RLEF funding boost

[Heritage XIII]

Just got news on the RLEF Facebook page they have just received €466,000 funding grant from the European Commission for development. What a huge boost!

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Not bad, near a Million Au. Lets hope they spend it wisely.

 

[Foreign Legion]

Sweet

 

[langpark]

Brilliant! I think most of it will go into their coach and match officials' training & development programs. Fantastic news!

 

[taipan]

Full details on RLEF website.
Main point"
Rugby league in Europe has received a record breaking financial boost to end what has been a pioneering season for teh sport on the continent.The rLEF has been awarded a biggest ever grant of E466,000 from the European union's Erasmus programme-one of only 22 projects selected for funding from over 300 eligible applications-for a 3 year scheme which includes 21 nations."
Put these details on a union biased site in their rl forum .The trolls will come out of the woodwork to downplay it,as sure as night follows day,Kim Kardashian increases her butt size,a polly tells a porky.

 

[Evil Homer]

http://www.rlef.eu.com/news/article/1199/rlef-receives-massive-financial-and

 

[Foreign Legion]

maybe they can spend a bit of Christmas dosh on a better website and a online shop (just saying)

 

[miguel de cervantes]

This must be the big news they were talking about. Amazing the grant progress in 5 years.

Pretty much the most competent league organisation in existence.

 

[Evil Homer]

If only the NRL could drop in a similar amount, which would be roughly 1/2500th of their new TV deal.

 

[The Great Dane]

If only the NRL could drop in a similar amount, which would be roughly 1/2500th of their new TV deal.

Why would they?

Why Should they?

Why does everybody outside of Australia seem to think that the NRL should bankroll international RL, it's completely irrational.

First off, if they invest they are going to expect a return for that investment, and just like in the Pacific Islands they're going to take that return in the form of taking all the best players at a young age and trying to get them to play for Australia when they're older (just like the All Blacks do in the Pacific in Union), do you really want that to happen on a larger scale?

Secondly, though the NRL is flushed with cash now there's still a ton of work that needs to be done to make things stable in Australia before they should start investing to much internationally.
Juniors need to be overhauled, lower tiers need to be overhauled and made relevant again, the business side of the clubs needs to be invested in, the business acumen of the clubs needs to be improved, interest in the sport needs to be fostered in half the nation, expansion, scheduling of the competition, etc, etc, etc.

Frankly at the moment the NRL simply needs to invest to much into Australia and fix to many things in Australia for them to be worrying to much about international affairs outside of the Pacific Islands and arguably South East Asia.

 

[Last Week]

Lol, this will be good.

 

[Evil Homer]

Why would they?

Why does everybody outside of Australia seem to think that the NRL should bankroll international RL, it's completely irrational.

Because nobody on the planet would benefit more from RL having a greater worldwide profile than the NRL. RL becoming more popular in other countries is just about the single most beneficial thing that could possibly happen to the NRL. Not like the dumb insular admins or many of the dumb insular fans will ever see that.

Why Should they?

Because the NRL is the only RL body in the entire world that has any sort of financial strength to make a difference. As I mentioned, this 'record-breaking' and 'game-changing' investment from the EU would represent 1/2500th of the NRL's TV deal. 0.04%.

If people in the NH had your attitude then the RLEF wouldn't even exist. "Why should we bankroll the sport, it's irrational blah blah blah"

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Because nobody on the planet would benefit more from RL having a greater worldwide profile than the NRL. RL becoming more popular in other countries is just about the single most beneficial thing that could possibly happen to the NRL. Not like the dumb insular admins or many of the dumb insular fans will ever see that.
Because the NRL is the only RL body in the entire world that has any sort of financial strength to make a difference. As I mentioned, this 'record-breaking' and 'game-changing' investment from the EU would represent 1/2500th of the NRL's TV deal. 0.04%.

If people in the NH had your attitude then the RLEF wouldn't even exist. "Why should we bankroll the sport, it's irrational blah blah blah"

Though i would like to see the ARLC give out funds, ill play devils advocate on this one...

The ARLC would not gain from the expansion of the game in these other places, and could potentially lose from it. The ARLC makes money from NRL games, the IRLF would make the money from international games.

Then there would be the fear that a new, huge market would drain all of the best players (or at least raise the salary cap massively). You see how shit the ALeague is with all of the best Aussie players heading over to Europe.

Unless the RFL or IRLF could show benefits for the ARLC, i cant see Grant giving money away for nothing.

 

[The Great Dane]

Because nobody on the planet would benefit more from RL having a greater worldwide profile than the NRL. RL becoming more popular in other countries is just about the single most beneficial thing that could possibly happen to the NRL. Not like the dumb insular admins or many of the dumb insular fans will ever see that.
Because the NRL is the only RL body in the entire world that has any sort of financial strength to make a difference. As I mentioned, this 'record-breaking' and 'game-changing' investment from the EU would represent 1/2500th of the NRL's TV deal. 0.04%.

