Samoa and Tonga look for defections from Kiwis

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

who said anything about voting for cash??

You obviously didnt read the rest of my post.

Giving the NRL and ESL one vote each is enough recognition of the hugely important role they play in our game, as i said before, we'd be lost without those pro competitions. But that should be enough, all other members get one rep and one vote

Your reasoning there isnt consistant. The NRL and ESL get one vote each (therefor being equal with all other nations) as recognition for their contribution to the game? So if the NRL and the ESL didnt have such a superior competition, they would have no votes but Samoa, Wales, Fiji, etc do?

Back to One nation, one vote. Say electing the Prime Minister is done by most states won. As we all know, the population of NSW is about 6.9 million people, Qld 4.2 million and Victoria 5.2 million. Thats only 3 states out of 8 but the population represents more then 3 quaters of the population of the country. Now say NSW, Qld and Vic all vote for Party A and the other 5 vote for Party Z. Even though 75% of the population voted for Party A, Party Z would win because 5 other states voted for them.

Do you see the logic in it?

 

[nadera78]

You obviously didnt read the rest of my post.



Your reasoning there isnt consistant. The NRL and ESL get one vote each (therefor being equal with all other nations) as recognition for their contribution to the game? So if the NRL and the ESL didnt have such a superior competition, they would have no votes but Samoa, Wales, Fiji, etc do?

Back to One nation, one vote. Say electing the Prime Minister is done by most states won. As we all know, the population of NSW is about 6.9 million people, Qld 4.2 million and Victoria 5.2 million. Thats only 3 states out of 8 but the population represents more then 3 quaters of the population of the country. Now say NSW, Qld and Vic all vote for Party A and the other 5 vote for Party Z. Even though 75% of the population voted for Party A, Party Z would win because 5 other states voted for them.

Do you see the logic in it?

If you read what I said earlier then you'll realise it's slightly political. Give the ESL and NRL a vote each in order to win them over. It's only two votes out of twenty something. Also, if ESL and NRL didn't exist, our game would pretty much not exist. Giving them a vote each doesn't impact on Wales, Samoa, etc having or not having votes.

No idea how the voting system works in Australia, but here goes. The size of a country has nothing to do with it, if they are a legitimate member of the organisation then they deserve to have as much of a say as anyone else. What you are suggesting is gerrymandering, in order to give yourself a better chance of pushing your agenda through.

 

[roughyedspud]

Actually, I'd give nrl and esl votes in addition to rfl and arl. Two reason; first we need to keep the clubs onside, play a little bit of politics with them. Give them a seat and a vote and then they can't accuse the feds of pushing through this that and the other, because they would have been part of the discussion. And it would only be two votes out of twenty-odd, so the smaller nations can keep them in check.

They would be the only exceptions though, keep everything else strictly one member one vote. And then get professionals in to organise things. The RLIF council would meet very occasionaly to set goals and agendas, then sit back and let the pros get on with it.

the ESL is'nt a stand alone body, the RFL run super league...so would you give the RFL 2 votes??


that fact that the ARL don't run orr are solely incharge of the NRL is a massive problem imo

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

What you are suggesting is gerrymandering, in order to give yourself a better chance of pushing your agenda through.

How is it?, my plan is to give the little nations a voice rather then the no voice that they have now. Australia and England should have the most voice in what happens as they provide the majority of funding, players and exposure then any other nation in the world. If you were living with 4 people and you earned 10 times what they did, do you think they should get an equal share of the money that you earned? or decide what you should do with the money that YOU earned?

 

[roughyedspud]

it does'nt matter if you give the "little nations" a voice if their vote counts for nothing..


and tell me again how much australia gives,monetary wise, towards international rugby league ???


a big fat f**k all..

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Compared to Scotland, Wales and Ireland?

 

[eels_fan_01]

Kiwis in either union or league dont really give a sh*t who they play for, all they want is to win thats why all the Islanders play for the All Blacks. No loyalty at all.

 

[roughyedspud]

Compared to Scotland, Wales and Ireland?

sorry is that in response to my "australia pays f**k all"??


scotland,wales & ireland all pay their dues to the RLEF...they have to to be members, what do australia put into the RLIF?? infact what does anyone put into the RLIF


i've just been looking on the RLEF website..

http://www.rlef.eu.com/constitution.htm

with regards to money i

ARTICLE 23
Only the Full or Associate Members, who have fully paid their annual contributions, are entitled to vote on the occasion of the General Meetings.

and on voting rights

Each Full Member will have the equivalent of four votes at a General Meeting. The votes will be cast by the Chairman of the delegation.
Each Associate Member will have one vote at a General Meeting. The vote will be cast by the Chairman of the delegation.

which means..

England, France and Russia are currently the full member countries, which entitles them to a greater proportion of voting rights and to become members of the International Federation (RLIF).


The RLEF has a number of associate member countries, such as; Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Serbia and Lebanon.






interesting stuff...but who decides who are full members and who gets full voting rights?

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I like the idea of the "fully paid their annual contribution" idea, thats a good way of deciding who gets the more votes.

Ill accept that system if it is incorperated in Oceania but I doubt that nations other then Australia, NZ, PNG and maybe Tonga would be able to "pay their contribution".

 

[nadera78]

Simple answer to that. The RLIF must 'own' the world cup, euro cup, pacific cup and quad nations. A proportion of the profits is given to the participating teams as prize money, another proportion goes to the RLIF to distribute. Simple. And it would have the benefit of having professionals running, marketing and organising these comps, so we take it out of the hands of the morons at the ARL, etc.

 

[roughyedspud]

that would be the easiest way for the RLIF to make money....but the RFL have already sold it's rights to the 2009 4 nations..

 

[deluded pom?]

that would be the easiest way for the RLIF to make money....but the RFL have already sold it's rights to the 2009 4 nations..

I assume that wasn't a unilateral decision though spud. The RLIF in their wisdom will have said to he RFL "you sort out tv contracts at your end and we'll ask the ARL to sort it out this end". That is assuming the RLIF have the rights to delegate tv sales on the TN. In your own words spud, do the RLIF "own" the TN?