RL independence day arrives - NRL Independent Commission announced

[Goddo]

Good news everyone!

Colin Love has legged it, and the ARL have stopped being News Ltd's bitch, now backing the clubs.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...n-nrls-civil-war/story-e6frexnr-1226175662071

RUGBY League's civil war over funding for clubs yesterday claimed its first high-profile victim - senior official Colin Love.
And the on-going saga took another dramatic twist with the ARL back-flipping on its original stance by agreeing the 16 clubs should now receive an additional $500,000 in funding for next season.

Love resigned in frustration after a 90 minute meeting yesterday between NRL club chairmen and chief executives at the NSWRL in Phillip St.

The ARL and News Limited - who comprise the NRL partnership committee - agreed last week the NRL would not seek an $8 million loan for the funding. Yet the ARL yesterday split the partnership committee with News Limited remaining reluctant to hand the new independent commission an immediate $8 million.

The matter will intensify further today with a NSWRL board meeting at 10am, an ARL meeting at midday with the clubs to then front a partnership meeting this afternoon.


With the ARL now supporting the clubs' demands, News Limited has been left as the sole voice in protesting against the proposed cash advances.

An ARL press release issued at 3.41pm yesterday - quoting John Chalk - read: "My personal view is that the clubs' funding request represents an affordable and sustainable increase in club funding for the 2012 season."

When contacted by The Daily Telegraph last night, Chalk said: "It's not a back-flip in any way. After talking to the clubs and looking at the accounts, the clubs aren't after any more than they are entitled to.

"If and when the television deal comes in, they can expect some further revenue and that's fair enough."

Asked what would happen if News continued to reject the funding requests, Chalk said:

"No means no. There is no casting vote on the partnership."

Tired of the funding issue, Love, the former ARL and NSWRL chairman, walked away yesterday. "It's a hornets' nest and I think Colin has had enough," Chalk said.

Love confirmed he had quit but preferred not to comment.

Clubs yesterday reaffirmed they would not sign the NRL's licensing agreements by November 1 unless the funding was approved. They still maintain the money can be advanced from the impending television deal.

Told the partnership was now split over the funding, clubs' spokesman and Wests Tigers chairman Dave Trodden said: "That is an issue for the partnership but the clubs won't be signing the licensing agreements in their current form. The clubs don't want to take money that doesn't exist but if it cannot be accommodated then I'd love someone to tell me why."

Trodden stressed the clubs were not pursuing any "radical agendas".

Clubs are also seeking to have their current annual grant of $3.85 million increased to $6 million to cover the costs of funding NRL and NYC teams.

Privately, some NRL officials are curious why the clubs themselves don't take out individual loans.

Furthermore, there are also fears that if the clubs are given the money, they will return in another year seeking additional cash.

News Limited could approve the funding and then exit the game and not worry about rugby league funding. But News has constantly maintained it wanted to leave the NRL in a strong and viable financial position - not with an $8 million debt.

 

[Goddo]

THE 16 NRL clubs secured a powerful ally in their push for more money in the form of the ARL chairman, John Chalk, yesterday - and armed with that remain adamant they will not sign new licence agreements until the funding issue is formalised.

The clubs met yesterday at the NSW Leagues Club on Phillip Street ahead of three key meetings today before the formation of the independent commission - a NSW Rugby League board meeting, an ARL hook-up and a meeting between representatives of the clubs and the NRL partnership executive committee.

They remain firm in their belief that the NRL should lift their club grants next season to $6 million from $3.85 million for each club. The fact that Chalk now agrees with them will be seen as a significant fillip, while others will see it as a flip.

The ARL is likely to formalise its own position today on the clubs' demand for increased funding, and after meeting with the clubs yesterday, it is clear Chalk will be in their corner. That comes despite the fact that he is a member of the NRL's partnership executive committee, which last week voted unanimously that it would not be prepared to borrow money to part-fund the increase in club grants by $2.15 million, nor commit to payments of television revenue that was yet to be negotiated.

Chalk's apparent change of heart came in the form of a statement issued by the ARL. It followed a crucial meeting of the clubs, during which they gave Chalk their reasons for seeking more funding and the context surrounding the demand.

