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

[East Coast Tiger]

All I've ever said is that the clubs can't be trusted to do the right thing by the game based on past and present behaviour. Many of them are privately owned, one of them isn't even Australian and many of them are open to the same poor decision making, in-fighting, squabbling and self-interest that some people seem to want to acuse the RLs of. The difference is the RL governing bodies are benevolent bodies designed to do the best thing for the game with elected members representing the stakeholders of the sport. Yet the proposal is that the clubs have total control of the game in Australia when a 50-50 split would seem more than reasonable and is in fact what we'd have under the peace deal after 2017. I'm not saying the NRL clubs and their commission won't do anything for the game beyond the NRL but the best way to ensure they do is to limit their power and give other stakeholders a say. Conflicts between club interests and the interests of, say, rep football are sure to arise and there needs to be a balance in the game's ownership to ensure there is no conflict of interest in the decision making at board level and a truly optimal outcome for the whole game is more likely.

 

[Ziggy the God]

The irony of this whole thing is that the QRL board is now made up of independent people, which is how Ribot got a run, while people are slandering the NSWRL which is elected by many of the NRL clubs pushing for the commission. The other irony is that Ribot has the chance to save us from accepting a dud deal from News Ltd.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

I just thought that I might as well click the thread to see where it had got up to, and now it is Ribot that is going to save the game?????


BWAHAHAHAHAHA

So what will he do to help the game if he gets on the IC, push for teams again in Moscow and New York and Upper Mongolia?
I guess the clus will be in the wrong because they will oppose 'spreading the game'.

 

[Goddo]

^ that and now apparently the ARL and QRL are benevolent forces in the universe staving off the evils of the clubs... relentless drivel in this thread

 

[Goddo]

No jobs for the boys with News Ltd or the clubs?

FFS! Wake up you lunatic!

:lol:

the lunatic is on the grass, and his name is loudstrat.

You are good value on this forum... whenever you disagree you just slander your oponent, you never challenge on a factual basis.

I'll see you on the dark side of the moon dopey...

:lol:

Well done loudy, you always make me laugh. (At you of course).

 

[East Coast Tiger]

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

I just thought that I might as well click the thread to see where it had got up to, and now it is Ribot that is going to save the game?????


BWAHAHAHAHAHA

So what will he do to help the game if he gets on the IC, push for teams again in Moscow and New York and Upper Mongolia?
I guess the clus will be in the wrong because they will oppose 'spreading the game'.

Well the NRL clubs certainly aren't going to push for growth. They've already decided against expansion, even though every other sport is doing so. Not that I suggested Ribot would do such a thing. I just said it's ironic that he may help prevent News Ltd getting its way. But you read whatever you like. As a Souths fan it's a miracle you can read at all so I won't be too pedantic.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

^ that and now apparently the ARL and QRL are benevolent forces in the universe staving off the evils of the clubs... relentless drivel in this thread

They are benevolent organisations, in rugby league terms. They are non-profit and their charter is to promote rugby league, and nothing else. The rest is just you trying to twist my words into something they are not. But I guess you'd have to in your position.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

You have some valid concerns(although I think you're being a bit paranoid) and I agree there needs to be protections in place to protect grass roots, rep and expansion.
From what I have read the commissioners will be required, by law, to act in the best interests of the game. Providing the definition of "best interests of the game" includes those protections for rep, expansion etc would you be happy?

 

[Loudstrat]

:lol:

the lunatic is on the grass, and his name is loudstrat.

You are good value on this forum... whenever you disagree you just slander your oponent, you never challenge on a factual basis.

I'll see you on the dark side of the moon dopey...

:lol:

Well done loudy, you always make me laugh. (At you of course).

Thank you for that well constructed argument at the sanctity of News Ltd and the 16 clubs. I especially appreciated the proof that there are no jobs for the boys in these organisations.

