By Steve Kaless
December 1st 2009 @ 3:38am
Related coverage
New league commission really just more of the same
The next chapter in rugby league looks set to begin in 2010, and while the symbolism may be huge, in reality it may just mean another day at the office.
With News Ltd and the ARL set to make way for an independent commission to run rugby league, many supporters are praising the heavens that they finally lose the Super League baggage of News Ltd and the many layers of seemingly pointless bureaucracy that comes with the ARL.
But it must be remembered that the independent commission, which I have praised in the past, shouldn’t be seen as an automatic answer to every problem in the game.
Colin Love hasn’t been able to stop the “alcohol fuelled incidents” during his time in nearly every executive position in the game, so I can’t see every player giving up the drink on the basis that Love is now anointed as the new high priest.
The very fact that Love is set to run the inaugural board should be a sobering moment for anyone getting caught up in the hedonism of change.
The board was meant to be about new ideas, new direction and new leadership, and instead we end with someone who seems to have attended every junket since 1908 and has been a part of many of the game’s great disappointments as he has been its successes.
The game is also taking something of a financial gamble.
They may well feel that it is a smart move, but the fact is, from day one, they lose $16 million dollars in News Ltd funding and it is then up to them into increase the new revenue by more than that in order to financially justify the change.
Some argue that that will be easy with the fact that News Ltd will now no longer be sitting on both sides of the negotiating table.
But trying to avoid News Ltd in Australia is likely trying to avoid your own shadow.
Amongst other things, News Ltd also own a 50 per cent stake in Premier Media Group, which owns Fox Sports and negotiated the first and last right of refusal on any pay-television deal until 2022.
The whole Murdoch business model is about owning every step in the production process so for those looking for a complete break may as well stock up on baked beans and move to the mountains.
The new commission is largely about administration and just because a sport suddenly has the same style of administration as the AFL doesn’t mean they have the same success in their administration.
Anyone who argues that fails to recognise the hard work and talent by the individual members of the AFL commission.
Rugby league is certainly doing itself a few favours by freeing itself from some of the nasty shackles of the past but its future is still down to the hard work and correct decisions made by the men in charge.
Perhaps if they want to replicate the success of AFL, they also need to replicate the relationship between the clubs who all seem to share the same vision.
In league, while each club is often hell bent on ensuring no other team receives an advantage, the AFL clubs seem to have been happy to support all forms of salary cap concessions for the good of the game.
Either that, or the leadership was strong enough to force it upon them.
It’s an interesting comparison when you ask yourself whether rugby league clubs would be as supportive of a new club in Perth in the way AFL clubs are welcoming of a side in Western Sydney.
You also can’t help but feel that it is nothing but scare mongering by the QRL, who claim the move could be the death of State of Origin.
Surely not even rugby league administrators are stupid enough to botch up the brightest jewel in the crown.
So a new set of business cards and a new logo for the rugby league world, but the challenges remain the same and the past is, well, prologue.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(171)
Col the Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:09am | Report comment
Steve the SL ghosts will linger and linger until the Bears are reinstated.. then the ghosts can finally be put to rest..Gallop has made it clear that this is the final wrong that needs fixing..The Bears; who missed out on everything in the compromise..and vanquished for 10 years..
and yes a lot are rejoicing about the new commission, I am optimistically cautious, until the day we run out at Gosford in the red and black as the Central Coast Bears.. our fight will continue relentlessly…
Col the Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:18am | Report comment
also you could see the writing on the wall as recent as last week when Lachlan went into buying into the radio business.. wasn’t it Nova and similar stations they are putting funds into.. ..
Steve Kaless said | December 1st 2009 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
Col,
I agree the Bears reintroduction is a no brainer and would finally end the Super League battles (save the few Adelaide Rams fans still hiding in the jungle). However it is interesting the mixed messages that seem to come from the NRL. First they tell us that the saturation of the Sydney market is there strong point and yet they seem cool on the Bears for the amount of pay TV subscribers they may bring to the table.
Surely a team on the Central Coast is going to add more to the ratings than say the Sharks?
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 6:45am | Report comment
Steve
You seem to be taking the side of cautious optimism rather than unrestrained jubilation.
I totally disagree that the new independent commission could be seen as more of the same.
Your main points of argument seem to be Colin Love and News.
Having Colin Love as chairman is not perfect but he is only there for 2 years and this seems to have been a compromise needed to get the new IC over the line. He’ll be referring to 8 independent commissioners who will be making the important decisions.
In regards to News Ltd all the codes have to deal with News at some point in their TV rights negotiations but RL has now joined the other codes by no longer have News Ltd sitting on both sides of the negotiating table. Can you imagine if we went into the next crucial TV rights deal with the old News/ARL leadership?
And now the clubs all receive equal grants from the IC guarantying all clubs the best chance of survival and all clubs vote equally on who becomes a commissioner.
And the AFL commissioners have worked very hard to get things done but what would stop industry heavyweights in a RL commission being any different?
I believe you are simply playing the devils advocate here. This is massive news for RL. It is a very big step in the right direction.
Steve Kaless said | December 1st 2009 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
Paul,
You make some valid points, my cautious optimism comes from the fact that the ideas need to be implemented. Colin Love does arrive with a reputation for making hard and fast decisions for the good of the game.
Yes, it is a massive step forward, but we can’t kid ourselves that suddenly every problem is solved, we may just have a better vehicle with which to deal with them.
Mushi said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:26am | Report comment
The age old saying “Be careful what you wish for” couldn’t apply more to the independent commission.
I read the throw away line that the commission will “hand back the game of rugby league to the people”. Now whilst this is a great line it isn’t actually true.
It will hand the NRL over to representatives of the clubs. Now have a think as to who will guide those appointments..