The clubs also reaffirmed their position that they would not sign their licensing agreements, which expire on October 31, until the funding position was resolved, which further places the chances of the new commission being established by November 1 in jeopardy.

''Contrary to reports, the ARL has not taken a position to oppose NRL club requests for additional funding for the 2012 season,'' Chalk's statement said. ''I have called for an urgent meeting of the ARL tomorrow to discuss the issue and for a position.''

Critically, he said: ''My personal view is that the clubs' funding request represents an affordable and sustainable increase in club funding for the 2012 season.''

The development came on the same day the former NSWRL general manager John Quayle said he feared the game was in the process of ''splitting'' as it did in the Super League era.

''We're splitting ourselves again,'' Quayle said at the launch of the book Supercoach: The Life and Times of Jack Gibson. ''We've got stand-offs - I went through it. I saw it all, not so long ago. I thought all that was gone.''

Quayle said he could understand why the clubs were demanding more money, but at the same time warned the NRL against agreeing to any short-term funding quick fix.
''What we hand out now, we'll still be handing out in five years' time,'' Quayle said. ''Nothing's changed in 20 years. It's easy to be given money as a sporting club, no matter what club, whether it's league or anyone, because it's the easy way - let the head body give us the money so we can be in their competition.

''As I've always found in sport around the world, no matter what it is, if you keep giving the money, the same thing will keep happening. It's a quick fix, because they will spend the majority of that money on the players for a short-term fix. Every club still believes today, give me that player and we'll win the premiership. It doesn't happen that way.''

He said any money given to the clubs on top of the club grants should be repaid.
''The problem you face in many sporting organisations is, once they get it, they think they don't have to pay it back. And then you never get in front,'' he said.

''Now is the perfect opportunity, with the new television contract coming up … everyone is talking about giving the money to the clubs, but the game should take a heap of it.''

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...-split-grow-20111024-1mger.html#ixzz1bk1rOibO

 

[Goddo]

John Quale is an idiot. Yes, the game is splitting, but quite clearly down News Ltd vs Rugby League lines.

This has always been the case, festering away. Some have been happy to appease News, but its all comming to a head now.

News Ltd, get the F**K out.

The clubs are kept on the pokies breadline because they are underpaid from TV rights, which should cover all player payments. He talks about clubs "wasting money on getting players", but if the grant = the cap there is no issue. The clubs then live and die on their own terms, rather than slowly drowning in debt.

 

[Gippsy]

John Quale is an idiot. Yes, the game is splitting, but quite clearly down News Ltd vs Rugby League lines.

This has always been the case, festering away. Some have been happy to appease News, but its all comming to a head now.

News Ltd, get the F**K out.

The clubs are kept on the pokies breadline because they are underpaid from TV rights, which should cover all player payments. He talks about clubs "wasting money on getting players", but if the grant = the cap there is no issue. The clubs then live and die on their own terms, rather than slowly drowning in debt.

Yep, well said.

And as far as Colin Love going, well let's hope this causes a bit more of the deadwood to leave as well.

And for those saying the clubs are being greedy I recall reading a little while ago that the AFL clubs currently have a salary cap of $8.8M each, including third party arrangements. And thats before their increased media deal filters back to the clubs. The NRL should get a media deal similar to the AFL, so, what the clubs are asking for is not unreasonable.

 

[Goddo]

THE fate of rugby league's independent commission could be determined by a series of crucial meetings today following yesterday's backflip by ARL chairman John Chalk on club funding and the resignation of NRL partnership committee chairman Colin Love in protest over the impasse.

The partnership committee, which controls the financial arm of the game, is hoping to meet club representatives at 4pm today to explain why it rejected their demand for the game to take out an $8 million loan to cover their debts.

The $8m is needed to top up a push by clubs for an additional $2.15 million each in funding next season. The meeting between the warring parties could hinge on the outcomes of a NSWRL board meeting earlier in the day and an ARL telephone hook-up, where a move could be made to change the current ARL representatives on the partnership committee.

