Strategic Plan

[6togo]

Anybody know where you can get a copy?

Would be an interesting read to see where the administrators see the game heading.

 

[Paullyboy]

Id love to read it but cant find it either

 

[gunnamatta bay]

Would be an interesting read to see where the administrators see the game heading.

I would love to have a heart to heart with Gallop off the record and get his thoughts on the Central Coast.

 

[Woods99]

I would be very interested to see how the following dilemmas in the game can be resolved:

1. The pinnacle of the game internationally is SOO. This is a game between two states of Australia.

1.1 If the game expands nationally, what happens to players from other states...will other states eventually be admitted to an expanded SOO. While it might be difficult for existing supporters to believe, Melbourne people might become interested in league, but they are unlikely to want to take sides in a contest between Qld and NSW, and ditto for the other states.

1.2 The existence of the SOO, plus an expanded club competition, plus a full international schedule, puts unreasonable demands on elite players. The club competition is essential, for obvious reasons. Which of the other two, SOO or internationals, is less essential?

2. The game as it is played in the NRL is at a far higher standard than the game as played in any other competition. This is likely to mean that Australian, and New Zealand players who play in the NRL will remain of higher skill levels, fitness, and overall quality than players who play in lesser competitions. Thus, Australia, and to some extent New Zealand should remain the top international teams for the forseeable future. The only way for other countries, like France, and England, to compete long-term is for the NRL to be weakened.

3. It is stated from time to time that rugby league must enhance its international profile, and I think that this is right. Who will pay for the development and propagation of rugby league, from the grass-roots, in new potential international competitors?

 

[Copa]

I would be very interested to see how the following dilemmas in the game can be resolved:

1. The pinnacle of the game internationally is SOO. This is a game between two states of Australia.

This is the pinnacle of the game domestically. But you're right it does have a high level of status in RL land generally... this is not necessarily a bad thing.. the inter-country matches need to play catch up in status. it's not unusual for clubs matches in some sports, eg soccer, to be of a higher quality than inter-country matches. Its about buliding the status for the inter-country clashes that need to be done for RL.

1.1 If the game expands nationally, what happens to players from other states...will other states eventually be admitted to an expanded SOO. While it might be difficult for existing supporters to believe, Melbourne people might become interested in league, but they are unlikely to want to take sides in a contest between Qld and NSW, and ditto for the other states.

I'd love to see Victoria get smashed in a SOO if they get enough player resources to enter a team.

1.2 The existence of the SOO, plus an expanded club competition, plus a full international schedule, puts unreasonable demands on elite players. The club competition is essential, for obvious reasons. Which of the other two, SOO or internationals, is less essential?

I believe the number of rounds for the NRL is going to decrease.

2. The game as it is played in the NRL is at a far higher standard than the game as played in any other competition. This is likely to mean that Australian, and New Zealand players who play in the NRL will remain of higher skill levels, fitness, and overall quality than players who play in lesser competitions. Thus, Australia, and to some extent New Zealand should remain the top international teams for the forseeable future. The only way for other countries, like France, and England, to compete long-term is for the NRL to be weakened.

What a load of rubbish. Stupid in fact.
France will be entering a team into Super League soon and a second french team in SL is also being talked about. This will increase their abilities. Increasing rivalries, resources and player numbers in both France and the nations within GB will result in increased skill levels.

3. It is stated from time to time that rugby league must enhance its international profile, and I think that this is right. Who will pay for the development and propagation of rugby league, from the grass-roots, in new potential international competitors?

The over $15 million of sponsorship for this year's SOO is a good start. Ticket sales, other RL sponsorships, profit from Tri-nations etc etc... their are many sources of income.

 

[Woods99]

What a load of rubbish. Stupid in fact.
France will be entering a team into Super League soon and a second french team in SL is also being talked about. This will increase their abilities. Increasing rivalries, resources and player numbers in both France and the nations within GB will result in increased skill levels.

Copa,

It is never "stupid" to ask questions, even if they are rhetorical. Just for the record, I have done a fair bit of strategy work for one of the world's leading sporting organisations (not in Australia, and not in any of the football codes).

Let me re-state the point I was trying to make. The NRL is acknowledged as the most intensive, highest quality, league competition in the world. I occasionally watch the ESL, and it is a couple of steps down the ladder.