For some they will be appointed by the boards members elected, though I use the term elected loosely as the club level politics represents devolution from a monkey exhibit at the zoo where qualifications and ability are a distant 232nd to various stunts, prejudice and loyalties.
For others they will be appointed by clubs which are privately owned. To suggest they will operate for the people is to suggest the management of Microsoft, BHP and Nestle has been given to the people.
The most likely result is going to be a mix of representatives with the commercial focus of increasing the value of their owners franchises and representatives born from back room deals and political alliances.
The only group that this commission will be independent from is the average punter.
Now in terms of broadening the reach of the game this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, a commercially driven board will focus on increasing revenue and in particular the value of that TV contract.
For the “true” fan, i.e. one who will at the very least watch just about every available game their club is involved if not every game they can get their eye balls fixated on, this may not necessarily be a victory. Because increasing revenue is not the same as looking after your existing fans.
Generally it means focusing on finding new fans secure in the knowledge that emotionally invested fans are “sticky” and unlikely to leave even if you repeatedly fail to meet their expectations. This is how banks operate and it is really how such other commission run sports operate.
The NFL has been used as the shinning light for results of a commission based governance system when talking about the benefits to Rugby League. And, for the owner of a club, this is correct such a commission is only likely to grow the value of your investment.
However if you’ve followed the NFL over the past two or three decades you would of seen a trend where the games has progressively alienated of the lower-middle class with ticket prices and the cost of accessing games on television .
In the present environment stadium designs are centred on the attractiveness and number of corporate suites for rent with every day fan no more than an after though. It is, to put it kindly, unprofitable to look after a plumber and his two kids when a PR company will pay five to ten times the amount to bring a few casual fans through every week.
So here is your commission where the new commissioner bares an uncanny resemblance to the ineffectual old head of the ARL and the other members of the commission look about as independent as Tony Abbot.
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:50am | Report comment
I agree that “hand back the game of rugby league to the people” is a bit of a throw away line.
6 NRL clubs are privately owned, 10 are not. Not a big issue.
The point is ALL the clubs now receive an equal (increased) grant from the IC in the future and ALL the clubs have equal say in who is elected as a commissioner.
The negative views of the IC so far seems to be of the “let’s not get too carried away with this” point of view, and i can see some merit in that.
But if the IC helps grow the game, which it should, how is that a really bad thing for any RL fan?
Can anyone give me one example of how the old News/ARL leadership structure was superior to the new IC?
M1tch said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:07am | Report comment
Its good and bad, good that arl and news are gone…but bad because its the same muppets who will once bow down to channel 9 and take whatever offer they put first
Mushi said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:10am | Report comment
Can growing the game be bad for a current fan? Yes.
Growth is focused on making the game a better proposition for the potential or marginal fan, if that comes at the expense of how enjoyable/accessible it is for the entrenched fan then so be it.
There tends not to be a magical way to just expand with out compromising on something regarding quality, traditional, accessibility etc. The more you want to expand the broader you have to pitch it and the broader you pitch it the less it meets any individual’s specific needs or wants.
As I said look at the NFL model, great model for making money – crap model for the low income punter who once was the “heartland” of the game. The great part is, most punters aren’t switched on enough to realise until 10 years down the track something doesn’t feel right.
As to giving examples of superiority you need to actually know what you’re comparing it to, at the moment we have a shell full of rhetoric that just looks like a more convoluted political facsimile of what we had before.
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:17am | Report comment
Mitch
It is not the same muppets. This is the main point.
Colin Love is there for 2 years and David Gallop for 3-5, they are the only 2 who have survived.
There will be 8 new independent commissioners. This is how an IC works. They are not old dinosaurs who were subservient to the ARL, NSWRL or QLD.
They will bring impartial & unbiased direction to the game.
M1tch said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
The 2 main men in charge are the here right now saying no expansion until 2017..
Colin Love has only started looking after the International game since 2008 and now he is our leader?
Gallop – I know has a tough job and has been restrainted by news, but he gives me no hope as a fan, he gives us no plans or vision.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:16am | Report comment
Mitch young buddy, i think your very harsh on Gallop, the game has grown under his leadership, and he has made some very tough decisions. As for Colin Love, he runs the ststaes leagues, i think he knows what he is doing, nobody else on the new board would have a clue what goes on?. So without love, the new commission would be koas.
Get it,? Without LOVE , the new commission would be kaos. 
Mr cheese said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Oikster, old boy.
I saw Mr. Love on the TV during the recent 4 Nations tournoi.
Rugby League on the BBC ?!?!?!?!? Well, yes, actually….
Anyways, he was talking about the ‘growth’ in European and International Rugby League. He seemed to me to be a nice guy who was probably a little optimistic.
I am afraid that he wasn’t very convincing.
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
Mushi
I think you’re arguing the traditions of a game balanced against the corporate reality of modern sport, this happen to all sports.
“As to giving examples of superiority you need to actually know what you’re comparing it to, at the moment we have a shell full of rhetoric that just looks like a more convoluted political facsimile of what we had before.”
I don’t know what you mean by this? How do you think the new IC is an inferior leadership structure to the News /ARL one we currently have?
I’m not having a go, i just can not think of how the IC will be worse than what we have now. If i missed something specific it would be good to know.
The Link said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:28am | Report comment
Steve – good article. A panacea it is not, but looking beyond the early compromise move of appointing Love, this is a step in the right direction. Cautious optimisim i’d say.
Some pundits believe the success of RL in Australia is due to some News Limited conspiracy, well they’re about to find out that RL was No.1 in NSW and QLD for 90 years before News Limited and will be so for a long time to come.
