1. Round 5 Edition OUT NOW:

    The Round 5 issue of The Front Row, our exclusive online e-magazine and match programme for is out now!

    This week it's Penrith v Canberra so we look at the competition leaders with second rower Kurt Capewell, while we also share the story of the birth of the Glebe Dirty Reds, and as always, the full program for the coming weekend's action across NRL, NSWRL and QRL with a wrap-up of the weekend just gone.

    VOLUME 2 ISSUE 5 - READ NOW!

    Guest, click here to read online or download your free PDF copy

The RLIF mid season test shambles

Discussion in 'International' started by roughyedspud, Mar 23, 2018.

  1. The Great Dane

    The Great Dane Bench

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,577
    Likes Received:
    1,481
    Good thing I never said that RL is only professional or that the NRL is representative of RL (though the product that they are selling is RL).

    You're basically making exactly my argument to him to me, he is the one that thinks that the NRL isn't a business cause it's RL, therefore it's can't expect to be treated like a business...
     
  2. The Great Dane

    The Great Dane Bench

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,577
    Likes Received:
    1,481
    Nope, I've responded directly to everything that you've said, if you didn't mean it that way that's on you.
     
  3. deluded pom?

    deluded pom? Coach

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,897
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    You wouldn’t believe how many. Mind you, Great Dane sometimes turns up to repeat the same thing over and over.
     
  4. Pommy

    Pommy Coach

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2015
    Messages:
    14,657
    Likes Received:
    6,239
    The insurance money is going to the clubs. We’re the cowboys insured for losing the premiership because their Star was injured playing rep footy?
     
  5. Springs09

    Springs09 Juniors

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2017
    Messages:
    1,903
    Likes Received:
    1,253
    No, you haven't actually. You seem to read my comments and then think I've said something completely different. You keep insisting that I'm saying the NRL isn't a business. I very clearly said in my last post that I wasn't saying that at all - I was saying rugby league isn't a business.

    You also respond to that by saying rugby league can be a business - once again, I wasn't saying anything of the sort. I said rugby league as a whole is not a business, it is a sport and 99% of it is not played for business reasons. Of course it can be a business, as like you said, anything can be a business, but I wasn't denying that.

    So unless you struggle with comprehension then you must be thick.
     
  6. deal.with.it

    deal.with.it Juniors

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes Received:
    133
    No that’s not it at all.

    Everyone agrees that the NRL clubs are business. The NRL is now the NGB for all of RL development in Australia.

    RL is for the majority an amateur sport that is developed for social good. If clubs have been able to monetise this, fanastic. But don’t complain when your players are selected for rep footy and play a match in a designated international window.

    Clubs are happy to capitalise on the development of the NGB. They are not in a position to refuse the player from playing rep footy.

    If your argument is around the mid year rep window, then the NRL/RFL/RLIF should not have approved this - and there should be no state of origin or pacific tests.
     
  7. The Great Dane

    The Great Dane Bench

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,577
    Likes Received:
    1,481
    In response to that I've said over and over that the fact that most of RL isn't a business is completely irrelevant cause every one of the organisations that we are talking about are businesses, all of them...

    Again RL being majority amateur is completely irrelevant.

    The clubs are obviously fine with releasing players for rep footy, they've been doing it since the very start, what they aren't fine with is a relatively modern problem (at least in RL) and that is that they are being expected to subsidise rep footy, they never agreed to that, and they have every right to be upset about it.

    Yes they do cause the governing bodies have no right to expect them to be out of pocket because of a player taking part in rep footy, and that is where we are at.

    Are you sure that the NRL approved the mid year rep window? Cause I'm not!

    We've no reason to believe that they did, for all we know when it was voted on at the RLIF they were the only ones who voted against it and the motion still went through, or whatever, who knows.

    But again it's irrelevant, even if there was no mid season rep games we should still be doing something about the problem.

