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!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
Is this just a wind up?

This is the last time i repeat this.

"Because they have the electoral power of the commissioners. How hard is that to understand."

The clubs make up 60% of the vote, 75% is needed to successfully elect commissioners. Apart from each getting a vote for commissioners, the clubs have NO power.

"If this is not the case then why have News and the clubs drawn up a proposal ensuring their huge majority ownership?"

Michael Searle is the chief instigator for the IC, NOT news. News did NOT propose the IC. The proposed IC removes NEWS Ltd from the game. It gives the clubs no power.


If that is the case then let someone other than the clubs or News Ltd elect the commissioners.

If it is truly independent then why does it matter who elects these commissioners?

Why does News Ltd feel they have to appoint members? Why do the clubs need to ensure they have a vote?
 
Messages
1,520
"If the state bodies keep all their powers the IC is essentially no different to the NRL as it is now."

No different? How exactly?

"If they do lose powers then the IC will be making decisions on the direction of any funds given to the RLs."

Exactly. This is how highly successful IC's work. They generate more revenue and then decide where and how it is distributed.

"For example, if NRL clubs have the power to set the agenda..."

I have run out of ways to tell you that under the IC proposed, the clubs will have NO power.

Can you please tell me just how the clubs will have power under the IC?

Its amazing that ECT thinks that the NRL clubs will have the power.

They won't.

The commission gets the money and they decide where to spend it. The clubs don't. Not only that but you are assuming everyone is corrupt, ECT.

Its like hiring a manager to run your life....not just anyone, but say, your father. Do you think he'd mess you over? Someone who truly cares about you.

Thats the commission.

If most commissioners are thinking one thing, such as expansion being a great option because the FACTS and FIGURES say it is, then they will do that. If its not a great option, they won't.

The new way of thinking will be for rugby league. And its true, elite clubs cannot take a hit, but then can neither the grassroots, so it would all be about balance. And sure, the grassroots dont need as much money as the elite, but then its about balance too.

To draw a line like you are, ECT, and separate the two and call it a tug of war - or an all out war - is being sucked into the politics of the moment.

Its obvious the game is not unified, but under an IC it can be.

So lets have the commission as proposed, and end all the little bitch slapping and posturing. And nonsense arguments like grassroots will suffer...it won't.

The commission is the head rising above a squabbling pack of hounds. If you can't see that having one group of leaders is going to provide direction, foresight enough, and clear goals to strive for, you are once again being sucked into politics. Thats opposed to what we have now, a giant tug of war, pulling the game this way, then that, then back.....gets you less of the way down the track, doesnt it

The grassroots notion is a fear campaign.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,520
If that is the case then let someone other than the clubs or News Ltd elect the commissioners.

If it is truly independent then why does it matter who elects these commissioners?

Why does News Ltd feel they have to appoint members? Why do the clubs need to ensure they have a vote?

This has been dealt with.

They may be appointing them, but at least both the ARL and news must agree on their appointment.

Its not quite truly independent, but its more impartial than what we have now.

Its such a complex issue, all the things you dont know about, me neither.

If this is what needs to happen to get a commission over the line, then so be it. Its a transitional stage and thats important to note. One consideration you must take is that it would not be such a good thing for the 'open' vote on commissioners to take place by clubs and everyone, because its a new system and they have not got a feel for it. At least news and arl will be able to use their resources to get the best appointees. I would not think a club-backed election would be a good idea at this stage.

When the commission is running in full, then so should normal elections take place.

Dude, no one is going to wave a magic wand and solve leagues troubles in one day. The transitional period is fine with me. You'd expect news to want to be out and still try to have a minor say, after all they can't just walk away.....their dealings in league and the legacy will go on for some time....

to me they are fading away rather than walking away, and thats ok, because league will be better anyway under an IC....

in life you have to 'pay' people off in business. Im not talking about money in envelopes, I am talking about swapping services, contacts, privileges, trade and business, etc. In business you can't do anything by yourself, it always involved other people/companies and they have their own desires.

Such as this is not a simple situation, you'd expect some complexity, and all thats been said on here, is hard for some to understand, but the underlying goal is still being achieved and that is RL's independence.