Any pain felt from News’ exit will be short term. RL has clearly been getting unders in TV rights. For example how any sport in Australia has gotten a cent more than RL for Pay TV rights is baffling, even allowing for subsciption growth arguments.
Redb said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Richard Hinds has penned a good article on how it took the AFL Commission took several years to get the self interest of the individual clubs out of the decision making.
http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/how-the-afl-commission-broke-the-shackles-20091130-k18f.html
“Graeme Samuel, one of the powerbrokers behind the AFL’s spectacular rise over the past 25 years, says the benefits of an independent commission can flow only when clubs and other vested interests are willing to relinquish control and invest full faith in the game’s tribal counsel”.
“”The allocation of the Sydney Swans licence to Geoffrey Edelsten (for more than $6 million), that was not the preferred position of the commission,” says Samuel. ”[Also] we wanted the Brisbane team established in Brisbane. (It was originally set up on the Gold Coast under a private consortium controlled by Christopher Skase.) They are just two significant decisions that were taken out of our hands because we did not have the ultimate say.”
The decision making process will have Implications for the how the Melb Storm will be handled and expansion to non traditional areas like Perth. Unlike the Central Coast of course (right Col).
Redb
Michael C said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:55am | Report comment
I reckon some NRL pundits have some unreal expectations of the time frame in which the benefits of an independant commission will clearly start to flow,
however, there DOES seem a willingness to go down this path, and there is a close neighbour with a well established ‘blue print’ – - so, perhaps the years it took for the AFL to win over the clubs may not be replicated or met with similar resistance.
Very, very interesting the bits about how the Commission was overruled by the clubs early days re Edelsten and Brisbane Bears on the Gold Coast.
Very interesting.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:27am | Report comment
I can tell you one thing, this is probably the worse peice of news that AFL has ever heard in your history, now you are going to be fighting a true golliath. Hey, you forced us into it, i told you not long ago we dont lay down lightly.
Besides, there is nothing like a little competition. Cheers M.C, put west sydney afl push to bed, enjoy your 30 year push.
Redb said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
An Independent Commission will need to make unpopular decisions for the good of the game. Do you remember Superleague? Many facets of Superleague were good for the game but the insular types like Springs below who basicailly said stuff Cronulla will always plague league .
Whilst League is bedding down its IC, the AFL which would have already facted in RL’s move, and be ready to go to Stage 3.
Redb
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
Stage 3….? blimey, i was just thinking we had a victory, now you are telling me we have a stage 3, what happened to stage 2.
I really dont care what happens, as long as rugby league is healthy, is all that matters to me.
NUFCMVFC said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:27am | Report comment
Seems that Football/Soccer generally would do wel for something of a centralised model. Although there are some issues as it is often restrictive amongst other things (poaching Jets Coach Van Egmond for example).
On the one hand the article is right, there is “no escaping News”, and it should be remembered that working with News brings some positives for Rugby League, coverage of their U20’s competition which wouldn’t get timeslots on FTA for example.
But it is better for them, because the Business reality is that Rugby League has TV value which is what seems to have started this Super League war in the first place, free from conflict of interest, they should be able to negotiate for much higher broadcast revenue returns, on the one hand the AFL perhaps did represent an avenue for new subscribers and hence new revenue, but I suppose the NRL can argue that they represent subscriber retention in economically tricky times and higher interests rates on higher mortgages etc.
Which is more important to Fox Sports in the upcoming era of FTA multi-channeling and digital TV? Channel 9 will get NRL, and have the avenue to present more of it as a product thanks to its second channel (while showing other prime time programs on first channel), meaning many people would be able to get their NRL fill via FTA perhaps? Guess the issue is a balance between FTA and Pay TV coverage/rates. Other sports face the same issue. I can see the NRL tempted to ensure they cover the weekend TV slots in order to strategically drown out any FTA Sydney viewership of any AFL game with respect to the new WS team?…This in turn compromises AFL’s ability to say their move into WS results in more customers/viewers for advertisers and impacts on their value to broadcasters and to negotiate higher revenue. Same can be said for other sports such as football/A League and Rugby Union/Super 15 when they also go through the next round of broadcast negotiations. These should be interesting to observe
One aspect that will be interesting is whether under digital rollout, regional viewers will be considered a lot more than they are now whereby they tend to just take into consideration viewership. For this reason I don’t think the “commission will struggle” because they should be in line to receive a cash influx of some kind from TV revenue, which in turn means money for them to hand out centrally and to fund “greater interest” initiatives, like subsidising Central Coast Bears or even counter marketing the AFL in terms of their push into WS, or in NRL sense trying to attract members who attend through the gates (for all teams) in place of Pokie Machine revenue
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:02am | Report comment
RedB
“…even by the arch-enemy NRL.” Is that Roy Masters in reverse? Just kidding.
“…says the benefits of an independent commission can flow only when clubs and other vested interests are willing to relinquish control and invest full faith in the game’s tribal counsel”.
This is an important point in an excellent article and shows what an IC can do. The fact that all 16 NRL clubs were giving the IC idea full support is a good indication that RL has finally learned from the success of the IC in the AFL and realise it is the way of the future.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
I dont know about you guys, but every week i read somewhere in a post, supporters moaning about 2 major issues.
1/ News involvement in the game.
2/ they want a independent commission.
Now if this is anything to go by, i think not only will rugby league thrive, its going to hit massive ground swell support, never seen before in Australian sport. Last year was just a taste of whats to come. This is the 1st time in the history of the game that we have a real challenge on our hands, and i think we are going to take it head on, like one report said, ” The Gloves Are Off.”
dave said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:01am | Report comment
more of a question than a comment. Are clubs able to generate there own revenue, or will all revenue be centralised and re-distributed. So for example, Broncos match day revenue generated through average home crowds of 33k plus, re-allocated to clubs attracting average 12k plus? If that becomes the case, what is the incentive for individual clubs to invest and attract there own sponsorship, it puts a new spin on the argument between clubs who develop their own players and those who just buy.