    SOO provides a return on their investment, so for the time that players are away at camp or injured that the clubs lose money on them they get that money back through the money that the NRL makes from SOO being used to partly fund their grants, in other words they don't lose anything from SOO going ahead (in fact they only stand to gain), so there's no problem.

    However when it comes this Denver game that isn't the case cause all the money being made is going to the RFL and NZRL, so the clubs won't see a return for their losses, that is the issue not that the game it's self is going ahead, not anything else, only that the clubs are being expected to take financial risk without compensation to support an international that broadly speaking they should have nothing to do with...

    The Pacific Tests are another whole can of worms I'd rather not get into, but they are another completely different situation to the other two where the NRL organises them for the nations involved and nations just provide the teams, so there're a whole ton of problems there too, but for now I'd rather avoid that topic.
     
  8. deal.with.it

    deal.with.it Juniors

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes Received:
    133
    It's not a new problem. There was never an issue when the Anzac test was on. No one complained when origin players backed up two days later.

    No ROI? Bullshit! International RL help to promote RL and leads to increased revenue, which both the NRL and its clubs benefit from.

    The clubs also benefit by having their players play at a higher standard and then going back to their clubs.

    Yes the NRL did approve an international window. When they announced origin on a weekend, they also announced that pacific nations would play. This was followed by the RFL and RLIF aligning with the NRL. It was not a board voting agenda item.

    The NRL was fine with England travelling to Aus for a match mid season. The NRL was also OK with NZ travelling to Perth and had agreed to support competition matches in Asia, London and America.

    The only thing that makes this game any different is that it is being played at higher altitude, which doctors have said is a non issue.

    If the NRL clubs made money would it be ok? If so, how much?

    I think a better strategy would make it so NRL clubs that have injured players during rep matches can replace them without it affecting the salary cap.
     
    deluded pom? likes this.
  9. The Great Dane

    The Great Dane Bench

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,577
    Likes Received:
    1,481
    Again that's not comparable to the current situation cause the clubs get a a return for their investment through the money made by the ANZAC test being reinvested into them...

    And their were issues with the ANZAC test, that's why it isn't mid-season anymore...

    That's not direct return on investment, you assume that a growth in internationals leads directly to increased revenue for them, and it's also unmeasurable.

    The money that they are losing is measurable (though to my knowledge nobody has measured the exact losses that are incurred in a situation similar to this, and I imagine that they are highly variable) and it's definitely a loss of revenue...

    Look this is an aside, and I don't really care either way, but are you sure that they approved it, cause it seems to me like it's an accepted fact that they did approve or willing approve it when we don't know that... I've never seen the stuff that you'd expect like announcement that they are supporting, all I've seen from Australia are a couple of articles by Mascord, that's it, but frankly if they did support it they shouldn't make promises that they could't fulfill...

    Also the Pacific Tests have been played on a rep weekend for years now, used to be alongside CvC during the SOO period or ANZAC test weekend, it wasn't created for an international window, and the way that you've written that suggests that the RFL and RLIF unilaterally decided to line up a weekend and force the issue (which frankly considering that we're talking about RL wouldn't surprise me at all)...

    The England players that traveled to Aus aren't the NRL or NRL club's concern and their loss didn't effect the NRL clubs, so not their concern, however the NRL based players that took part in that game did effect the NRL clubs so yeah the revenue they lost due to the loss of those players for the time that they were off due to that game should have been covered, but it wasn't and for whatever reason the clubs didn't seem to mind.

    Irrelevant to my argument...

    My argument is 100% economic, it has nothing to do with either travel or absurd concerns about altitude.

    Enough to cover the the losses that they incurred due to the time that players were away because of the match, but I think if you were creative you could cover the difference in a mutually beneficial way instead of just a lump sum.

    I agree, but it doesn't go far enough cause even if it doesn't effect their salary cap it'll still be effecting their bottom line as they'll still have players away cause they are playing internationals, they'll still have lost revenue cause of having to pay the salary of a player that isn't playing, lower ticket sales, etc, especially if a player is lost due to an injury that happens during the international.
     
