David Gallop is letting rugby league die
Roar Rookie
By jaymz, 30 Jul 2009 jaymz is a Roar Rookie
So another player leaves from rugby league to head to another code, only this time the code is not rugby union but AFL. Suddenly the articles written about the TAB odds of Lote Tuqiri heading to the A-League aren’t so funny.
If Karmichael Hunt does well, it could well spend the end for rugby league, unless something is changed.
What I propose is that every young player making their league debut signs a contract to remain in league for a period of ten years. This will have a knock-on effect and actually improve a lot of international teams, which is what rugby league craves.
For the players who sign the contract but fail to make the NRL, they are able to head to Europe and sign with one of the growing leagues there, or the Super League, of course. There is also the new Professionalised American League.
David Gallop is a major concern on this issue.
It seems like every time a player crosses codes, or a player at the peak of their career goes to England, he has the same response: “It’s a unique case, there is no need for knee jerk reactions, we will find another player to replace him.”
But these cases aren’t unique, simply because there are so many of them.
Here is a list of players who have crossed codes in recent years: Lote Tuqiri, Wendell Sailor, Matt Rogers, Sonny Bill Williams, Craig Gower, Timana Tahu, Karmichael Hunt, Ryan Cross, Berrick Barnes, Craig Wing.
Not to mention players like Matt King, who have left at their peak to go to England.
Rugby league is heading to death row unless something is done.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby League articles
- An open letter to Channel Nine (107)
- Gallop and some of his precious Sydney NRL clubs must go (101)
- The NRL is back baby! (65)
- The NRL’s scariest players (56)
- The NRL needs a vision (52)
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (48)
- Bulldogs setting benchmark for Sydney’s NRL clubs (46)
- New league chief coy on TV deal
- RL Commission was never in doubt, says Searle RL Commission was never in doubt: Searle
- Chalk predicts bright rugby league future
- Clubs must stop knifing Gallop, if commission is to succeed
- Rugby league’s new era: where to now? (23)
- New dawn for rugby league gets underway (11)
- Rugby league commission ushers in new era (3)
- Rugby league’s new era: where to now? (23)
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (49)
- An open letter to Channel Nine (108)
- The NRL’s scariest players (56)
- Is the All Stars match increasing the divide? (25)
- Channel Nine needs NRL-cricket ODI compromise (36)
- The NRL needs a vision (52)
Mushi said | July 30th 2009 @ 8:26am | Report comment
I predict the knock on effect of this would be another super league-esque break away league, you know like last time the players felt they were being taken advantage of financially. Which what you’re attempting to do here restrict their careers and I’m not certain how this would hold up given it is a one way commitment from the players.
The problem for rugby league is money available for the absolute elite.
They compete against clubs in other countries which have more money available because of a larger population. This is not David Gallops fault.
Domestically the only competition they really compete with for developed players is Rugby, which doesn’t has smaller sized elite player base and an international squad meaning they have more money per elite S14 player than the NRL has per elite NRL player. Now Gallop could change the salary cap structure and watch a few clubs fail? Is that a better outcome.
I don’t think there is anything the NRL can do about the occasional player (what around 1% per year) changing codes at a wage well above what they are worth under the NRL salary cap.
And here’s the thing. We have readily replaced every one of the players you mentioned. Outside backs are the youngest developers with their pace and agility and it seems every year there is a new crop of players knocking on the door to play wing , centre and fullback at first grade.
Mushi said | July 30th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Which “has a” not the three year old’s “doesn’t has” jesus I should write these up in word and then post them
jaymz said | July 30th 2009 @ 11:02pm | Report comment
i never said the cap should be changed, but a contract worked in locking them into league
Mushi said | July 31st 2009 @ 8:33am | Report comment
Sorry Jamz I know you didn’t say the cap should be changed. I was thinking about more viable options for retaining top talent.
I don’t consider the ten year contract a viable one, even if it is enforceable I think it would be a great way to alienate your players but probably drive away any sensible young player choosing between two codes.
Chop said | July 30th 2009 @ 8:35am | Report comment
I just don’t think there is enough support for Rugby League throughout the world.
Look at how much Rugby Union make out of playing internationals, in Rugby League the options are basically England, France and New Zealand. Even these internationals are not as interesting to Australian crowds as State of Origin!
Unfortunately I think the NRL is stuck until they can extract much more money from the telecasting contracts.
It’s not David Gallops fault, it’s not the clubs fault. It is just the fact that Rugby League, while the premier sport in NSW and QLD is not more than a passing interest anywhere else apart from the 4 main countries.
The end of Rugby League is not any closer with Karmichael Hunt moving to AFL.
oikee said | July 30th 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Mushi, agree with what you have posted, league could solve the problems by getting rid of the cap but what would that really acheive?
Elite clubs with super stars getting paid huge amounts. At least with what they have is enabling plenty of talent to come through the ranks and get paid for doing what they love doing, play footy, weather that be going to union, (which is a larger sport world-wide) or moving to soccer or AFL does not really matter anymore.
The players are getting paid what they are worth to any code. A couple of league players were super stars at Union, (Thorn, Robinson) so league will continue to be feeders for other codes. Good for them, it might improve our international game if we lose some more elite players.
I read a report that the 2015 rugby union world cup will make over half a billion dollars, international games are where the money lies. And lets face facts, players love the mighty dollar.