Its not an add on cost you can get away with. Its acceptable to the ARL, and thats fine by me too. And its hardly completely unfair to fade away rather than walk away, because they dont even have to do that! Remember news was approached, and from their side they wanted to disentangle themselves from league because its becoming a bad image for them....thats why we are where we at....

And lets say it once more: grassroots will be looked after. The commission will utilize the resources already there in men on the ground and build on it. If you have a job due to excess or waste, or just got overlooked, hey I feel sorry for you, or if you have to take a pay cut, who knows...thats life.....do it for RL, bro
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,139
And this is the last time I ask this (for now):

if the comissioners are not subject to voter pressure why did the clubs' original plan give 100% of the vote to themselves?

If you cannot answer this question you cannot claim their independence from the clubs.
 

Digga Hole

Juniors
Messages
340
Is this just a wind up?

The clubs make up 60% of the vote, 75% is needed to successfully elect commissioners. Apart from each getting a vote for commissioners, the clubs have NO power.

I think you need to research the term "negative control".

Yes you are correct that the clubs cannot directly elect the commissioners without agreement from the other parties who have a vote. However conversely, no commisioner can be elected without the agreement of the majority of the clubs as they hold 60% of the vote.

If a potential commisioner runs on a platform that is to promote "grassroots" or International at the expense of all the clubs, then there is no way they will get elected.

If you think that this won't be a club controlled commission, then you need another think. There will always be a trade off required to keep the clubs happy.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,869
we could elect them via a poll on here! That'd be fun.

There is a real danger of ending up with exactly the same scnario we have now in terms of teh running of the game just with News Ltd replaced by the clubs. A clubs v ARL situation does the game no good for the long term.

Seeing clubs vote for no expansions despite not having a clue about what expansion might be worth or how it might be funded was indeed a warning shot across the bows, but as said one can only hope that the elected commisioners do not pander to the clubs weekly whims and do indeed run the game independently.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,869
If there is one thing in life I've learnt is that there is no certainties! None of us are privvy to the detail so it is hard to argue for or against, we can all agree we want News out, we can all agree that an IC is the way forward, now we just need to hear the details of how an IC will represent the best interests of the game at all levels whilst managing any potential rifts between clubs and NSWRL/QRL/ARL.
 
Messages
1,520
If there is one thing in life I've learnt is that there is no certainties! None of us are privvy to the detail so it is hard to argue for or against, we can all agree we want News out, we can all agree that an IC is the way forward, now we just need to hear the details of how an IC will represent the best interests of the game at all levels whilst managing any potential rifts between clubs and NSWRL/QRL/ARL.

Answer to your quote.....there will be no arl....and the qrl and nswrl will need to fall into line and assume their future role gracefully - thats how they can help the game best.

__________

Now:

I will start this post with a purpose statement. I intend to dispel some peoples myths about the current IC situation.

The grassroots disruption gamble

Ok. So for the sake of some bulldust idea that grassroots will somehow suffer under an IC, people are going to town with a lot of crap....and its frankly a low act by the QRL. It is a grab for power, power they do not deserve. Frankly they are NOT REQUIRED to be at the level they are asking for. If you dont get all that, then I ask you to unblinker yourself and failing that, I ask you to realign your perceptions, take a step back and just think.....who the hell would want to overlook their next generation of players? What sport would want that to happen? Forget tv contracts if you have not got a pool of players to follow, let alone the best athletes in your country.
You know as well as I do that grassroots is as important as the Elite. You need to get over this idea that commissioners won't know or understand that, because all you are doing is adding weight to a devious scheme by the qrl to (uneloquently) f**k with the RL power balace - primarily nswrl and arl - one final time before they bow out and assume a more fitting role....


The problem you guys face is that you want power for organisations that would not have any power unless you gave it to them and they would be governing (and stiffling) the ones with the real power - the clubs.

it should never be the other way around. It would be like asking the king to accept instructions from the serfs.

Unleash the powerful ones, let them be the drivers, and they will look after all else so they can continue to be powerful. You never unleash the less powerful, such as the states, they will bring mediocrity because if they are casting shadows on the more powerful they are in fact holding them back. my language may be simple and I guarantee you its not because I think people on here are simple, its because I am intending to address much deeper issues without writing massive blocks (as best as possible).

The underlying issue: it goes beyond a qrl power play.