  10. Pommy

    Pommy Coach

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2015
    Messages:
    14,657
    Likes Received:
    6,239
    Basically Great Dane doesn’t want mid season rep footy and nothing you can say will change his mind.
     
  11. The Great Dane

    The Great Dane Bench

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,577
    Likes Received:
    1,481
    Well you haven't understood a word that I've written... Or you're disingenuous...
    What're you gonna do I guess.

    Everything I've said has been with the intention of making mid season tests go ahead without interference from the NRL clubs, in other words to make international tests (not just mid season ones) easier to organise and more common place, that's a very strange goal for somebody that doesn't want mid season rep footy...
     
  12. Pommy

    Pommy Coach

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2015
    Messages:
    14,657
    Likes Received:
    6,239
    Sorry rep footy that doesn’t involve Australia.
     
  13. clarency

    clarency Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,198
    Likes Received:
    22
    The NRL =/= RLIF. The NRL will look out for their own best interests and it is unreasonable to expect them to act any different.

    The NRL have little to gain through assisting the expansion of the game world wide. You could argue that increased exposure of rugby league into new markets means increased market share and a richer league, however it also means new leagues.

    If (a big if, but an if nonetheless) the game were to take off and lead to the creation of new pro leagues, that means the NRL now has to competition to keep their own players. Do you see Toronto Wolfpack developing their own stars? No... their are reliant entirely on existing nurseries in the UK and Australia. The NRL isn't going to want to share that.
     
  14. roughyedspud

    roughyedspud Coach

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    12,179
    Likes Received:
    1,063
  15. RedVee

    RedVee First Grade

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    5,202
    Likes Received:
    701
    I think you have to afford the Wolfpack a bit more time. It’s a long term play. The Melb Storm eventually produced a couple of first graders.
     
  16. clarency

    clarency Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,198
    Likes Received:
    22
    It's not blind at all... it's just the cold reality of a domestic sports org being larger than the international sports org. No different to NFL or AFL. Neither of those will ever experience strong expansion world wide as it requires the big players to hand over major resources for no return, which will never happen.
     
  17. Pommy

    Pommy Coach

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2015
    Messages:
    14,657
    Likes Received:
    6,239
    Presumably this same argument can be narrowed down even further to not giving Perth or Adelaide a team, if they can’t produce a squad of 25 pros instantly then they’re of no use.
     
  18. roughyedspud

    roughyedspud Coach

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    12,179
    Likes Received:
    1,063
    The NFL & AFL don't have world cups
     
  19. adamkungl

    adamkungl Immortal

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    42,955
    Likes Received:
    6,525
    Some people need to look beyond this years finals series for return on investment.

    Ambitious, successful, rich people/organisations are thinking years and decades ahead.

    The NRL with its $200mil a year income acts more like a dole bludger winning the lottery. They've bought 16 new cars but there's no smart investment, no new opportunities, and in a few years will be again struggling to make ends meet.

    Backing the international game won't provide a return tomorrow, or next year. It's an investment in the game's future for the small price of risking 1-2 players per club.
    The returns will come 7, 10, 20, 50 years down the track. When the game and its comps and its clubs have audiences, sponsors and developing players around the world.

    When the game's historians look back, they're either gonna see a squandered opportunity for greatness, or the first steps to it.
    Whether Gareth Widdop pulled a hammy and sat out a few weeks for St George will be a footnote within a footnote within a footnote. No one will care.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2018
  20. Springs09

    Springs09 Juniors

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2017
    Messages:
    1,903
    Likes Received:
    1,253
    But what if Sam Burgess breaks his ankle and costs Souths the premiership!!!! Who cares if rugby league is dead in 3018 I want my team to win this week nothing else matters!

    It's strange to think how much things have changed. When rugby league first started players were missing out on Grand Finals to go on Kangaroo Tours.
    Now we'd rather play charity games for Smith and Thurston's wallets than enter the Kangaroos in a series.
     

Share This Page