Horse Sh!t!

If international RL grows at the NRLs expense too quickly for the NRL to keep up (and BTW I'd like to see it grow, just not the way you'd like to see it grow) interest in the NRL and SOO inevitably shrinks, at which point the only money that the NRL sees is their share of from internationals involving the Kangaroos, at which point they follow the same path that the ARU has been forced down, and that path doesn't end in riches for the NRL and the money for all the nations that have come to rely on from the NRL runs out.

And BTW at the moment the NRL is effectively developing all the NZRLs, FIJI RLs, Samoan RLs, Tongan RLs players and English internationals to a competitive international standard and trying to do the same in more of the Pacific.

It is also effectively bankrolling the NZRL as a way to tap into the NZ market at an NRL level (which it is likely to expand on in the next 10-20 years, which means more money invested in NZ) and is starting a much more concerted effort to help fund and grow RL in the other Pacific Island (though that was happening naturally anyway as the needs for talent grew to support the needs of the NRL).

So what happens when they can't afford to invest anything significant into these areas anymore?

The first thing that will happen is that the best players will start to look to RU for the cash that the NRL can no longer afford to pay them and then the interest that they created for RL in their home countries will follow them to RU and RL will likely be in a similar place as it was in 2000. In other words we'll peak then crash and be back where we started.

If people in the NH had your attitude then the RLEF wouldn't even exist. "Why should we bankroll the sport, it's irrational blah blah blah"

It's not the attitude that is different, it's the approach!

We both want the same thing, the difference is that you want the rich (NRL) to spread it's funds all over the world to give everywhere somewhat of a financial base to build off and grow from, which is fine until the rich has spread it's resources to thin and is no longer rich and can no longer afford to support it's self let alone all the poor and everything collapses. What you're doing is taking the bricks from a mansion to build a lot of little houses.

What I want to do is spread that money much more slowly and more directly at a pace that the NRL grows and slowly add more and more international talent into the NRL's system (which will ocure naturally as the need for talent to supply the NRL grows) to create competitiveness at the international level at which point interest grows and nations start to fund themselves (see Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and to a lesser extent NZ).
I say extend the mansion to fit everybody into one big rich family.

Sure it means that for a long time a lot of countries will be reliant on the NRL and Australia to exist (as many already are), but we wont out grow our financial base this way and it's proven to work as NZ and the PIs show and other sports all over the world have shown in the past.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Yeh, the only way i can see the ARLC investing massively in the global game is if they decided to usurp the IRLF and build a RL empire on their own.

The reason they are investing so heavily in the Pacific is because there is no one else that could take advantage. In larger economies, that is not the case. (for reference, note that it is FIFA that makes all the money from the WCs, not the domestic organisations)

I wouldnt mind seeing the ARLC take over the IRLF (the ARLC is rolling in cash, and it wouldnt take much investment to get good returns in some places), but i dont think its reasonable to demand the ARLC to contribute without claiming some reward.

 

[roughyedspud]

A percentage of both the ESL & NRL tv deals should got to the RLIF for international development..

and by percentage i mean treat the RLIF as a "extra club" so the tv grant is split 13 ways ,12 clubs & rlif, for ESL & 17 ways ,16 clubs & rlif,for the NRL..

That would put $8-10m a year into the RLIF..probably more cos the NRL grants are getting silly

 

[The Great Dane]

A percentage of both the ESL & NRL tv deals should got to the RLIF for international development..

and by percentage i mean treat the RLIF as a "extra club" so the tv grant is split 13 ways ,12 clubs & rlif, for ESL & 17 ways ,16 clubs & rlif,for the NRL..

That would put $8-10m a year into the RLIF..probably more cos the NRL grants are getting silly

Again, why would they?

Why should they?

The NRL (and the RFL) get nothing out of it but another league/board/whatever with opposing goals and objectives, that they're now funding and now have to appease, except they wouldn't have direct control over the RLIF like they do the NSWRL, QRL, etc.

In other words it'd be spending money on a competitor for the NRL.

And really at the end of the day that's all that the RLIF is to the NRL (and the RFL), it's a competitor for money, sponsorship, fan interest and players. It's a competitor that they share many goals with and need to work with sometimes but it's a competitor none the less.

 

[Evil Homer]

Horse Sh!t!

If international RL grows at the NRLs expense too quickly for the NRL to keep up (and BTW I'd like to see it grow, just not the way you'd like to see it grow) interest in the NRL and SOO inevitably shrinks, at which point the only money that the NRL sees is their share of from internationals involving the Kangaroos, at which point they follow the same path that the ARU has been forced down, and that path doesn't end in riches for the NRL and the money for all the nations that have come to rely on from the NRL runs out.