I also appreciated your succinct prose outlining the constitutional guarantees that representatives of sub NRL clubs will have a major voice on the commission, and will have the strength to thwart any rogue elements that may keep all the profits for their clubs, and starve the grassroots and regional clubs.

So, we should all sell the game lock stock and barrell based on your arguments, which are basically "I'm right and you are wrong".

So, in short, twat face, f*ck off and stop whinging that you have nothing apart from a pair of testicles waiting to drop.

 

[Goddo]

LOL the clown continues to rant. You are worse than the bum who lives on the corner of the QVB ranting about God. You are a funny guy...

 

[East Coast Tiger]

You have some valid concerns(although I think you're being a bit paranoid) and I agree there needs to be protections in place to protect grass roots, rep and expansion.
From what I have read the commissioners will be required, by law, to act in the best interests of the game. Providing the definition of "best interests of the game" includes those protections for rep, expansion etc would you be happy?

The big problem I have is that people keep mentioning these protections and the fact the commission must follow a constitution. But the proposal has offered no detail as to how any of this would work. Yet they expect people to support it. It's not clear how the commission will be elected, it's not clear how long their terms will be and if and how they can be re-elected or booted out, it's not clear what the constitution will dictate, who will write it, whether it can be changed, how and by whom and it's not clear whether there is any get out if it all doesn't work. The detail of the plan needs to be made clear. I can't see how anyone can blindly support it until that happens. The problem with the definition of "best interests of the game" is that it's a subjective thing. Conflicts between what is good for club football and what is good for rep football are sure to arise. What happens then? Whose definition of what's best will win? I suspect that at a commission elected (and re-elected) by the clubs, following a constitution written by the clubs is highly unlikely to act in opposition to what the clubs want. So that's why I think giving the RLs, which represent the traditional stakeholders, is the only way to truly safeguard against a club-centric agenda prevailing in instances where the good of the game conflicts with what the clubs want. And I honestly can't see why, if they are so keen for this commission, the clubs wouldn't make such a concession to their original plan unless a. News Ltd is calling the shots, or b. the clubs see the advantages of having all the power or, c. a bit of both. They need to either come up with a water-tight plan that covers all bases and ensures the good of the game is gauranteed, which they have not done yet, or, ideally, they need to allow the stakeholders in the game an equal representation in this process, which to me seems to be the right thing to do anyway in the inerests of all of the game's stakeholders holding some ownership of their game.

 

[Ziggy the God]

Well the NRL clubs certainly aren't going to push for growth. They've already decided against expansion, even though every other sport is doing so. Not that I suggested Ribot would do such a thing. I just said it's ironic that he may help prevent News Ltd getting its way. But you read whatever you like. As a Souths fan it's a miracle you can read at all so I won't be too pedantic.

Wow, that hurts.:lol:


Listen very carefully..........no one gives a f**k what you think, because you made your point, and posted it again and again 100 times.

I have no doubt now that you are one of the blazer wearers on one of these boards, who have done f**k all for years.

I cannot wait until you and your mates have their grubby claws removed from the game.

Go and peddle your pathetic conspiracy theories to someone else.

 

[Loudstrat]

LOL the clown continues to rant. You are worse than the bum who lives on the corner of the QVB ranting about God. You are a funny guy...

Keep beefing up your post count - makes someone think that at some time in your miserable life you could mount an argument with reason - nothing you have posted here contains one.

EC - looks like the News Ltd lovers are just throwing stones. All we wanted was some sort of proof that the ENTIRE game would be looked after with the IC. Apart from "Of course they would", it's now down to stone throwing and inane rants and lots of tongue poking. *sigh*

All we needed was "here's the evidence......"

No evidence came. Only lice.

 

[m0nty]

The big problem I have is that people keep mentioning these protections and the fact the commission must follow a constitution. But the proposal has offered no detail as to how any of this would work.

This is true. One of two things needs to happen to expedite the process. A, the clubs release the draft constitution, or B, the NSWRL pushes its majority vote through in the ARL board. B should not happen before A, and should be avoided if possible.