The Link said | July 30th 2009 @ 8:53am | Report comment
Alarmist crap, RL is not dying in Australia, its growing.
oikee said | July 30th 2009 @ 9:06am | Report comment
I mentioned Soccer because a player like Thuston would probably be a super star at this sport the way he can bend a ball in league, now before you laugh think about this, one of our best players is Cahill, his cousin is Ben Roberts, would you think that Cahill would make a league player? no but would Roberts be any good at soccer, i dont see why not, and Thurston has beautiful balance and kicking skills as we all know.
Be interesting to find out where Thuston ends up after his contract expires. We must not forget that El Magic was bound for soccer before he played league.
Steve said | July 30th 2009 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
“but would Roberts be any good at soccer, i dont see why not,”
Sorry Oik but in Football you actually have to kick an Football. i know it’s not the case in the eggball games.
And has far as leaguies being bound for sokka, if they were as good as you and others like to think they would make the wagga wagga under 12 C team. PLEASE STOP TALKING S$%@
Rodney McDonell said | July 30th 2009 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Jesus, did the red alert siren just go off and did someone just yell panic stations? I must have missed it.
Lets not go overboard. A contract like you suggest sounds like it would be an infringement of free trade. It wouldn’t be legal. Having said that, there are better ways to secure the top athletes for rugby league.
Recently there has been talk about a points system, in tandem with a salary cap to prevent teams from acquiring too many of the top athletes. Such a system could result in a relaxing of third party arrangements, where the points system takes care of dispersing elite athletes evenly through out the clubs whilst the salary cap keeps the clubs from going under.
Another idea is to sell off the State of Origin as it’s own product to the broadcasters and to take at least one State of Origin game on tour around the country to the highest bidder. An extra infusion of cash from the auctioning off of an Origin game each year and the extra TV revenue could be partly funnelled into the origin players salaries.
The answer to locking in our players is being innovative, not devising strict and unsavoury ways of locking in and screwing over our playing stocks. Such ideas as yours would be a discouragement to players playing our great game.
Ben C said | July 30th 2009 @ 10:29am | Report comment
I am a Union supporter and I don’t follow League at all. I don’t hate it, It’s just not to my taste. I am perihpherally aware of what’s happening in League because it always seems to be a big splash when a League player defects.
From a Union perspective:
(a) Lots of League players are leaving but there seems to be plenty of replacements. Given the constant stream of new players Gallop seems to be keeping salary pressure downwards so League lives within its means rather than aggressively expanding and risking financial difficulty. A conservative strategy is not necessarily a bad one.
(b) As I said, I don’t follow League so I am not really in a positon to judge but speaking to friends and a skim of the League news suggests that despite high profile players leaving, there is good young talent coming through and the quality does not seem to be falling away too markedly.
(c) League therefore seems to have good player development and a wealth of players coming through. The League competition seems to maintain 16? 17? teams of a fairly high standard.
(d) Union has fewer players coming through and is struggling to field 4 teams of a sufficiently high calibre in the Super 14. (I would rate the competition level in the Super 14 as slightly higher than the domestic League competition but no hugely so. The more difficult competition is balanced by it being substantially shorter than the League competition anyway so there is little in it).
(e) I don’t want to get into a debate about mental abilities but I will say Union is more technically challenging (specialist positions, technical restarts in scrums and lineouts etc) while League is more challenging in terms of fitness. Basic skills (pass-catch, tackling etc) are equally demanding although the League players seem to be superior (better coaching?). Perhaps more players gravitate to League because fitness is easier to master than technical skills (particularly for young kids), League seems to do far better in terms of junior development and recruitment and Union pathways being traditionally limited to a certain number of private schools rather than a broader base of schools and clubs.
After all that, I think that Union is struggling but surviving. It has more of a niche market. League is adopting a conservative strategy and is doing quite well within that but may have future difficulties with AFL taking a more aggressive growth strategy. League is in no danger of dying but may need to rethink its long term strategy (although the more conservative strategy was probably a blessing when the global financial crisis hit).
I want League to stay strong otherwise its supporters may come across and drive up the price of my Tahs season membership!
DAVOS said | July 30th 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
Hunt has decided to play a different game, he’s not public property, get over it! Clearly AFL do not have International games, however their income streams through gate attendances, merchandise and the biggest sports TV rights deal make NRL look very poor. NRL needs to ask it’s self, ” are we moving forward, growing the game, building greater awareness, creating a demand for the game domestically”? In my opinion, the NRL management inc. ARL are at fault. Look at the massive growth and awareness Football (Soccer) has in such a short time domestically, with professional managment, thats why.. Union only turned professional in 1998, thats ten years ago and in that time, the game has clearly surpassed NRL, that game now has massive purchasing power in Japan!! NRL is in the bleachers, the culture starts at the top. There is a saying, “how do you know if a fish is off, you smell the head”
Mick from Giralang said | July 30th 2009 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
Jaymz
I think the fact that you can reel off a list of league stars who have left the game in recent years, while the game continues to grow and prosper, undermines the argument that somehow our great game is going to die. Remember the headlines when Lote and Wendell left? The sky was going to fall in…
Dave said | July 30th 2009 @ 4:47pm | Report comment
League players leave but that is not going to stop NRL fans supporting the game.
In the old days before the AFL, WAFL players would go to VFL. Western Australians could watch the VFL and realise its better.
Italians can see the best players go to the EP L. They then can turn on the TV and watch the EPL.
NRL fans are not going to start watching French rugby or Japanese rugby just because their players are going there. They will just keep watching the NRL.
Mick from Giralang said | July 30th 2009 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
“NRL needs to ask it’s self, ” are we moving forward, growing the game, building greater awareness, creating a demand for the game domestically”?”
The answer to all this, by any objective measure, is yes.