This differential is evidenced by the fact that there is only one overseas star in the NRL (other than New Zealanders), whereas there are dozens of pretty good Aussies and New Zealanders in the ESL. Nevertheless, the ESL is slower and noticeably less intensive than the NRL.

Do you seriously believe that there is any reason that this gap between the quality of players, and play, in the NRL, and that of overseas competitions, will be narrowed? If you do, how will it happen?

It can only happen by either the NRL becoming comparatively weaker than the other competitions, or the other competitions becoming comparatively stronger.

The only competition, from your own post, that has any chance of becoming comparatively stronger is the ESL.....is this enough to create a genuinely interesting, varied, and competitive international schedule? At best it will make the British team more competitive, which it used to be, in spades, when I started to get interested in rugby league.

So that will be it, will it? Just Australia, New Zealand, and Britain. That is the inevitable outcome for the very long forseeable future....unless the NRL is deliberately weakened to allow some other players from some other competitions to catch up, and to make their national teams competitive.

Stupid? A load of rubbish? It probably is. You are right in one sense. There will never be more than three competitive teams in international rugby league, in that case.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

It's way too early to be talking about a Victorian SoO side. Realistically, even if was to happen, it wouldn't happen in the next 20-25 years and who's to say Origin or even the NRL would still be alive by then.

 

[LeagueXIII]

You would think that the strategic plan would be on the NRL site, but then we know how transparent they are.

 

[aids]

SA and WA have the largest junior base in australia after nsw and qld

if there is a larger SOO plan it'll have to be done after these two states are serviced with a competative team.
i would imagine that happening in the next 10years.
and gallop has said that putting a team in these states is not in their shot to medium vision.
so i would image we may not see a team in either state in the next 15-25years.
sad though, i would image a team in Adelaide and Perth would fair a lot better than three teams in the current comp, from a fan base and attendance point of view.

how did did the Superleague NSW vs. QLD vs. NZ plan go?

 

[griff]

2. The game as it is played in the NRL is at a far higher standard than the game as played in any other competition. This is likely to mean that Australian, and New Zealand players who play in the NRL will remain of higher skill levels, fitness, and overall quality than players who play in lesser competitions. Thus, Australia, and to some extent New Zealand should remain the top international teams for the forseeable future. The only way for other countries, like France, and England, to compete long-term is for the NRL to be weakened.

That is a very good point. Becase they are playing in a better quality and more intense club competition week in week out, Australian players are able to beat British players in international competition. But I don't agree that the only way for other countries to compete is for the NRL to become comparitively weaker.

Just because Australia's domestic comp is stronger, doesn't necessarily mean that our national team has to be stronger as well. For example, the English Premier League is probably the top domestic soccer comp, but the England national team is only 8 or 9th best in the world.

The NRL should be positioning itself as the world's premier rugby competition (either code), just like the NBA has positioned itself as the world's premier basketball competition. Like the NBA features the world's top basketball players regardless of what country they come from, the NRL should feature the world's top rugby players.

So in the future if there were 9 or 10 PNG players playing regularly in the NRL, the PNG national team would better be able to compete against Australia, despite having a relatively poor quality domestic comp.

Having more international players playing in the NRL would benefit both International RL and the NRL considerably. I think to bring this about there needs to be either an NRL subsidy or a 150% salary cap exemption on non Aus/NZ players. This would give clubs an incentive to expand their horizons and take a chance on foreign players.

 

[Copa]

Copa,

It is never "stupid" to ask questions, even if they are rhetorical. Just for the record, I have done a fair bit of strategy work for one of the world's leading sporting organisations (not in Australia, and not in any of the football codes).

Let me re-state the point I was trying to make. The NRL is acknowledged as the most intensive, highest quality, league competition in the world. I occasionally watch the ESL, and it is a couple of steps down the ladder.

This differential is evidenced by the fact that there is only one overseas star in the NRL (other than New Zealanders), whereas there are dozens of pretty good Aussies and New Zealanders in the ESL. Nevertheless, the ESL is slower and noticeably less intensive than the NRL.

Do you seriously believe that there is any reason that this gap between the quality of players, and play, in the NRL, and that of overseas competitions, will be narrowed? If you do, how will it happen?

It can only happen by either the NRL becoming comparatively weaker than the other competitions, or the other competitions becoming comparatively stronger.

The only competition, from your own post, that has any chance of becoming comparatively stronger is the ESL.....is this enough to create a genuinely interesting, varied, and competitive international schedule? At best it will make the British team more competitive, which it used to be, in spades, when I started to get interested in rugby league.