Springs said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:21am | Report comment
Centralised and re-distributed? The Communist Rugby League.
If Sharks are dying because they are onlyaveraging 10k why should the broncos help them out? The only re-allocating I would do is if a Broncos/Cowboys match got 50k, the Cowboys could see some of the revenue.
Pippinu said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:28am | Report comment
Springs
each comp and sport can decide their own course – but people often refer to the highly regulated AFL framework (mostly pinched from the NFL), and that is what happens there more or less, with a bit of a twist.
Clubs keep all their membership fees, sponsorship, revenues from cotery groups, etc.
The AFL keeps all the TV revenue and and a large chunk of merchandising and gate receipts (those who pay on the day to attend matches).
At the end of the year, it does an equitable split of the profits as a dividend back to clubs.
The key is that the clubs share the TV revenue equally (which is one of the major sources of revenue).
The justification is that 16 teams means double or more the TV revenue of 8 teams, so big and small clubs contribute to that TV revenue being as large as it is.
Springs said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:41am | Report comment
That’s a fair enough system.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:47am | Report comment
Dave, i will give you a exaple of what probably will happen.
Here is a example for you by showing 20 million as a figure.
If a club earns 20 million, and it costs 20 million to run the club, no profit, now if a club earns 15 million then if they get equal share of lets say 5million from the commission,as a figure to allocate to clubs, they are running at no profit, so a cub who earns 20 million, with their allocation of 5 million, make 5 million profit.
Now lets say that club is the broncos, so their 5 million is profit, and they are a registered company on the stock exchange, so what they can do is invest in some sort of venture and increase their share holdings.
Now the other team, lets say the Sharke, they dont make any, or lose any money, so their aim is to increase their losses to move into profit.
So no, the money does not go back into the Commission, all clubs get equal amount, what they do with it is the question, if your club is losing money, then as a member i would want to know why. Cheers.
Jay said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:32am | Report comment
I dont think this will be the case. In the article in todays paper it said that the Melbourne Storm should be viable under an IC with the new stadium and attracting bigger crows. While this does not clearly state that gate taking are redistributed, it does suggest that ticket sales for home games will be kept by the clubs for season matches.
I think finals will be a different issue.
I would seem inequitable for Brisbane to subsidise the Shares. Brisbane is a listed company and its shareholder would be furious if this was the case. I dont think this will happen – all that will occur is that tv revenue, NRL merchandise sales, state of origin and internationals will form one big pot of cash. The IC will determine who needs funding on basis of merit. Grants equal to the salary cap will be paid to each club and the remainder will be distributed equally.
It will still be up to each club to run their own business. That is, their revenue will consist of leagues grants, poker machine revenues, club memnerships, sponsorships and ticket sales.
Tom Alexander. said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:47am | Report comment
If the slate was totally wiped clean (No Colin Love-No David Gallop) then we really would have a skip in our step. The ARL (who own the Kangaroos) were stupid enough to knock the Ashes on the head which was the International Jewel in our Crown. It was also reported the other day that the NSWRL are completely broke (which is why the QRL who have built up a nest egg of 7 million, aren’t happy about this new commission slush fund idea) . So Rugby League administrators can be just as inept as the next person. You just hope with the right board members, they will make enough of a positive difference to the running of our game. Hopefully there is light at the end of this long dark tunnel.
M1tch said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
I hope Finch isnt near the refs/rules again
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:57am | Report comment
Springs said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:36am | Report comment
Well the pocket ref runs in and yells in the players ear to MOVE, so I think that is equally annoying.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:53am | Report comment
What i like about the commission, so QLD are making money, and NSW are losing money, the commission will look at what QLD are doing right, and then transplant that to NSW and get it right their. The commission will also send just the right amount of funds needed for any one area, so we are not sitting on 7 million in the bank waiting to lose that 7 million.
With the big guns on the board, they will be able to use that 7 million, and turn the sucker into 20 million.
BigAl said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:10am | Report comment
This NRL Commission has come . . . in a rush and out of nowhere compared to the equivalent AFL & FFA bodies !
Makes you wonder just how much thought has been put into it.
M1tch said | December 1st 2009 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
not really its been in planning for 2 years and the overall process will take 2-3 years..
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Just to give you guys a idea of the untold riches involved, and what a commission can do for the game, Steve, you listening dude.
1/ For a start it saves the game up to 7 million straight off by not having news sit on 2 boards.
2/ with games now being bought and paid for by governments to play the game in their state, or country(NZ) , this income goes back into the game and is alloacated to the right people.
3/ the support now the people have their game back will increase.
4/ the game can be sold overseas with a commission doing deals, with plenty of clout and knowleadge of how to deal.
5/ salary cap will increase, higher profile, not only here, but also around the world
6/ we already are the biggest rugby comp in the world, that will just get bigger.
7/ with all the extra attention, it will invite cites to want to be part of the game, not having to pick and choose.
8/ the international game will go from strength to strength, and the players profiles will also increase.
9/ we can finally stop looking over our shoulder at what other codes are doing, and hopefully stop being attacked by other codes. Mind you, i might miss that part of the game.
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:16am | Report comment
Tom
There is a lot of light at the end of the tunnel.
Basically now we have the Broncos (my team) the Titans and say the Bulldogs having bigger crowds and more money. They keep their profits which for some clubs goes to private owners. They are not concerned about other clubs or junior development of the game nation wide.