Bottom line, the clubs definitely need to release that draft constitution.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...enewed-hope-despite-doubts-20100211-nv9m.html

A month until independence day? Renewed hope despite doubts
GLENN JACKSON AND GREG PRICHARD
February 12, 2010

There is renewed hope an independent commission can be established before the start of the NRL season.

Today is a month from the opening match of the year, and while it had appeared there was little chance the 16 clubs would achieve their wish of a commission in place by March 12, there is renewed hope after yesterday's board meeting of Australian Rugby League, which resolved to expedite the process, even if officials from News Limited remain unconvinced.

Heavyweights among the clubs believe the establishment of a commission could be as easy as - or as easy as easy gets when it comes to the long and drawn-out negotiations so far - getting all parties to sit down in a room and agree to it.

It is believed that once an agreement is reached between the ARL and News, the process of the actual establishment of the commission is comparatively simple.

ARL chief executive Geoff Carr admitted there had been passionate debate at yesterday's lengthy board meeting in Sydney, but the fact that the resolution at the end of it was to ''reinforce its commitment to move towards a commission'' was taken as a positive sign.

Of course, there is also still the prospect of a catastrophic breakdown in negotiations, and it remains clear the Queensland Rugby League is seen as the last major obstacle between the ARL and News agreeing to hand over ownership of the game.

The Herald understands that News's reaction to the QRL's push for the ARL to form a 50-50 partnership with the clubs if News exits the game, as revealed in the Herald yesterday, is that the media company simply won't let it happen.

News genuinely wants to relinquish its 50 per cent share of control and help establish a commission, but won't move aside to allow what it would see as a situation in which one dysfunctional structure replaced another.

Its determined view is that independence means independence, and that if it agreed to the forming of a commission that was not free of vested interests then it wouldn't work because reform would be stifled.

That said, the company feels that while negotiations have been going on for a long time without the final result having been achieved, there has still been significant progress made and many obstacles removed. News officials are not counting on an agreement being in place by the start of competition, but remain confident that, in the end, the commission will be formed and will take the right shape.

Since the Super League war in the mid-1990s, News has - rightly or wrongly - been blamed for many of the game's ills, and is sensitive to that.

If it wasn't totally convinced about the structure but signed it just to get a commission formed, and if it were to subsequently fail, News would risk being blamed, even though it was no longer in charge.

The ARL has formalised a negotiating committee - made up of two representatives from both NSW and Queensland - to ''try and expedite negotiations with News''.

''We're committed to it,'' Carr said. ''We're trying to get on with it.''

 

[Loudstrat]

So News' biggest problem is that it doesn't want to look bad.

What a way to run a game - the biggest issue is making sure a newspaper company doesn't look bad.

The code deserves far better, even if Goddo doesn't believe so!

 

[m0nty]

In other words, the ARL decided nothing, and put out a meaningless press release.

Bring on the draft constitution.

 

[Loudstrat]

Meanwhile News Ltd failed to put out a press release, in case it looked bad.

Are you happy that the code is run and it's future is being decided on the basis of a media company not wanting to look bad???????????

Fair dinkum???????

 

[bartman]

The Herald understands that News's reaction to the QRL's push for the ARL to form a 50-50 partnership with the clubs if News exits the game, as revealed in the Herald yesterday, is that the media company simply won't let it happen.

f**k off News Ltd.

Still f**king up our game, even 15 years later...

 

[El Diablo]

Meanwhile News Ltd failed to put out a press release, in case it looked bad.

Are you happy that the code is run and it's future is being decided on the basis of a media company not wanting to look bad???????????

Fair dinkum???????

it's more they don't want to be blamed if it goes pear shaped

doesn't sound like they're trying to harm things.

if it did go sh*t after whatever they agree on THEN they would look bad after not agreeing to what some propose now

 

[Loudstrat]

As opposed to looking sh*t if goes pear shaped if they get their way?