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

[Paul J]

The AFL independent commission has a CEO, a chairman, and 8 commissioners who run the game. They have spent big time on junior development as it's obviously the future of the game and extremely important.

The NRL independent commission will have a CEO, a chairman, and 8 commissioners who will run the game. They will spend big time on junior development as it's obviously the future of the game and extremely important.

The QRL have suggested the NRL independent commission will starve junior development to feed the clubs and that they – a state body – must stay in power and run the game nationally to protect junior development. Absurd!!

 

[Parra]

The AFL independent commission has a CEO, a chairman, and 8 commissioners who run the game. They have spent big time on junior development as it's obviously the future of the game and extremely important.

The NRL independent commission will have a CEO, a chairman, and 8 commissioners who will run the game. They will spend big time on junior development as it's obviously the future of the game and extremely important.

The QRL have suggested the NRL independent commission will starve junior development to feed the clubs and that they – a state body – must stay in power and run the game nationally to protect junior development. Absurd!!

Do you think if you keep saying this it will come true?

 

[$$Poor Boy Blues$$]

Do you think if you keep saying this it will come true?

you are delusional, mr ribot

 

[Paul J]

Do you think if you keep saying this it will come true?

Parra

May i ask, why do you think an independent commission will starve junior development to aid some or all clubs, as the QRL have suggested?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Shane Richardson and his mates have already suggested the NRL clubs block funding to the QRL and its thousands of grassroots players. If they're willing to cruel junior development to get their own way before a commission is even in place, what will they do when they own the sport?

 

[Paul J]

Shane Richardson and his mates have already suggested the NRL clubs block funding to the QRL and its thousands of grassroots players. If they're willing to cruel junior development to get their own way before a commission is even in place, what will they do when they own the sport?

The 16 clubs make up 60% of the 26 votes. You need 75% of the votes to get things through.

The clubs will be able to do nothing on their own, even if all 16 clubs actually agree with each other.

The IC will be run by the Chairman, CEO, and the 8 commissioners. The clubs and state bodies will have no say on the direction and future of the game, thus removing all self interest which is why independent commissions are so successful.

An independent commission will get the Shane Richardson's and the Ross Livermore's removed from the leadership of the game, no to mention the removal of News Ltd as well.

Rugby League will go gang busters under an independent commission. The other codes would much prefer us to stay where we are.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

If it's not an issue I don't see why the clubs don't accept the QRL's more balanced proposed commission model.

Not that taking the state bodies' say in the direction of the game is a good thing as some suggest. I know I'd hate to see the NRL running the game in country NSW without anyone from the country having an input on how it's run. You can be sure there will be no commissioners from the bush and none who will know the issues here. Only the CRL is representative of the bush RL.

 

[Parra]

Parra

May i ask, why do you think an independent commission will starve junior development to aid some or all clubs, as the QRL have suggested?

I've never suggested that. I am just not buying your "big-time" argument. As this stage that is nothing more than wishful thinking - yet you present this as fact. It is not. Fact is, this whole model has been developed in secret. If there was a bounty for junior league why isn't this being touted as a commission benefit?

As in what % increase in funding is guaranteed? How much is that in $?

Until you can answer these questions you are just a spin doctor.

 

[Perth Red]

Ultimately all the State bodies need is a guarantee of funding and that they will be allowed to run the game at jnr and amateur level in their own states. I don't see why this can;t be enshrined in the constitution of the commission and then it wouldn;t matter if they get a vote or not. In fact why not agree to set aside profits from SOO as the main funding source for the State bodies. SOO should be capable of making $20mill profit in years to come and that would be alot more than the ARL currently gets to give States.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I think there has to be more than a committment to funding. The governing bodies need to know that their activities will be supported by the big end of the game and not hindered. I think they also have a stake in what happens to issues like rep football. Paying them off won't ensure that club issues don't supercede the good of rep football. They need that committment too and I don't think that is possible when ownership of the game essentially goes to the elite clubs.

 

[Perth Red]

I don't see why they should have any say on rep football. The IC Chairman should hold the place on the RLIF who ultimately should decide any Int RL issues. The IC shoudld deal with SOO and the States should spend their time and energy on what they should be doing which is developing the game at a jnr and amateur level in their state. With just their own backyard to look after we should see far less infighting than we have now between NSWRL and QRL.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Because an IC elected almost entirely by the clubs is not representative of the game. AS "independent" as they may claim to be, at the end of the day they are elected and re-elected by the clubs and that gives the clubs power. Club influence has hindered rep football, particularly international development, before, even when the clubs haven't owned the game. What will happen when they do? Make the balance fair as per the 1997 agreement and this issue goes away. 50% ARL with commissioners representing the traditonal owners of the game and 50% clubs representing the elite of the game.

 

[Parra]

Bear in mind that as soon as clubs had their income reduced via poker machine taxes they all threatened to reduce funding to juniors and community programs.

Not one club said that they will cut down on administrative or executive costs, not one club suggested that less staff will travel interstate, or that entertainment costs would be reduced.

But junior funding was threatened without question.

This demonstrated the attitudes of the NRL clubs - and that was with their own money and their own juniors. Once it is other peoples money and other states juniors that they get their hands on what do you expect will happen?