As Pip said what an IC will do is take the profits from crowds and TV revenue from ALL the clubs. It then gives an equal share to ALL clubs to give them all the best chance of survival. It then keeps an amount it will use on the international game and then give grants to the NSWRL, QRL & CRL to look after junior development.
The IC decides who gets how much depending on who they feel needs it the most. It is the fairest system that will stop the club mentality of looking after no. 1 and will do what’s needed to grow the game as a whole.
dave said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:28am | Report comment
but how does this system provide an incentive for underperforming clubs to improve their own systems of generating revenue if they know they can depend on a guaranteed income, despite their own (lack of) effort. Surely everyone has to contribute equally if they expect an equal share of funding?? This is not a community where some individuals are clearly disadvantaged and need a leg up just to make ends meet. This is supposedly a professionally run sporting competition, where everyone involved has to contribute. Clubs that can’t cut it will bring down the comp, not enhance it.
Michael C said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:57am | Report comment
Dave -
A. clubs get compensated in situations like in the AFL with Anzac Day blockbuster being the domain of Ess and Coll. The AFL recognise this as maximising centralised broadcast revenue, and then ensuring the clubs who are excluded are able to ’share the benefit’…….i.e. the total pie is maximised and it is shared more equitably.
B. incentive. IN the AFL , basically the salary cap (TPP – total player payments) is covered by the AFL distribution to clubs. It’s the monies atop this for which the clubs seek to generate to establish a winning edge,
at times, there’ve been AFL clubs who couldn’t afford to have rookies (i.e. not covered under the salary cap, only can play senior footy in place of a ‘long term injured’ player). This is a clear example of where clubs have missed out in the past because they were just scraping by or running at a loss compared to other clubs generating healthy profits.
(also, the capacity to take advantage ot salary cap ‘loopholes’ such as back ended contracts for older ’stars’ who can go on the veterans list and have half their salary for that year sit outside of the salary cap…..if you’re club is broke, they can’t afford that $500K or whatever).
Off field as well – the size of the budget (let’s say a club operating on $40 mill vs one on $25 mill, well, $15 mill buys an awful lot of specialised coaching, talent identification/development, medical/sports science support, etc etc.
There’s plenty of incentive to perform well financially in the AFL structures…….one assumes there are similar avenues in the NRL or proposed NRL structures.
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:42am | Report comment
dave
While an IC will greatly improve the prospects of struggling clubs it does not guarantee their future. All clubs will need to do everything they can to be as profitable as possible.
We need to look after all the clubs – so we don’t lose fans (as in the Bears demise) and that we have 8 games to sell to the networks. It’s in the interests of all clubs that all the clubs survive.
You can not expect Manly or Cronulla to make the profit of a one town team like the Broncos. The idea of an IC is to stop a situation where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:45am | Report comment
All clubs get the benifit, if one is doing bad, the commission is their to lend a hand, thats what is all about, no club wants to run at a loss, but running at a loss could be a right-off also, so we need Cronulla. A couple of AFL clubs run at a loss, and look at them, there thriving.
Michael C said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:58am | Report comment
oikee – gee, the voice of reason on this…..you’ve been taking notes along the way with our AFL-NRL tete-a-tete’s over the journey!!!!
Good work old chap!!!
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Yes well, i cant really knock the AFL, they really do have a great set-up, as long as rugby league also has a great set-up will do me. And we are not looking at signing AFL players, might take a note from this comment M.C, back to your head-quarters.
The man said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
I don’t understand a model where it is the clubs alone who can vote on “independent” commissioners. These Commissioners will act in the interests of the clubs and not necessarily the other stakeholders.
There needs to be room in the commission for commissioners who also represent the grass roots of the game that provide all the players for the clubs and who hopefully ensure junior development is not scarified in the interests of short term gain. At this point this has got to be the various RL’s and they should have a seat at the table.
If the balance of the IC is right it will be a definite step forward.
As for News, given all the damage done to the game by there self interest in monopolising pay tv, the sooner they are gone from the running of the game the better.
Had the game not had to empty its warchest in a battle for survival it would be in a much better place – the teams in Perth and SE Queensland would be almost 15 years old by now.
If anything News should exit and STILL KEEP PAYING from its profits in Foxtel as reparations for the sins it committed in those dark days.
Paul J said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
Redb
Just saw your earlier comment.
“Many facets of Superleague were good for the game…”
Super League was created because a large part of the RL community did not want their game sold to a billionaire tycoon to use as his play thing for his new pay TV network in Australia. Which facets of Super League were good for the game?
“Whilst League is bedding down its IC, the AFL which would have already facted in RL’s move, and be ready to go to Stage 3.”
What is this mysterious stage 3? Something you’ve taken from the NFL that we in turn can take from the AFL?
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Mate, i am still getting over stage 2.,,,,, 200 million spent in west Sydney to make a AFL team viable, and no turning back. What is stage 3,,,,,, 1 billion spent on the childrens hospital so every child has a collingwood jumper.
bever fever said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:28pm | Report comment
200mill has not already been spent , 200 mill MAY be spent over quite a long time not one year.
prowling panther said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:34pm | Report comment
good riddance News ltd. Jeez I hate that thing. Now that the commission is more or less confirmed, I don’t understand why league people seem to suddenly be afraid. Yeah it aint totally and perfectly independent and both Love and Gallop are retained -but some sort of transition is required and the proposed set up is a hell of a lot better than the current NRL
Paul J said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
PP
I totally agree. I have been surprised at some of the negativity to the IC. I was expecting mass celebrations and dancing in the streets.
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:37pm | Report comment
Me too.
Even if it turns out the initial commission isn’t much chop the hard yakka of effecting positive change would be gone. It will be a great day once it happens.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
Let’s be honest, once you move away from a place like the Roar, your average punter is not paying all that much attention to changed administrative structures – let’s be honest – it’s not really glamorous stuff.