So that will be it, will it? Just Australia, New Zealand, and Britain. That is the inevitable outcome for the very long forseeable future....unless the NRL is deliberately weakened to allow some other players from some other competitions to catch up, and to make their national teams competitive.

Stupid? A load of rubbish? It probably is. You are right in one sense. There will never be more than three competitive teams in international rugby league, in that case.

Overseas stars of nrl quality earn considerably more in Europe. That is why they don't play here.

You'd be crazy to think that when the SL strengthens and increases in size they are not going to develop other areas and improve those regions as well. Aus invited the kiwis into the NRL... the kiwis have improved dramtically. France will improve with the SL exposure, GB will improve with tri-nations exposure.... it all flows on to elsewhere..

Smaller countries will improve with exposure to the lower level comps...A small example of how increasing competition flows on to the smaller countries is the two born and bred Serbians who play club RL in Serbia who have just signed with London Skolars on trial... this would have been unheard of many years ago...

When countries are exposed to one another and compete... standards are improved at every level.

Do you seriously believe that the gap between the quality of players, and play, in the NRL, and that of overseas competitions, will not be narrowed? If you do, why will it never happen?

 

[Kurt Angle]

The way to pay for expansion is to get money off the people who control the purse strings.... the clubs.

The best way would be to set a flat cap amount, then a second tiered amount which the clubs have to pay for.

I.e Once we get the new FTA deal.

The flat rate for each club would be $3.8 million dollars.

After that, they can exceed the cap by $1, for every additional dollar the give to the RLIF, up to $200,000.

So if the wages for a club, is $3.8 million, they just pay $3.8 million.

If they want to spend $100,000 more, they have to give an additional $100,000 to the RLIF.

If they went the full hog of $200,000, their wages bill would be $4.2 million. $4 mil on players, $200k to the RLIF.

If all 16 clubs did that, the RLIF would have $3.2 million a year. Plenty of developmental money.

 

[Lantana]

The strategic plan is available to everybody. Copies available from the NRL, they are sitting on the front counter.

 

[taxidriver]

link to the strategic plan below.


www.playitbyear.com.au

 

[Copa]

link to the strategic plan below.


www.playitbyear.com.au

Link doesn't work for me.

 

[Paullyboy]

Yeah thats a dead link

 

[skeepe]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Copa]

Link doesn't work for me.

Hook line and sinker.... should have read the damn thing first. :lol:

 

[griff]

You'd be crazy to think that when the SL strengthens and increases in size they are not going to develop other areas and improve those regions as well. Aus invited the kiwis into the NRL... the kiwis have improved dramtically. France will improve with the SL exposure, GB will improve with tri-nations exposure.... it all flows on to elsewhere..

In the 19 matches between Aus and NZ since a NZ team joined the NRL, NZ have won just 16%.

In the 19 matches prior to joinnig the NRL, they won 21%, so there is no evidence that a NZ team in the NRL has made the national team improve at all relative to Australia.

Before NZ came in, the top Kiwis played in Australia anyway - so the top players already had that exposure to the toughest comp week in and week out. A team in NZ didn't really change anything in this regard.

A French team in the SL probably will strengthen the French team, but it won't be the dramatic difference some people are hoping. It will be many years before there are 17 NRL or SL quality Frenchmen, which will be needed for the national team to effectively compete.

SL being stronger would help the GB national team. But expanding the comp won't help at all. It will just reduce intensity and dilute the playing talent still further. The top 5 or so clubs in SL are all excellent quality, and matches between these teams are at a high level. Unfortunately they don't have tough matches every single week, like we do in the NRL. I can't see how going to 14 teams and bringing in weak expansion teams in new areas will up the intensity.

Do you seriously believe that the gap between the quality of players, and play, in the NRL, and that of overseas competitions, will not be narrowed? If you do, why will it never happen?

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I don't think the gap between the NRL and overseas comps is narrowing at all. Sure other comps may be improving, but the NRL isn't staying still. In fact the relative difference is probably getting bigger. I think GB are just as far away from a series win against Australia than they were in 90, 92 or 94, if not further.

Players that don't get exposure to the top level RL (the NRL) will increasingly be unable to compete against players that do play in the NRL. The solution to make international RL more competitive is to expose more international players to NRL experience.

 

[bartman]

link to the strategic plan below.


www.playitbyear.com.au

Think some people missed the joke there...