (MLB) as well as Australia's own AFL, an organisation which is starting to encroach more into league's traditional recruitment territory in New South Wales and Queensland, Karmichael Hunt's transfer being a case in point.
"A commission is elected," says Scurrah. "It's not a new concept. At the moment the professional game is being run by the amateur part. It should also tidy up the layers of management, improve the way the game's administered and create a bigger salary cap with savings of between $5 million-$10 million, which would come back to the clubs through a grant."

 

[Ziggy the God]

For an example, I guess when my club does things like play a match in the US, play COMPETITION games in Perth, play trials in country areas, have our players visit schools, hospitals etc, have the sport of Rugby League actually talked about on US tv, have a charity to help out the disadvantaged, play a charity game each year etc etc......it is all about making money and self interest.

They even go as far as lauding our players each and every time they make a rep team be it at State or National level.

I guess that doesn't fit into the script of them being money hungry dogs who are only in it for themselves, and has been conveniently left out.....and that is just from my club.

EDIT: I guess we are just waiting for the IC to be formed, then we are going to f**k these all off, because all we are after is money and self interest. I also hear that we will be banishing Santa, just as we did the Cheerleaders.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

What about all the clubs that didn't even want them in the comp?

 

[Ziggy the God]

What about all the clubs that didn't even want them in the comp?

Nice way to miss my point.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

It doesn't miss the point. You're trying to say your club isn't worried about self interest but clearly it is in the minority considering the bulk of the other clubs didn't even want them back in the comp, thus displaying their own self interest.

 

[skeepe]

What about all the clubs that didn't even want them in the comp?

The QRL didn't want the Titans in the comp, yet it's been the best move that the NRL has made in years.

To further Ziggy's post, it really is shocking the way the Raiders are sending their entire squad, from Alan Tongue and Terry Campese down, as well as 8 of the coaching staff, to visit 55 schools in Gundagai, Tumut, Tumbarumba, Adelong, Junee, Cootamundra and Wagga Wagga early next month.

I am equally shocked that they would dare hold a charity dinner at Kapooka army base, with all proceeds to go to Men of League Riverina and the junior clubs in the area.

They won't even keep a single cent for themselves! What money-grabbing, self interested bastards they are.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The QRL didn't want the Titans in the comp, yet it's been the best move that the NRL has made in years.

To further Ziggy's post, it really is shocking the way the Raiders are sending their entire squad, from Alan Tongue and Terry Campese down, as well as 8 of the coaching staff, to visit 55 schools in Gundagai, Tumut, Tumbarumba, Adelong, Junee, Cootamundra and Wagga Wagga early next month.

I am equally shocked that they would dare hold a charity dinner at Kapooka army base, with all proceeds to go to Men of League Riverina and the junior clubs in the area.

They won't even keep a single cent for themselves! What money-grabbing, self interested bastards they are.

That's the NRL Community Carnival. They have to do it, all clubs do. It's run by the NRL and the ARL and CRL Development organisations. And Tongue won't be there because he's in the All Stars team. As I said before, the Community Carnival was supposed to feature a game between the NRL clubs and local players but they didn't want to do it so it was scrapped.

And since you're such a big fan of proving things (even things that haven't happened yet) show us your proof the QRL didn't want the Titans in the NRL.

 

[m0nty]

I think News Ltd just wants to sink the ARL once and for all and they've co-opted the clubs to do it by offering them the whole pie.

I'm glad you said it out loud. This is your real agenda, no sugar coating. You view the clubs as if they are an extension of the corporate will of News Ltd. Never mind that the majority of clubs are not privately owned, and the percentage of the whole that News controls is nowhere near a controlling interest. No, in your world the clubs are doing the bidding of their super secret paymasters.

That is paranoia, plain and simple.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Nonsense. my "agenda" is the best result for ALL of RL and you'll find others who also question this proposal are the same. Twisting the issue and making such assusations does you no favours. I wouldn't care if News Ltd owned all of RL if it was the best thing for the game. Clearly it isn't, and even 50% ownership of the NRL isn't but that's beside the point as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Loudstrat]

Furthermore, allowing the ARL to appoint commissioners would lead to the removal of the word independent from the title. In fact, it would be no better than what we have now. The ARL wanted Colin Love appointed as chairman. Colin bloody Love! Seriously.