The BIG issue here is that the ones who will become dwarfs per se` are crying foul because they dont like it, its a personal income/prestige reduction they are worried about not the best interests of the game; moreso they are upset a new body is coming in to rule them, as they may feel they are the rightful rulers of themselves.....but let me say this to you: by the way they are acting they think they own RL, but they dont....the fans own the game by providing power to the clubs, and for the sake of rules, people say the clubs own the game; but really the game and rules known as rugby league own themselves...the arl said they were custodians of the game, well that mantle falls to the IC, so in effect the game is ruling itself and drawing commissioners from the best of its fans amongst the community.....the qrl has no right to do what it is doing.

.....but you know, if they pulled their heads in, and got along, they could play a valuable part in leagues co-operative future.

Thats the only issue you need to look at....dragging your head out of your but, qrl, and anyone else who thinks they should have a great say, be on the same level, command the same 'power'......no, it should be IC as the head, and everyone else helping THEM in what THEY want.


Notice how the clubs are not at the head, they are merely the powerful drivers out there, and they are handing their power to the commission. Its no longer theirs.


Here are three telling points.

1. You know, in AFL and NFL, and others, the clubs trust in their commissioners. They let them do their thing, because guys, when clubs dont have to worry about politics, etc, they can get on with the business of running footy clubs, and I bet you, clubs dont want to be involved in politics. They just need a good system to back them up. And a good system that they would like is one that LOOKS AFTER ALL THE GAME. By the rules, the commissions decision is final - they are the ones who research and obtain facts, they are the ones who are unhindered along party lines, they are the ones who can make things happen moreso than any club affiliated person - so why get involved? Why disrupt that process??

2. Some people seem to think that the clubs are going to be in the pockets of certain people, whispering in their ears, getting involved.....as if. They are handing over the running of the game to people whom they trust so they dont have to worry about that sh*t!


3. The current structure of RL is totally wrong. The current admin has low credibility, the ARL and SL war threw everything off-kilter, the states bodies are a little bit too involved to the point of meddling (falou affair, etc), the whole second level admin runs Origin our biggest product yet it uses NRL players. Talk about a tug of war....there are too many RL's out there and they are essentially on the same level as the other, and political means is the only way they have of getting anywhere, and it usually descends into slanging matches, backstabs and disruptive maneuvers because they are basically punching at the same weight. The power balance in the game is a shambles, and the conflict of interest at the top is a sham.....

.....ok....point is that if you think all of whats happening now is going to happen under an IC, then you are sorely mistaken....whats more, its the prime reason to change....forget news ltd, you wont have to deal with them too much in the future....worry about all the rusted on warts left in the game, and hope the IC has the forsight to do a massive cleanout and restructure of the levels underneath it.

Ok. So for the sake of some bulldust idea that grassroots will somehow suffer under an IC, people are going to town with a lot of crap....and its frankly a low act by the QRL. It is a grab for power, power they do not deserve, and frankly they are NOt REQUIRED to be at the level they are asking for. If you dont get all that, then I ask you to unblinker yourself and failing that, I ask you to realign your perceptions, take a step back and just think.....who the hell would want to overlook their next generation of players? What sport would want that to happen?
You know as well as I do that grassroots is as important as the Elite. You need to get over this idea that commissioners won't know or understand that, because all you are doing is adding weight to a devious scheme by the qrl to (uneloquently) f**k with the RL power balace - primarily nswrl and arl - one final time before they bow out and assume a more fitting role....


I ended as I started, so hopefully you get the idea. You do get it dont you?

If thats not enough to convince you, then here's this:

If you were in a household and you earned 80 grand but your partner earned 500 grand, and you thought you should have the say in how ALL the money is spent, I bet your partner would be telling to go jump. Its like that everywhere, and for the situation to be reversed, well your partner would have to be very stupid....
thats why the clubs should have majority say as much as anything. Now if the states earned half of rl's income, sure, but no they dont, and thats why they must assume their future role gracefully as much as anything.
 
Last edited:

hellteam

First Grade
Messages
6,536
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/new-push-to-sign-up-howard-20100710-104pt.html

howard push

but get a load of the names on the list, and hmmmm, searle is not the only person involved in all this

you (some) pack of simpleton tools. read my post above for some real insight, you got nothing to lose if you do

The only insight anyone might get from reading your posts would be insight into the convoluted mind of a very strange person.