 

[Perth Red]

That's why I said it should be easy to enshrine a % of the games income to be given to States in the constitution. If that is the only thing holding it up then it seems a very easy thing to put right.

missing the boat on the next TV deal is infinitly more dangerous for the game than an IC voted on by clubs imo.

It seems to me there is still alot of blazer protecting going on and the game will suffer big time if they don;t find a compromise. imo I don't see why every club should get a vote either, I'd have votes for NSWRL, QRL, Affilitated States plus a NRL rep vote. Make sure that all agreements need a 75% majority and that the numbers are made up so that at east two of the three state bodies had to be in agreement. Safeguards everything and would get the thing happening.

 

[Quidgybo]

I don't see why every club should get a vote either, I'd have votes for NSWRL, QRL, Affilitated States plus a NRL rep vote. Make sure that all agreements need a 75% majority and that the numbers are made up so that at east two of the three state bodies had to be in agreement. Safeguards everything and would get the thing happening.

One thing you need to keep in mind is what generates the money to fund the game - predominantly the elite club competition with smaller amounts from Origin and Test football. There is nothing tying the clubs and the players they employ to the NRL, ARL, QRL or anyone else beyond 2012. With the clubs voting as a block (unlike the SL war where the clubs split), what happens if they say they aren't happy with only one quarter of the vote for commission candidates while they and/or their players are generating 99% plus of the game's income? See the dilemma here? Procrastination over the commission, 2012 deadline creeping up, and all the financial power with the clubs.

It's a dangerous game the QRL are playing because if the clubs don't like the new arrangement and decide as block not to sign on beyond 2012 then the deal the clubs offer the QRL after leaving the NRL an empty shell and forming their own league may not be nearly so good. Sure, it's a sh*tty situation that all the financial power lies with the elite end of the game, but none the less it's the reality. As I've said previously, I think the proposed commission is much better than what we currently have and if it is the best proposal that is *politically achievable* at this time then I'll support it and hope we can improve on it in the future.

Leigh.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Oh yeah the old "the NRL makes all the money" line. But where do they get their players from? I'd love to see the NRL clubs try and go it alone without the grassroots game beneath to prop them up. Grassroots RL succeeds in spite of NRL clubs not because of them.

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

Oh yeah the old "the NRL makes all the money" line. But where do they get their players from? I'd love to see the NRL clubs try and go it alone without the grassroots game beneath to prop them up. Grassroots RL succeeds in spite of NRL clubs not because of them.

Rubbish. Why do kids start playing?

The CRL in NSW is a joke. The NSWRL that funds them is a joke. Where do these organisations get their coin from? The ARL. Where does it get its money from? The NRL. Same goes for the QRL, though I can't speak with any authority on their capabilities in administration.

Why don't the QRL negotiate to insure NRL clubs provide players junior clubs either set payments or a staged payment system such debut, 50 games, 100 games as triggers or some such thing?

Because they're not interested in whats right for grass roots. Only protecting their power base.

 

[Quidgybo]

Oh yeah the old "the NRL makes all the money" line. But where do they get their players from? I'd love to see the NRL clubs try and go it alone without the grassroots game beneath to prop them up. Grassroots RL succeeds in spite of NRL clubs not because of them.

Which still doesn't deal with the fact that the NRL clubs and the players directly employed by those clubs *do* make (virtually) all the money. You can twist and turn that fact any way you like but it still doesn't change the reality that television networks, sponsors and spectators pay to see the elite clubs and the players they employ (either playing for the club or playing rep football). How the clubs get their players isn't of particular concern to those three stakeholders as long as they continue to provide a product worth paying for. Like it or not, that gives the clubs all the financial power in this situation.

If we fail to provide a commission structure acceptable to the clubs then they'll walk - taking their product and the games entire funding structure with them. Of course they won't let the grassroots die because as you say they need a source of new players. But they will be in the position to dictate the relationship with grassroots organisations and they won't even have to entertain any notion of offering them a vote. I think that would be a worse outcome for the game than what is currently proposed. But ultimately, I'm not putting forth an emotional argument about how it should be or what I'd like, I'm just telling you how it is and what the implications are of ignoring that reality.

Leigh.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

And you still can't twist the fact that there would be no NRL without grassroots RL. This isn't 1895 the pro clubs don't just get all their players from union. If the clubs want to hold the entire sport of RL to randsom it will just show exactly why they shouldn't be handed ownership of the game.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

[/B]

Rubbish. Why do kids start playing?

The CRL in NSW is a joke. The NSWRL that funds them is a joke. Where do these organisations get their coin from? The ARL. Where does it get its money from? The NRL. Same goes for the QRL, though I can't speak with any authority on their capabilities in administration.

Why don't the QRL negotiate to insure NRL clubs provide players junior clubs either set payments or a staged payment system such debut, 50 games, 100 games as triggers or some such thing?

Because they're not interested in whats right for grass roots. Only protecting their power base.

You don't know what you're talking about. Why is the CRL a joke exactly? Any dickhead can say sh*t like that, and plenty do. But these are people who have no clue how grassroots RL works and what these government bodies are doing for the game. For example, the NSWRL does not fund the CRL. NRL clubs are already supposed to pay development fees to the grassroots bodies when they sign players, but they are very regularly delinquent in this duty. The bodies have to lobby the NRL to try and enforce this obligation as it is. What will it be like when the clubs own the NRL and indeed the whole sport in this country?