Problem? One day Colin Love will move on. If you tear down the structure just because of a name you'll never get it back when someone you prefer comes along

Oh and expansion? What makes you think the ARL will fight any harder for it than the clubs? This is the same organisation (through the QRL) that fought tooth and nail against the inclusion of the Titans.

That was News Ltd and the Broncos you dense f*ck!!!!!!!

To further Ziggy's post, it really is shocking the way the Raiders are sending their entire squad, from Alan Tongue and Terry Campese down, as well as 8 of the coaching staff, to visit 55 schools in Gundagai, Tumut, Tumbarumba, Adelong, Junee, Cootamundra and Wagga Wagga early next month.

I am equally shocked that they would dare hold a charity dinner at Kapooka army base, with all proceeds to go to Men of League Riverina and the junior clubs in the area.

They won't even keep a single cent for themselves! What money-grabbing, self interested bastards they are.

Wow. That will keep Group 9 ticking along for years. No need to worry about paying bills fellas. Tonguies going to breeze through Tumut one day. :lol:

 

[bartman]

The clubs cannot instruct the commission to do anything. They only have the power to vote them in or out. The commission will act according to its charter.

And Commissioners will act according to the pressures applied to them by those with the power to vote them out... it's simple Politics 101, look anywhere around you (Councils, State/Federal MPs, corporate businesses) but some people just don't get it.

You know what I find amazing though? The sheer arrogance of those against this commission to assume that they are the only ones who have thought about it, and that anyone who is in favour of a commission is a mindless drone swallowing whatever they are fed.

Call it arrogant, but if I think people have swallowed a hot warm discharge of News Ltd's agenda, then I'll say so. If these forums were about when Super League split was on, I would have been a very busy guy...

Well guess what? I have thought long and hard about it, and this shake-up is EXACTLY what the game needs. And it needs it now.

Good for you. But that doesn't make your conclusion immune from criticism, or take away the right of others to post the results of their long hard thinking.

Some of you are advocating that the ARL appoint 4 commissioners. Are you all ready to have John Ribot in a position of power again? Because that would be a logical result. He's already on the QRL board, and has been quoted as saying that he wants to go higher in the game.

Your logic is faulty. Who is scaremongering now? Where is this quote you speak of?

Furthermore, allowing the ARL to appoint commissioners would lead to the removal of the word independent from the title. In fact, it would be no better than what we have now. The ARL wanted Colin Love appointed as chairman. Colin bloody Love! Seriously.

No, the Commission would be Independent of News Ltd. That's all the game really needs at this point. And it would be a lot better than what we have now, and what we have had since News Ltd decided to use the game we love as undervalued fodder for its PayTV war. Chairmen will come and go, but the structures are more important.

Oh and expansion? What makes you think the ARL will fight any harder for it than the clubs?

The ARL has a record of seeking sustainable expansion, before Super League even came along and set the code back 10-20 years. The clubs won't want to split a set amount of revenue more thinly than they have to - you need ARL appointed Commissioners to make the Commission vote for this, because logically the clubs will instruct their Commissioners not to. Your Titans example has been refuted by others above.

Quite simply, we need this commission, and we need it now. And it needs to be independent, not some quasi-compromise to appease an irrelevant organisation that has done absolutely nothing to look after the game for the last 12 years.

Simply is the apt word for the point of view that you have outlined. No-one is arguing that the game hasn't been compromised for the past 12 years - but this is not caused by, nor the fault of, the ARL. It comes from one factor - Super League and compromising with News Ltd, and we (rugby league, best represented by the ARL) are faced with the dilemma of manging News Ltd's exit now that they have extracted what they want (a cheap ready-made payTV audience) out of our game, and are ready to spit us back out again.

If people can't see that... and are happy with the model of just the NRL clubs deciding the make up and monitoring the composition of the IC... then the game really has problems.