LMAO, no. If RL is more popular worldwide, NRL is the premier RL competition in the world then NRL is more popular worldwide. This isn't a remotely difficult concept.

The idea that international popularity would be to the detriment of domestic popularity is just f**king nonsense in a way that I can't even comprehend.
http://www.livesoccertv.com/news/13...-economics-how-much-el-clasico-2015-is-worth/

So what happens when they can't afford to invest anything significant into these areas anymore?

The first thing that will happen is that the best players will start to look to RU for the cash that the NRL can no longer afford to pay them and then the interest that they created for RL in their home countries will follow them to RU and RL will likely be in a similar place as it was in 2000. In other words we'll peak then crash and be back where we started.

Again, the idea that RL being popular worldwide would somehow bankrupt the sport is just laughably idiotic. Players are leaving the sport as it is because the NRL cannot provide the wages or exposure that these players want. And you want the sport to not invest a tiny fraction of its earnings into international development, which would have an exponential benefit long-term, because you think they won't be able to pay top players anymore? :lol:

Why do you think RU has the cash? Do you think they are able to constantly poach top RL players based on their pitiful domestic attendances and viewing figures, which are dwarfed by RL even in the UK?

It's not the attitude that is different, it's the approach!

We both want the same thing, the difference is that you want the rich (NRL) to spread it's funds all over the world to give everywhere somewhat of a financial base to build off and grow from, which is fine until the rich has spread it's resources to thin and is no longer rich and can no longer afford to support it's self let alone all the poor and everything collapses. What you're doing is taking the bricks from a mansion to build a lot of little houses.

What I want to do is spread that money much more slowly and more directly at a pace that the NRL grows and slowly add more and more international talent into the NRL's system (which will ocure naturally as the need for talent to supply the NRL grows) to create competitiveness at the international level at which point interest grows and nations start to fund themselves (see Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and to a lesser extent NZ).
I say extend the mansion to fit everybody into one big rich family.

Sure it means that for a long time a lot of countries will be reliant on the NRL and Australia to exist (as many already are), but we wont out grow our financial base this way and it's proven to work as NZ and the PIs show and other sports all over the world have shown in the past.

Nobody is asking them to invest a billion dollars. For the third time, the 'game-changing' investment that the RLEF received is equivalent to 0.04% of the NRL's TV deal. They could invest 20x that amount and still not even reach 1% of their total TV revenue. So don't give me any bullshit about the NRL not being able to afford to help.

If you want to use an analogy, what we have currently is a billionaire with a mansion in a town where everyone else is living in poverty in clay huts with no access to running water or electricity. And instead of doing anything to help the community or improve conditions, the billionaire is just sitting around in his mansion doing nothing and then wondering why nobody ever wants to come to visit.

 

[roughyedspud]

Again, why would they?

Why should they?

The NRL (and the RFL) get nothing out of it but another league/board/whatever with opposing goals and objectives, that they're now funding and now have to appease, except they wouldn't have direct control over the RLIF like they do the NSWRL, QRL, etc.

In other words it'd be spending money on a competitor for the NRL.

And really at the end of the day that's all that the RLIF is to the NRL (and the RFL), it's a competitor for money, sponsorship, fan interest and players. It's a competitor that they share many goals with and need to work with sometimes but it's a competitor none the less.

Because a stronger international scene will benefit the domestic scenes..

If we can get the usa upto a decent level can you imagine how much us tv would pay for NRL tv rights?...more than the give away price they get now!

Canada...south africa....the same

Its a long game...probably won't see the benefits for 10,15,20 years...but thats how we have to think.

 

[Last Week]

I think the fear is that if other nations get stronger in League, they will develop their own professional competitions which will grow larger than the NRL. Meaning the NRL is no longer the premiere Rugby League competition it is. Which is a fair fear. If the USA got a professional Rugby League competition, it wouldn't take very much for that competition to be bigger than the NRL. Due to the economic power of the US compared to Australia.

I get the feeling that a majority of League fans want us to have the same international footprint as Union. Similar competitiveness. Which would be good. But I think the majority of NRL fans fear that the NRL will become something along the lines of Super Rugby. Which just won't happen. Super Rugby is weak because of the NRL exists.

The NRL is currently the biggest and richest domestic Rugby competition in the world. If all of Union died and became League, that wouldn't change. They're already a competition for our players and sponsors and TV rights. We're winning by a huge margin.

I would like to see the NRL put in a certain sum of money to the RLIF or APRL, but I can also see why they don't. They are the AUSTRALIAN governing body. They could give a million to the APRL or to, for example, Western Australia NRL. It's pretty clear who their priority is. And fair enough too.