The NRL Should Restructure The Third Party Sponsorship Scheme

[possm]

We have banged on about this for years. Just have a f@#ken draft. As Owen said before couldn't give a stuff if clubs, players, managers don't want it. Have you ever thought why these identies don't want it. Maybe it just might be to difficult to rort. Remember the largest code in relation to crowd numbers, sponsorship and television rights have had it for years. Ask them to go to the good old days. Yeah right. Stay calm.

I'm in favour of a draft similar to the draft used by the AFL. The problem is that this idea has been litigated against in prior years and the draft was deemed to be a restraint of trade.

How the scheme run by the AFL is not also deemed to be a restraint of trade, I don't kow. But maybe it is time to try again sighting the AFL scheme as an example.

 

[possm]

Have you heard of the “black economy” and brown paper bags?? Well let me tell you that is one thing you can never police. So the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
The game had gone to shit.

Maybe along with a TPA restructure, there also needs to be other measures taken to clean up the player remuneration system.

• Draft
• Points System
• Club limitataion of marquee players
• NRL player salary levels band
• Compensation to junior clubs by Clubs fielding players on their NRL debut

 

[denis preston]

The draft rewards poor on field performance & provides no rewards for developing a proper junior system in your catchment area.

These are both areas that should not be encouraged for the long term health of a sport.

AND teams running dead to get top draft picks. Example, you are coming 14th and have no chance to make the finals so you send 2 or 3 players to have niggles or injuries attended in hospital operations that would normally be done off season.

 

[merahputih]

I'm in favour of a draft similar to the draft used by the AFL. The problem is that this idea has been litigated against in prior years and the draft was deemed to be a restraint of trade.

How the scheme run by the AFL is not also deemed to be a restraint of trade, I don't kow. But maybe it is time to try again sighting the AFL scheme as an example.

Poss., the AFL draft apparently only restricts players' ability to move for two years and then they are free to enter the market ,so it falls outside the definition of restraint of trade.

 

[The calm one]

AND teams running dead to get top draft picks. Example, you are coming 14th and have no chance to make the finals so you send 2 or 3 players to have niggles or injuries attended in hospital operations that would normally be done off season.

This is a very minor problem, if it exists at all considering that 5 different AFL teams have won the wooden spoon in the last 6 years. Storm ran dead against us in the last round of the comp, ????

 

[possm]

Poss., the AFL draft apparently only restricts players' ability to move for two years and then they are free to enter the market ,so it falls outside the definition of restraint of trade.

Well if it has to be a two year deal than so be it. If the player is happy at the Dragons, we can extend his contract or draw up a new contract for him.

 

[ALSGI]

We don’t need a new system, we need to be better within this one.

Spot on.

 

[TruSaint]

I think there is a false assumption that the NRL cares about an even comp.

For them, the most important part of the cap is that clubs no longer send themselves broke by spending too much on their rosters, when trying to compete with more affluent clubs.

Since TPAs are removed from clubs’ finances, and put money in the pockets of players without taking it from the clubs, the NRL has no incentive to get rid of them.

Also, our 2010 GF doesn’t happen with a draft system in place. There’s no way that group of Illawarra juniors would have been kept together.

We don’t need a new system, we need to be better within this one.

Overall I agree with this sentiment, although the biggest selling point for the NRL was to "even out the comp". I agree that's an idealistic notion meant to appease the fans. Whilst various clubs have won the title since its inception, the past decade or so has shown consistently only a handful of clubs are in real contention.

Clubs need to be accountable for their financial positions, and yes in theory the TPA addressed this.

I have yet to see though a clear defining line between a 3rd party, and one loosely associated with the club, its sponsors, media, stakeholders etc.

Until this is clarified, the TPA remains in my view, a top up to the cap.

Edit :- This chart doesn't hold true to me. apart from Storm / Broncos. Look at the Roosters.

 

[SBD82]

Overall I agree with this sentiment, although the biggest selling point for the NRL was to "even out the comp". I agree that's an idealistic notion meant to appease the fans. Whilst various clubs have won the title since its inception, the past decade or so has shown consistently only a handful of clubs are in real contention.

Clubs need to be accountable for their financial positions, and yes in theory the TPA addressed this.

I have yet to see though a clear defining line between a 3rd party, and one loosely associated with the club, its sponsors, media, stakeholders etc.

Until this is clarified, the TPA remains in my view, a top up to the cap.

Purely speculating, but I’d say that’s probably how the NRL views it too.

It allows for outside money to flow into the game, without the risk that the clubs will become reliant on it. While the clubs finances are relatively stable, the NRL is able to negotiate content to media organisations while having some pretty solid guarantees that they’ll be able to deliver.

Its win/win for the NRL. It still allows organisations with deep pockets to splurge on clubs when they choose to. But that money isn’t relied upon. I don’t think the NRL would have any impetus to address the vagaries. The less scrutiny on this slush fund, the more money that flows into the game. In my experience, making it hard for people to give you money makes them less inclined to do so.

And meanwhile, they get to spin it as though the comp is an even playing field.

Really can’t see any reason why the NRL would want to change the status quo.

 

[TruSaint]

Purely speculating, but I’d say that’s probably how the NRL views it too.

It allows for outside money to flow into the game, without the risk that the clubs will become reliant on it. While the clubs finances are relatively stable, the NRL is able to negotiate content to media organisations while having some pretty solid guarantees that they’ll be able to deliver.

Its win/win for the NRL. It still allows organisations with deep pockets to splurge on clubs when they choose to. But that money isn’t relied upon. I don’t think the NRL would have any impetus to address the vagaries. The less scrutiny on this slush fund, the more money that flows into the game. In my experience, making it hard for people to give you money makes them less inclined to do so.

And meanwhile, they get to spin it as though the comp is an even playing field.

Really can’t see any reason why the NRL would want to change the status quo.

Yeah, well said.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Well if it has to be a two year deal than so be it. If the player is happy at the Dragons, we can extend his contract or draw up a new contract for him.

The other thing is the AFL Players Association support the current AFL draft rules so they pledged they would not challenge it in court. The NRL Players Association by comparison are very much on the record opposing any form of a draft in the NRL.

 

[mighty red and whites]

its all about real estate now

cheap real estate

 

[muzby]

cheap real estate

Chicken coops?