The partnership committee consists of three representatives from each of the game's current owners, the Australian Rugby League (Chalk, Love and QRL nominee John McDonald) and News Limited -- publisher of The Australian-- (Peter Macourt, Ian Philip and Stephen Loosely).

The partnership committee issued a statement last Wednesday saying it had unanimously decided to reject the clubs' request for additional funding which made it all the more strange yesterday when the ARL issued a statement quoting Chalk as saying he now backed the clubs.
"Contrary to reports, the ARL has not taken a position to oppose NRL club requests for additional funding for the 2012 season," Chalk said. "I have called for an urgent meeting of the ARL tomorrow to discuss the issue and for a position.

"My personal view is that the clubs' funding request represents an affordable and sustainable increase in club funding for the 2012 season."

The partnership committee operates on the premise that News and the ARL each get a vote and that a motion can only be carried if that vote is 2-0.

The Australian was told yesterday Chalk either switched his position out of fear he could be pushed out of a job following today's board meetings or was out-voted by his ARL counterparts, prompting the move by the clubs today to remove them.

Love is believed to have either resigned his post before he was pushed by the clubs or was simply sick of the continuing problems plaguing the commission.

It is unclear as to why the ARL is putting out a position on the issue of club funding given its role in the game, as it stands is to control its representative arm.

While the imbroglio continues, former NSWRL general manager John Quayle warned it would set a dangerous precedent if the NRL caved in to the clubs' demands.

"If you give some clubs more money now, you'll be giving them more money in five years time because nothing will change," Quayle said yesterday.

"Until such time as clubs understand they have a future and they've got to control that in the same way as we would control BHP or Woolworths, we're always going to have the same problems because emotion overrules the decisions in the sporting boardroom.

"If they want money (they should) go to the bank like we all have to do."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ide-games-future/story-e6frg7mf-1226175639801

Bolded bit shows what News Ltd think - they don't want to budge an inch, and think the ARL should know their place. Well, the News Karmichaels can f*** right off.

 

[bobmar28]

Just get the IC up and running by Nov 1 and let them sort it out.

On a totally different matter did anyone else notice the NFL playing the song This is our house at the New Orleans Saints game yesterday (Sunday US time).

 

[smithie]

Just get the IC up and running by Nov 1 and let them sort it out.

On a totally different matter did anyone else notice the NFL playing the song This is our house at the New Orleans Saints game yesterday (Sunday US time).

It's not the NFL, it's NBC Sunday Night Football using the song. They have used it since the start of the season.

 

[Patorick]

RE NEWS LTD ARTICLES:

 

[Perth Red]

No problem with clubs being guaranteed a grant increase dependant on TV deal delivering the increase we expect. Don't really have that big a problem with clubs that are in dire straights next year getting an advance on that. do have a MASSIVE problem with the clubs doing this now on the eve of the IC being formed and putting it all in jeopardy. Let the IC come in on Nov1st then negotiate with the body that is actually going to be responsible for running the game.

Clubs need to realise that if the IC gets delayed into next year it wo';t be them negotiating the next TV deal it will be ARL/News again and then they rae all well and truly fricked!

 

[Red&BlackBear]

It's fitting that after almost 3000 replies, this thread will self-close with some good news. Hopefully the next I.C. thread will be about productivity and not constant stalling. Cool heads will prevail.

 

[Canard]

If a couple of clubs are on the verge of bankruptcy for next year then withdraw from the NRL now and let in new clubs that can hack it in the premier division of the code!

They have known for 4 years what 2012 income from grants was going to be, if they can't raise enough funds to stand on their own two feet then bye bye, join a level of the game you are sustainable at.

Maybe Chalk is going to suggest the ARL forgo there payout from the NRL for 2012 so that clubs can get the increase he thinks is fair? Yeh thought not.

But every new expansion club will need to be propped up by the NRL to the tune of millions.

Pretty frustrating as a Cowboys fan, whose club got not a red cent from the ARL when we joined.

 

[Beowulf]

Qualyle is 100% correct.

