Who should run the game

[imported_Rasputin]

As you all know the NRL's strategic plan is being stalled due to the reluctance of the various league bodies to hand over their control to a single entity. The various leagues areunhappy with New's i<span>ntransigence over maintaining at leat50% control of the governing body. The NSW, Country and Qld leagues therefor want the ARL to be the governing body over the NRL and of course News wants the others to fold in under the control of the NRL which is the only body they have representation on. All the bloody leagues are totally absorbeb and internally focused on who controls what at a local level.</span>
<span></span>
<span>The thing is while all the bodies are so self absorbed in local power struggles no one is really looking at the overall strength and growth of the game internationally. Though league constantly outdraws union at a club level it was very painfull to see 84,000 at a test match tonight knowing that a gb v aussie league test wouldn't get a third of that number. We really need a strong NZ and GB and a restored international game.</span>

 

[imported_Roopy4246]

The question is - do we trust Newscorp to exercise total control over the game?
The way I see it they would make all their decisions based on whether it were good for the Newscorp bottom line, not based on whether it were good for the future of the game.
Developing juniors only pays dividends in the long term, and Newscorp bean counters would only be interested in short term objectives.
I think the game should be divided into professional and amatuer streams and the professional game should be handled with the bottom line in mind, while juniors, country leagues and amatuer teams should all be handled by volunteer officials and financed from within their own ranks.
I think the professional game would go ahead if it were able to be more flexible by streamlining the administration, but the small time or amatuer aspects of the game needs to be controlled by the people who do it for the love of the game.

 

[Willow]

While I agree with a breakaway from the old boy's clubs that pollute the NSWRL, ARL, QRL etc, I don't trust the NRL to be the all-powerful body for all these administrations.
I don't like their concept of heirarchy which places media and other corporate interests above the game's development and best interests.
It's a big problem and one which needs to be resolved.

 

[imported_Rasputin]

According to Hill the amalagamationis back on the agendaand forthe game to go forward I do believe we need one body whoever that may be. though like you guys I am mistrustfull of News.

Roopy, the seperation of amatuer and professional is much the way it is now.The NRL overseesthe main comp and the ARL/NSW/QLD bodies overseeall the amatuer &amp; juniors other than the ARL also doing representative. Are you saying the status quo should be maintained or that all those amatuer bodies get rolled into one?

As for News, I must admit I really am struggling to understand New's role and financial position at the moment.It appearsall clubfunding now comes from tv rights andapart from News'interest in individual clubs does anyone know how much if any News actually fundsthe NRL these days?

 

[imported_Roopy4246]

Rasputin,
I don't just mean the fully professional NRL. I mean all the levels of the game where money is paid for players at a senior level to be put together and run as a money making venture, while all the juniors and 'weekend warriors' who play for fun to be formed up into a group like the BARLA.
That really isn't a well formed idea, but I only had it five minutes ago.

 

[imported_Bigbopper]

The problem is that News wants 50% of the overall body. That's a lot of control to give to an organisation whose main aim is to make money (which is fair enough). The $35,000,000 (soon to be $37,500,000) to fund the clubs comes from the TV rights. News and the ARL split any further income (after HQ expenses, etc).
The fact that News will be entitled to claim dividends for another 16 or so years will prove to be a long term drain on the NRL's capacity to grow and to compete with the AFL and Union.
Cheers
Bigbopper

 

[TheSaint]

I'll go in a bit more detail tommorow but this is how I believe the game should be run.

At the top, you have the IRFL (International Rugby Football League). They have the ultimate say in Rule changes, organise internationals and direct funds to developing Leagues.

Then in Australia you have the ARL. They are in control of the national team, the judicary and rules.

The NRL is then the body that just administers the actuall Competition. The NRl make deals with TV, radio etc and are basically just a League.

Finances would obviously move from top to bottom.

 

[imported_Rasputin]

Damn I am having crap tonight with this bloody new Windows XP system, third time typing this and will probably lose it again, bloody technology (

Roopy, yeah I see where you going now withBARLA, maybe the professional body could just give them a yearly grant for development.

Bopper, that's where I'm having problems, without going into all the shit of the pastjust what is League getting from News these days in return for for the 50% stake.

Saint, interested in what you have to say there but wouldn't the main income stream be at the bottom in the NRL so finances would be from bottom to top wouldn't they?

 

[G@v]

At the top we should have a RLIF, which is the equivalent of FIFA. They should be in charge of all international competition, manage international development funding, organisation of an international calendar, set international rules so that when GB play Australia or New Zealand, they play to the RLIF's set of rules.

Below that, you have each nations governing body, ie, the ARL, RFL and NZRL. Who would be in control of all domesticnon professional league's,including rules within their own jurisdiction, development structures, and the control of all amateur leagues.

Bodies like the NRL and ESL should only be concerened with the structure of competition they control, promotion of their professional competition, TV and other media deals, setting salary caps and the organisation of trade between the member clubs within the competition's they control. Any rules introduced within their competition would need to be ratified by national governing body. If the NRL or ESL have a development scheme, it should be run in conjunction with the relevent governing body of the region concerned.

 

[imported_Rasputin]

OK gav, but where do those bodies other than NRL/ESL get their funds from?

 

[imported_Roopy4246]

A World Cup format that actually makes a profit would solve a lot of problems. I believe there is every chance that the next World Cup will be better organised and will pay its way and make some sort of profit.

 

[imported_Rasputin]

What you doin on here at 2:20 Roopy?

 

[imported_Rasputin]

All those bodies would require substantial funding to cover both local junior and international development.Other than SOO the other rep games don't show much profit. It would have to be funded from percentages of tv rights.

 

[imported_Roopy4246]

The joys of being a shift worker.
Last night I was working at this time. I slept all day and now am clicking away on a computer while the rest of the household sleeps away.

 

[G@v]

Who funds the ARL or RFL? The RFL receive some money through sponsorship of their competitions.Lesser nations would rely more on the international federation for funding.

 

[imported_Roopy4246]

BTW - With your losing messages. I have taken to copying all messages before I send them on these message boards now. If I lose the message I just reopen the send window, paste it back in and try again. Saves a lot of typing.

 

[imported_Rasputin]

The ARL is a 50% partner in the NRL and has access tot he tv rights as well as all the profits from SOO. Don't know the setup with the RFL.

 

[imported_Rasputin]

Roopy, it wasn't the message board, it was my PC. My son just installed the beta version of the new Windows XP system today and has been working on getting it stable all night, just shuts itself down sometimes. Good to see thatmicrosoft is at least consistent with their new bullett proof operating system, just as kudgy as the last one).