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

[RL1908]

The NSWRL competition was so successful that they should have charged entry fees for any corporation that wanted to field a team.

That's an interesting point - one that was briefly mentioned during the Federal Court action between News & the ARL/NSWRL.

I'm not sure if was applied to all, but I'm pretty sure that the SA, WA & Qld teams (original Gold Coast club) that entered the VFL/AFL were required to bid and then pay quite substantial $ for a licence.

 

[RL1908]

"The ARL - Custodians of the Game?"
Some background history I've written on the formation and role of the ARL, from its inception in 1924 to the present, and the issue of club power under the NSWRU in the early 1900s (one of the lesser known triggers that led to the founding of RL in Aust).

 

[Perth Red]

Do you know how these fees are decided? What is a licence fee? Why do they have to pay state bodies this money and what would happen if they didnt? Also who negotiates the deal, the AFL commission or is it directly from club to state body?

The WAFL own the two AFL club licenses, the Eagles and Dockers pay them an agreed amount to use those licenses. The amount is set between the clubs and WAFL, traditionally based on an income % I think. Eagles have traditionally paid alot more than the Dockers up till the last few years. Also helps that the WAFL own Subiaco Oval and get a huge income from leasing the ground to the clubs and concerts.

The WAFL's income is more than the ARL is currently getting from the NRL grant!

Would it work in RL? Lets say NSWRL hold 10 licenses, QRL 4, WARL 1, VRL 1 etc and clubs paid them to play in the NRL say $750k each. This money would be covered by increasing the club grants via better TV deal and more efficent running of the new IC. Would fund the States independently of the IC and there could be little argument about securing funding for jnr's etc. Only down side is would privately owned clubs be willing to be at the beck and call of the State governing body?

 

[Titanic]

No they wouldn't and there lies the core of the Commission issue... imho the clubs are only too happy to embrace change, as long as they call the shots.

 

[Parra]

"The ARL - Custodians of the Game?"
Some background history I've written on the formation and role of the ARL, from its inception in 1924 to the present, and the issue of club power under the NSWRU in the early 1900s (one of the lesser known triggers that led to the founding of RL in Aust).

That is a great read. Makes the present day negotiations seem a bit "back to the future"

Also interesting that the influence of non-Sydney clubs and the angst it causes goes right back to the start of league in Australia. We haven't come very far at all.

 

[m0nty]

No they wouldn't and there lies the core of the Commission issue... imho the clubs are only too happy to embrace change, as long as they call the shots.

It would be interesting if the QRL asked to take over the Broncos as part of a deal. That would put News in a funny position.

 

[RL1908]

That is a great read. Makes the present day negotiations seem a bit "back to the future"

Also interesting that the influence of non-Sydney clubs and the angst it causes goes right back to the start of league in Australia. We haven't come very far at all.

Cheers! Time and circumstances change, but people are no smarter or dumber today than we've always been - particularly if they are unaware of past lessons that history can reveal to them, to learn from, not to repeat the same mistakes etc.

What's not mentioned in that article, though it should be obvious once read, is that the ARL gained 50% of the club competition as a result of the Dec 1997 "peace deal", even though the NSWRL was funding and running the 95-97 "ARL" (sic) competition.

The effect of that deal was the QRL got 50% of the ARL's 50% of the NRL - even though the QRL was not a party to the SL war, and never ran/funded the club competition.

 

[Parra]

They lie, they cheat they steal....


At least some things remain constant

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Bloody Queerlanders

 

[bartman]

The WAFL's income is more than the ARL is currently getting from the NRL grant!

And this is where we are still paying for the pointless excesses of Super League, and the costs of having to defend the game against it.

The money that could have allowed the RL to own grounds as assets instead had to be pissed away on both sides to pay overs to greedy players and cuts to their managers or organisers.

And some people still (occasionally) try and defend Super League on here, and claim it was good for the game :lol:.

 

[Brutus]

And this is where we are still paying for the pointless excesses of Super League, and the costs of having to defend the game against it.

The money that could have allowed the RL to own grounds as assets instead had to be pissed away on both sides to pay overs to greedy players and cuts to their managers or organisers.

When you put it like that, it becomes very annoying to think what might have been for our game.

Think of the money wasted between 1995 and the present :x

 

[Goddo]

I love these two quotes in RL1908's article

“I never was in favour of the Board of Control,” ‘Jersey’ Flegg, NSWRL President. [SMH April 5, 1932]

Mr J McGrath (North Sydney) said that he could never see the necessity of the Board, with only two states playing the game. He referred to “costly jaunts”. [SMH June 8, 1937]


Seems right from its inception the ARL was a junket. Also, it never had any control of the domestic competitions. Nor should it. The ARL should simply manage representative games and leave the domestic comp to those running it.

Does the ARL have to remain in its current form? No! Its been shown time and again it is exploited by fat cats at the top.