If the game caves into 16 NRL clubs, they will always have their hands out for welfare and never take responsibility. They will always spend more than they have to chase a premiership if they think 'she'll be right, the IC will bail us out another $2m'.....they need checks and balances. I agree they need assistance to get the grant to the cap level ASAP without putting the game into debt. Any monies over that should be borrowed by the clubs from banks like we all have to do and they suffer the consequences if they default. It may make them employ businessmen, not old mates/cronies.

And that money x 15 unprofitable clubs every year is all money that should be going to junior leagues, development, country football, where 99% of grassroots communities need it, as they are the future of the game.

 

[El Diablo]

continued from http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=365874

 

[adamkungl]

But every new expansion club will need to be propped up by the NRL to the tune of millions.

On what basis?

 

[Fonzie]

Part of me sees this as the new wave of club based businessmen forcing the ARL to stand up and end the News Ltd rort for the good of the game. The other part of me worries that this is the clubs standing up for their own self interest at the expense of other parts of the game, and a sign of things to come.

On balance, I would rather take the risk of the clubs than the certain lies and thievery that comes from News Ltd.

 

[Goddo]

Qualyle is 100% correct.

If the game caves into 16 NRL clubs, they will always have their hands out for welfare and never take responsibility. They will always spend more than they have to chase a premiership if they think 'she'll be right, the IC will bail us out another $2m'.....they need checks and balances. I agree they need assistance to get the grant to the cap level ASAP without putting the game into debt. Any monies over that should be borrowed by the clubs from banks like we all have to do and they suffer the consequences if they default. It may make them employ businessmen, not old mates/cronies.

And that money x 15 unprofitable clubs every year is all money that should be going to junior leagues, development, country football, where 99% of grassroots communities need it, as they are the future of the game.

You and Qualyle only have a point if there are no caveats on how clubs spend grant money. But the aim of the NRL is that under the new TV deal, the Salary cap = the TV rights club grant.

If Cronulla had been getting their Salary cap paid for by the TV rights over the last 6 years, would they be in financial strife today? Probably (because there are too many Sydney clubs given the size of the market), but not nearly as bad as their current situation.

All other monies clubs have (sponsors, match day, memberships, pokies) would go to club staff, juniors, scouting, medical costs, development, juniors... they would all be much better off. Clubs like Parramatta, St George and Canterbury would be able to start investing in off field activities such as memberships, game day promotion and facilities.

Leagues clubs would be able to upgrade facilities and more money would go to junior leagues sponsored by clubs. This is where the game would be better off because the clubs are better off. There will still be lots of money under the new TV deal for the IC to direct funding to Juniors, promotion and growth.

As it currently is the clubs are suffering small losses every year because the funding model of the game is wrong. When 15/16 clubs are making losses, there is something wrong with the whole game, not the clubs.

This is largely because the rights were under sold last time. Some people are too quick to blame the clubs, whos position is entirely reasonable. AFL clubs get somewhere between $8-11M from TV money (depending on the extras).

I also notice the most vocal anti-club voices are those who fear the impact on expansion of "club greed". But this isn't club greed, they just want what they deserve. Any new club will need to generate extra revenue for the game to get a licence anyway, so its not an issue.

Expansion will happen in 2014 or 2015.

 

[Quidgybo]

Colin Love has legged it, and the ARL have stopped being News Ltd's bitch, now backing the clubs.

The ARL's death bed conversion? Too little, way too late. This organisation has had over a decade as an equal partner in governing the NRL, where they were supposed to be the ones standing up for the game's interests. Yet they signed off on television and sponsorship deals that massively under valued the game and left us in this current situation. And the likes of Colin Love have been at the heart of it. It's well past time for the ARL to die a well deserved death, and the self interested old boys to make way for new blood.

Leigh.

 

[El Diablo]

NSWRL NSWRL



The Board of the Australian Rugby League met today and resolved to support the 16 NRL Clubs in their funding application.

 

[El Diablo]

a big f**k you to News Ltd

 

[BunniesMan]

So if 50% of the NRL supports this and 50% of the NRL doesn't...wtf happens now. One of the many many problems with not having a proper majority owner.