I can recall the AFL public hated the AFL commission for a solid decade before they granted them some begrugding respect.
Also, keep in mind that this new commission might make some tough decisions and get noses out of joint – a similar thing could happen over the next decade.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:59pm | Report comment
“We’re all Doomed,! Doomed i tell ya”.
Col the Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:44pm | Report comment
Game will never be right until the Bears are back in the comp.. when we have a guarantee of that and the Bears are running out onto Gosford stadium, then I’ll know the Commission is truly independent..the only reason the Bears are out is due to Super League.. under the encouragement of the NRL we relocated to Gosford..only to be halted at the last hurdle.Well now it’s time for the NRL/ARL/IC to keep their end of the bargain.. and bring back the Bears…our biggest indication is by Shane Richardson who said recently the Bears should be in next.. and he is on the committee for expansion…
Sorry to all you doubters.. but we have been at this for 10 years.. if anything we deserve the first spot before 2013.. no one else has continued the fight.. no one else in the past 5 years has said “hey we would like to be in the NRL” no one has put up a formal bid until the last couple of Months..the Bears have done the hard yards.. and now it’s time to be rewarded for that hard effort..our membership is already running, I’ve signed up for 3 years myself..why because as we say this is a no brainer and we are confident it’s our time now…. we are ready to go,
Springs said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:04pm | Report comment
Bears deserve to be let back in. A lot of fans will be angry if the Bears are looked over again. I don’t know what the big deal is, expanding to the Central Coast, an area between Sydney and Newcastle, League Heartland, more tha nenough money, two legions of fans, a brilliant stadium, what’s the risk? I’m sure the Bears won’t cause the commission to fail. Geez, more fans, more players, more juniors, what’s the downside?
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
Hear hear! I love the colour scheme, the old culture and the opportunity to see (my) Manly-Waringah beat the Bears two time per year, seems like heaven to me
Also if they even get to play on North Sydney one or two games a year I’ll be salivating all the way down the Coast
Midfielder said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:56pm | Report comment
Time will tell but RL is saying their advise is not to expand to keep the competition tight and therefore interesting and thus retain audience…all other codes are on expansion football the most then AFL and RU… will the introduction of two new AFL teams have 18 even teams …
It is a brave move by the RL and time will tell who is right…
Springs said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:10pm | Report comment
Are they seriously not expanding so the competition will still be close? Even with 14 teams Brisbane and Parramatta were far above the others in ‘00 and ‘01. Souths were low for a while, Titans have been successful. And it doesn’t stop the Sharks or whoever from playing bad.
Col the Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:24pm | Report comment
Can’t agree MF, it will stop the drain on players going overseas for a start..a lot of players are missing out and they are talented players who have gone over seas.. another couple of teams would give these guys a better option to stay here instead of running off to Japanese RU or Super league..the talent is here..I still think we will get the nod
as I have mentioned, in 2004 the same thing happened, and before the TV rights in 2006, the Titans were given the nod in 2005 to play in the 2007 season..2 years run up time..licence given out BEFORE the last TV rights deal…these TV rights deal is due at the end of 2012, for the 2013 season… the NRL /IC will have to have bargaining chips otherwise nothing gained since the last TV rights deal…add 2 more teams, and there you have more games…more revenue….for all the present 16 clubs…
Midfielder said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:58pm | Report comment
Col
We disagree only on the CC team… you say CC I say there are better places … aside from that we both think expamsion is the way to go … my post was only to say the RL comment is brave when you consider what all the other codes are doing…
bever fever said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:30pm | Report comment
Personally think the CC is the place to go to in NSW, not sure about where in QLD.
WA i dont think is ready for a new league team, there are bugger all juniors and you would probably be stealing from RU and viccy verca.
Its possibe to make a go of it but i have my doubts and if it was to stuff up again i dont see how RL would recover.
As it happens RL is slowly gaining momentum in this town but of the footy codes it is still a long way behind RU and soccer in terms of players and supporters at grass roots.
ren said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
We’re ready and waiting. The 3rd largest grassroots state in australia for league, dominated the associated states comp (non Qld, NSW), the reds were on the way to success before super league happened. The WARL is strong and healthy wih solid leagues in Perth as well as the North-West and Kalgoorlie. Jersey Flegg net year then next stop NRL.
WA is a strong and safe expansion place for RL, a healthy growing population, an economy that continues to carry the nation (Qld helps to pick up a bit of the slack) BIG companies with no teams left to sponsor- there is a big hole in Perth just waiting for NRL to fill it. AS long as the NRL doesnt expect super crowds – they should expect 10-15 K crowds not greater than 20K, but as time goes on th ecrowds will grow.
The worst thing the NRL could do is relocate a sydney team to Perth, that won’t do and will never work. We want and deserve our own team.
Col the Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:32pm | Report comment
The Central Coast has the 3rd highest rate of Juniors in Australia.. what is it over 3000?? and what you don’t think you could find 24 talented players out of that…just have a look at the CC juniors running around in the NRL now.. guys like Orford(well not now) Ryan tandy, Shaun Corrigan..if you go on the Central Coast Bears site you’ll see how many NRL players have come from the CC and Norths Juniors…sorry but it’s BS to say the talent is not there..
bever fever said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:45pm | Report comment
RL needs a team playing out of the CC, many league followers from Sydney have moved there over the years not to mention the locals and you should go where the supporters are.