Would an independent commission be capable of managing the responsibilities of the ARL? Yes, probably more capable than the current set up if it has a strong constitution.

Seems the only loose end is funding for NSWRL and QRL grass roots. Surely, if you give a vote to each of these organisations on the commission, and funding kpi's for the Independent Commission there is no problem.

The ARL needs to stop fighting progress so Love can maintain his bonuses. Same with the QRL. And thats what this resistance is really all about. Love and Ribbot don't want to be locked out of the game, no matter how much they say they are happy to stand aside...

 

[Goddo]

I also liked this bit:

The ARL consists of four delegates from each of NSW and Queensland, with Arthurson having the casting vote. “It would be wrong for a State to have equal power when another State has 90 per cent of the assets,” he says. “It’s better to just leave the administration of the new competition to the NSWRL board."

Would the same not apply to News Corp and the ARL today? Why do they have a say in the domestic competition? They don't own the assets (except the branding of the clubs and competition which isn't just either), the clubs are the assets. Why not leave the domestic comp to the clubs?

The argument that the clubs will stop funding player development is rediculous. Where will their players come from if they don't develop any? Stupid argument.

Also:

So, one of the founding principles of rugby league in Australia was that the premiership clubs had, collectively, the controlling power. Gate-takings from each club game was split three-ways (the two clubs and the NSWRL), while from rep games the NSWRL took a cut, but the bulk of it was divided equally amongst the players. This issue is one of the lesser known, but no less important, triggers that led to the break-away from RU in Australia.

Seemed to work out well for the game for almost 80 years. Maybe a 66% share to the clubs and 33% share to NSWRL and QRL.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

You make no sense. What you're arguing for is that the ARL keep out of running the club competition. But this proposal is that the clubs run the club competition AND everything else. You also advocate the QRL and NSWRL get to vote on the commission. Well, the NRL clubs are not advocating that, and that is the problem. So in saying the RLs should get a vote what you are basically saying is that this proposal in unacceptable.

 

[Goddo]

Err, wrong ECT.

Just recently an offer was made to the NSWRL and QRL to get a vote each on the commission to get them to sign up, Roy Masters mentioned it in his bit the other day. They are still unhappy as it means they only get an 11% share in the comp, even though with 2 votes they can veto any changes to the constitution as a fail safe, and they will have guarenteed funding from the commission. They are gunning for more power, which is not rightly theirs. Thats what its all about... the states wanting power and money.

I have no problems with the elected COMMISSION (not the clubs, you need to make the distinction) running all the responsibilities of the ARL. Remember what the ARL's original purpose was until the super league war... run international league. That was it. They had no other role. If the Commission acts as a governing body for the sport in Australia, then the ARL has no relevance and can F*** off.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Err wrong. The ARL does a lot more than run international RL. Ever heard of ARL Development? Do you realise that rugby league exists below the elite level?

And the fact is the written proposal, with few details, relased by the clubs states that they will elect the commission. That is all the concrete evidence we have to go on and that clearly leaves the RLs out. If the NRL clubs have realised how wrong they are they need to provide a proper, detailed proposal that includes the RLs, in writing. Until that happens their proposal can't be seen as acceptable.

 

[Parra]

If the 'clubs' were all true clubs then the model would work.

With corporations involved it just means that money continues to flow out of the sport. Instead of News Ltd taking it's dividend it is just a number of smaller companies taking theirs.

Ownership of the teams needs to be sorted out first.

It's not just taking profit from the game - the registered clubs are in a relatively unique position in NSW of getting a massive proportion of their income from poker machines. The registered clubs, despite the whinging, also receive a lot of tax benefits. Why should the money generated from these sources be allowed to flow up & siphoned off? It shouldn't be happening now with News Ltd & splitting the dividend differently makes no difference.

 

[Loudstrat]

Err, wrong ECT.

Just recently an offer was made to the NSWRL and QRL to get a vote each on the commission to get them to sign up, Roy Masters mentioned it in his bit the other day. They are still unhappy as it means they only get an 11% share in the comp, even though with 2 votes they can veto any changes to the constitution as a fail safe, and they will have guarenteed funding from the commission. They are gunning for more power, which is not rightly theirs. Thats what its all about... the states wanting power and money.

I have no problems with the elected COMMISSION (not the clubs, you need to make the distinction) running all the responsibilities of the ARL. Remember what the ARL's original purpose was until the super league war... run international league. That was it. They had no other role. If the Commission acts as a governing body for the sport in Australia, then the ARL has no relevance and can F*** off.

So the Clubs can control who is on the commission - who has a say on the rest of the code - but the mob running the rest of the code cannot.

Great move......:x

 

[Goddo]

The mob running the rest of the code ceases to exist. The board then takes over their duties.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Erm wrong. The NSWRL, QRL, CRL and all the affiliated states RLs continue to exist. They just have NO say on th way the game is run.