We also get to see bolded fonts.... and sometimes even blue and red colours :)
 
Messages
1,520
you guys are a pair of tools

absolute douche bags, and your douche's are full of blood....blood drained from your brains, that sits in your big toe no doubt.

what administrator - independent or chained to the wall - would want to upset junior footy?

The QRL are in a grab for power - they have no business in a full spot at the head of the power tree.

The clubs won't be running the game or meddling - they dont want to be involved in the decision making processes; they just want to run footy clubs, not footy comps. And neither would they want the chance to sign future youngsters compromised.

There is plenty of revenue out there to be had for everyone.

The difference between us (the pros) and you guys (the cons) is that we want to become truly independent from where we are now; and you guys want to continue the power struggles and links to the past and a failed system based upon failed ideas that have left our sport wanting for so long.
 

1 Eyed TEZZA

Coach
Messages
12,420

Paul J

Juniors
Messages
89
And this is the last time I ask this (for now):

if the comissioners are not subject to voter pressure why did the clubs' original plan give 100% of the vote to themselves?

If you cannot answer this question you cannot claim their independence from the clubs.

The original plan was based on the highly successful AFL Commission where only the clubs vote.

The QRL have managed to change this by increasing the vote from 16 to 26, but it won't effect the ability of the commissioners.
 

Paul J

Juniors
Messages
89
I think you need to research the term "negative control".

Yes you are correct that the clubs cannot directly elect the commissioners without agreement from the other parties who have a vote. However conversely, no commisioner can be elected without the agreement of the majority of the clubs as they hold 60% of the vote.

If a potential commisioner runs on a platform that is to promote "grassroots" or International at the expense of all the clubs, then there is no way they will get elected.

If you think that this won't be a club controlled commission, then you need another think. There will always be a trade off required to keep the clubs happy.

To my knowledge, the AFL, NFL, & NBA commissions have never been club controlled, it's impossible under the independent commission structure for it to happen. The NRL commission will be no different.

How could the NRL commission ever become club controlled? I'm not trying to be a smart arse but can you give an example of how it could feasibly happen?
 
Messages
14,139
I'm sick of being told the AFL commission can be translated to RL. We actually have an international game, although the clubs would probably rather we didn't. They don't even have state of origin anymore because their clubs killed it off. It's just not as simple as saying it works in the AFL, if indeed it does, so it will work in RL. The main reason the AFL kicks our arse is because it has a competent CEO who talks up his game and acts in its interests while we have a CEO who talks our game down and who does not act in our interests or reacts to what others do. Even a fair and balanced IC won't be able to solve that unless they get rid of Gallop and there's no evidence that any IC will do that.
 

Paul J

Juniors
Messages
89
I'm sick of being told the AFL commission can be translated to RL. We actually have an international game, although the clubs would probably rather we didn't. They don't even have state of origin anymore because their clubs killed it off. It's just not as simple as saying it works in the AFL, if indeed it does, so it will work in RL. The main reason the AFL kicks our arse is because it has a competent CEO who talks up his game and acts in its interests while we have a CEO who talks our game down and who does not act in our interests or reacts to what others do. Even a fair and balanced IC won't be able to solve that unless they get rid of Gallop and there's no evidence that any IC will do that.

The independent commission has worked for the AFL & NFL which don't have an international game and for the NBA which does. It will work for the NRL as well, the only reason given that it won't work in the NRL as well is because of the clubs?

The CEO's are the mouth piece for the game. The AFL CEO has a commission behind him, he speaks about the decisions the commission has made. Gallop needs a commission behind him, he can only speak now for the lack of leadership the NRL currently has.

Can you give an example of how the clubs will get any influence over the commission in the NRL commission that has been put forward?
 
Messages
14,139
Yes, I've done so a million times, as have others. They vote for the commissioners. No commissioner stands a hope in hell without the support of the vast majority of clubs. So they are inexorably obligated to their wishes. Same as every other entity that relies on popular support from its constituency. In this case the constituency is the clubs and that gives them power. Anyone who thinks a commission will go against the wishes of those who elect and re-elect them is living in a fantasy world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top