If they are not careful the area will be lost to another competitor namely soccer and its very hard to get the kids back once you lose them.
oikee said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:38pm | Report comment
Their is too many teams wanting to get into the NRL, last time i checked it was over 8 areas. Their is a action going on now for a challenge cup type comp. This will include every state, NZ , PNG and the Islands, its the only way to deal with the amounts of bids going on. If the NRL has 2 more teams, thats it, no more. So the question is, do we expand into Perth (t/v money) and let the Bears back as well, or do we go the safe option, Bears and a Brisbane team.?
We really need to open the game up, a challenge cup will allow every team into the comp, help all clubs grow., I cant see another better option. Mitch was talking about this on his blog, i think he is right. At least PNG can be involved without having a NRL team, which could destroy their local comp. ? It use to be called the Amco cup, someone mentioned.
Col the Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:41pm | Report comment
the spin is not working this time..the Bears are on the Central Coast now and we are staying there until we get what the residents of the CC and the North Shore deserve and thats an NRL side called the Central Coast Bears…this bid is run by staunch Bear business people unlike last time we went for a licence..
and this time we will succeed….!!!!
tifosi said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:20pm | Report comment
Col,
I think the CC bears will come in, but it wont be until 2012 when a new tv contract is up for grabs.
Can you hang on that long!!
Deja Roo said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:34pm | Report comment
This new IC is gonna get the shock of their life when they open the books. Melbourne storm alone is a massive problem trying to make them sustainable without News Ltd funding, they just finished $6m in the red after 4 GF appearances. And you laugh at the AFL Oikee for investing $100m – $200m in a 2nd Sydney team when your going to be pouring millions into the Storm for many years to come after 10 years in the caper already while the NRL has No money in the bank. And idiots like you and Col the bear are screaming for expansion teams in Perth and Central Coast. Gallop came out today and basically ruled out expansion for the next 25 years because it’s not viable, RL is still trying to expand and hold Melbourne together 12 years on. On top of just about every Sydney club with small crowds and pathetic membership bases the so called epicentre of RL doesn’t have the pulling power to drive the game further like AFL has with Victoria. Cash, Cash, Cash baby……………..
And a bunch of new faces for this IC doesn’t change much and thats straight from Gallops mouth. Already the IC have pointed to 2013 for 2 new teams to enter the NRL which lasted a good couple of days before Gallop quickly put that fire out saying it’s not realistic. So we can gather that the IC have no business sense and they are mostly League rev heads who going to dig themselves a few whole along the way I’m guessing.
Read the heading for this article one more time- “New league commission really just more of the same”
The Link said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:09am | Report comment
Since when does not expanding in the ’short term’ mean 25 years?
Sydney NRL clubs do alright. Any one of them would be in the top 2-3 clubs in the A-League for crowds, memberships etc…
Redb said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:10am | Report comment
That wouldn’t be particularly hard.
The Link said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:21am | Report comment
well surely it shows that getting a 10k – 15k average isn’t easy if another sport battles to get anywhere near that. Hardly small and pathetic.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:26am | Report comment
just re the top 2-3 crowds in the HAL -
this year,
MVFC 20K
SFC 12K
AdUtd 11.7K,
the rest are sub 10K.
So, yup, you’re right, anyone or more correctly – everyone of them would be in the top 2-3 clubs in the HAL for crowds….so long as they keep playing RL and not soccer!!!!
Redb said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
never said pathetic.
The Link said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
original post did
Rod said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:20pm | Report comment
Yeah let the clubs run it and we can all watch rep footy be fully destroyed just as it’s making a comeback.
Great move.
Springs said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:34pm | Report comment
I am hoping this commission will help out bush footy, but if the clubs run it, I can’t see it happening. Country footy needs more than just ‘kids wearing the same logo as Darren Lockyer’.
jus de couchon said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:35am | Report comment
Basicaly their are 4 codes scraping over finite resources. An Independent comission should be created to represent all of them. It would take some imagination to implement but the alternative is the “Lord of the Flies” debacle that exists now.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
are the resources really finite??
the resources are kinda renewable,
and, the population is growing,
okay, perhaps not infinite, but, at least a growing renewable finite resource……..
Col the Bear said | December 2nd 2009 @ 5:40am | Report comment
The CC Bears will happen..just keep thinking 2004.. and as I said the Bears bid is way to good to ignore..how can we find millions in sponsorship and we’re not even in the NRL yet.. so why can’t anyone else..??Yes Deja roo they said the same in 2004…take a chill pill..
Kurt said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:32am | Report comment
Only vaguely related to the topic at hand I know, but interesting article on the AFL website today:
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/87750/default.aspx
It talks about a proposed re-development of Adelaide Oval “under a deal brokered by the state government with the SANFL, AFL and the South Australian Cricket Association.” The SA Govt is putting in $450m, and they’re going to ask for the Feds to come up with $150m on the basis that the stadium can then be part of the soccer world cup bid.
If it meets FIFA requirements you’d have to think it would be good for an NRL team too?
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:41am | Report comment
$600 million!!!!
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:45am | Report comment
450m Total $150m from the feds
That Fifa World Cup doesn’t seem such a bad deal for AFL afterall, $150m to rent a few stadiums for 8 weeks.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:47am | Report comment
AndyRoo
The AFL doesn’t use Adelaide Oval.
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:54am | Report comment
It’s part of the deal that they will be. 100m from the SA state govt that was to go to AAMI will go to this instead.
Seems win win (Pip you know it’s 6-8 weeks and Sydney, Geelong, Brisbane and GWS aren’t effected) and probably a similar announcment for Perth Coming I would expect.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
this news has been coming through the Fairfax press 12.09 and 12.10 today.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
Why is Brisbane unaffected?
The latest reports have been that the grounds like the MCG and Dome may actually be needed for 10 weeks, or even 12 weeks.
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
I think anything more than 6 to 8 weeks is scare mongering. Same as the AFL having to be shut down, it will be damm hard without so many stadiums though.