 

[Loudstrat]

Simply is the apt word for the point of view that you have outlined. No-one is arguing that the game hasn't been compromised for the past 12 years - but this is not caused by, nor the fault of, the ARL. It comes from one factor - Super League and compromising with News Ltd, and we (rugby league, best represented by the ARL) are faced with the dilemma of manging News Ltd's exit now that they have extracted what they want (a cheap ready-made payTV audience) out of our game, and are ready to spit us back out again.

If people can't see that... and are happy with the model of just the NRL clubs deciding the make up and monitoring the composition of the IC... then the game really has problems.

That is so true Bartman. Very well said!!!!!

 

[m0nty]

"... this is not caused by, nor the fault of, the ARL. It comes from one factor - Super League..." What a load of crap. "We (rugby league, best represented by the ARL)..." Codswallop. "The ARL has a record of seeking sustainable expansion..." My shiny metal butt.

News Ltd was not the only instigator of the Super League war. I doubt clubs would have been so eager to jump ship if the ARL/NSWRL hadn't threatened to drop up to six Sydney clubs from the league according to spurious financial requirements, and then started doing so with Newtown Western Suburbs (edit).

It is true that the likes of the Warriors support the concept of the IC because it means that they are far more likely to be a permanent part of the league. The experience under similar structures in the NFL and AFL is that it is almost impossible for clubs to be dropped even if they are trading insolvently, e.g. North Melbourne and Carlton. This situation is preferable, however, to the ARL's last bright idea of an invitation-based competition where a club gets no assurances that it will be allowed back into the league on a semi-annual basis.

One consequence of the IC will be to lock in a certain number of Sydney teams, I think. If the ARL is allowed to push its agenda, there will be further rationalisation of Sydney clubs. Which do you want: the league to try to retain all existing clubs and grow the pie so that everyone can survive and thrive, or for the league to prune the competition and alienate fans during a time of positive growth in the game?

 

[pennywisealfie]

That is so true Bratman. Very well said!!!!!

holy spelling mistake Bratman

 

[East Coast Tiger]

"... this is not caused by, nor the fault of, the ARL. It comes from one factor - Super League..." What a load of crap. "We (rugby league, best represented by the ARL)..." Codswallop. "The ARL has a record of seeking sustainable expansion..." My shiny metal butt.

News Ltd was not the only instigator of the Super League war. I doubt clubs would have been so eager to jump ship if the ARL/NSWRL hadn't threatened to drop up to six Sydney clubs from the league according to spurious financial requirements, and then started doing so with Newtown.

It is true that the likes of the Warriors support the concept of the IC because it means that they are far more likely to be a permanent part of the league. The experience under similar structures in the NFL and AFL is that it is almost impossible for clubs to be dropped even if they are trading insolvently, e.g. North Melbourne and Carlton. This situation is preferable, however, to the ARL's last bright idea of an invitation-based competition where a club gets no assurances that it will be allowed back into the league on a semi-annual basis.

One consequence of the IC will be to lock in a certain number of Sydney teams, I think. If the ARL is allowed to push its agenda, there will be further rationalisation of Sydney clubs. Which do you want: the league to try to retain all existing clubs and grow the pie so that everyone can survive and thrive, or for the league to prune the competition and alienate fans during a time of positive growth in the game?

If you're trying to claim the ARL's "agenda" will be to cull Sydney clubs you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel now. It was News Ltd that wanted that and got it under the 1997 deal and then promptly killed off two of its expansion clubs as well. Newton were booted in what? 1983? 12 years before the ARL ran the national comp. I wonder who Skeepe's scaremongering tag fits best now? And has there been a more baseless claim ever?

 

[m0nty]

If you're trying to claim the ARL's "agenda" will be to cull Sydney clubs you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel now. It was News Ltd that wanted that and got it under the 1997 deal and then promptly killed off two of its expansion clubs as well. Newton were booted in what? 1983? 12 years before the ARL ran the national comp. I wonder who Skeepe's scaremongering tag fits best now? And has there been a more baseless claim ever?

Whoops, I meant to say Western Suburbs, not Newtown, my bad. But the club fought back in the courts.

Ever heard of the Bradley Report?