The Lions use the Gabba, I can’t imagine them using the Gabba rather than Suncorp.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
Yep – it’s that fact, and even Kate Ellis again couldn’t add certainty on the Offsiders on Sunday – it’s the fact that there’s so much uncertainty,
is it 8 weeks, or 10 or 12?
can the AFL play in the same city at all?
can the NRL play anywhere at all?
Australia needs to ‘commit’ some planning detail very shortly…..and yet no-one seems to know……(or aren’t saying).
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
MC
that’s right – Ellis didn’t know (but geez she’s hot, and yet the consummate politician – she didn’t answer a single question).
Andyroo
looks like Adelaide Oval will be used for AFL afterall – I guess they’ve opted for this rather than an upgrade of AAMI.
Yes – similar thing might happen in Perth, but:
1. it’s hard to imagine FIFA officials being rapt at so many ovals being used; and
2. not too much of a legacy for soccer!!
Well – Kate Ellis is a South Australian – and she is far smarter than her gorgeous looks would let on.
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
Pip
If you look at some of the previous world cups a hell of a lot of ovals have been used. There is a big legacy for AFL sure (I don’t think Cricket really needs the upgrades) but there is a big legacy for Football too; it’s just not in regards to the stadiums. This is a league where the avg crowd is 10k and the minimum capacity to host a World Cup match is around 45k….. not hard too see the problem their.
And even if the Stadiums are oval it means that Socceroo games or HAL grand finals can be played in those states too.
I think we get too caught up with little problems, an Australian World cup would have a really good atmosphere (Australia is a safe destination where fans don’t need to be segregated), it’s prime time in China and the Government is 100% behind it as opposed too say the US bid.
A lot of the other bids look crap compared to ours.
I reserve the right to become bitter though if the 150m is provided even though we don’t get the World cup.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:45pm | Report comment
tee hee,
don’t go being a Lookist!!
Kurt said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:50am | Report comment
This looks like the AFL and SACA getting on the front foot to try and take advantage of the bid rather than wait to be shafted by soccer and the feds. If it comes off it sounds like a win win – the AFL and SACA get a great stadium for ongoing usage and soccer gets its wc stadium for the bid. And we taxpayers, as always, pick up the tab. Sigh.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:53am | Report comment
There’s no doubting that if the AFL is required to shut up shop for 8 to 10 week – it will extract maximum compensation, plus a few other sweeteners.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
Looks like about $300 mill from the planned West Lakes PT extension and the planned AAMI upgrade get’s redirected plus the hoped for $150 mill of fed funds.
AAMI get’s downgraded to a secondary venue, and some of the SANFL’s land is rezoned so they can sell it off for commercial uses.
Still – needs the parties to commit and sign proper (not just in principle) by mid year 2010.
On AdelaideNow, there’s some soccer tragics whinging already….but, the plan is that it’d be FIFA WC compliant too…..not sure what they’re whinging about…..(oh, they wanted their own stadium……).
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
All for it. In Perth and Adelaide a 45k Rectangular ground is not viable.
Well maybe Perth if it’s 2022…. but anyway win win I think.
We get the world cup and then the AFL is left with a legacy of some great stadiums which will like the Bundisliga after 06 be a huge plus.
Art Sapphire said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
Michael C how come you are not complaining about a waste of taxpayers money in the building of this sports stadium. Oh, that’s right! Its an oval shaped stadium. They are exempt from criticism
The AFL get a brand spanking new half billion dollar stadium in Pissant Town and there is no guarantee that Australia will even host the WC in 2018 or 2022 and if we do win the bid, all the AFL have to do is give up eight weeks of football. Talk about Xmas coming early.
Don’t get me wrong, this is not a whinge. I don’t have any complaints. If it helps to win the WC bid, even better.
What is funny and hypocritical is how Michael C and Co. have used this website to stage one of the biggest crusades ever to whinge about the building of the Swan Street Rectangular Stadium. Hilarious!!
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
Let us all share a group hug – I’m shedding a tear.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
Art
we all have to pull our weight and pitch in to get the WC.
The AFL will do its bit, all in the public interest (as long as hundreds of millions of dollars are redirected their way) – but let’s not forget the trillion dollars that come back into the Australian economy as a result of the WC!!
It’s actually costing nothing!!
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
Art –
there’s a city specific context to consider.
In Melb – a 100% State Govt funded stadium is the odd one out, it’s an issue then when it becomes corporate/sporting welfare
IN Adelaide, there’s stuff all justification to build a FIFA compliant dedicated soccer stadium – so, to build one that big and not have AFL and cricket on board would be madness. The complication is that the SANFL owns AAMI.
These funds from the State Govt were to be directed towards the long promised PT link to West Lakes and an upgrade of AAMI stadium. Fair enough – - those funds being allocated, and now redirected – - to redirect them NOT for the benefit in part of AFL or the SANFL – - THAT Would be something to complain about.
and the $150 in Fed funds would be on the provision of the venue for a FIFA WC should it happen.
So, $150 million of federal funds for 8 weeks of activity……..sad that that is the Fed Govt criteria for unlocking funds, whereas, 30-40K every week for 22 weeks a year, year after year doesn’t seem to register on the Canberra Radar (obviously, the radar range is not great enough, and it bounces off the hills and can only see Sydney via the beautifully landscaped ‘Federal Highway’).
Anyway, just so long as messers Buckley and Lowey don’t come out whinging about ’soccer money’ building infrastructure for other codes……
Art Sapphire said | December 2nd 2009 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
Pip, do you have trouble comprehending what I write.
I am not against this development so you don’t need to justify anything.
What I am laughing at is Michael’s ridiculous crusade against the Swan Street Stadium. The more he tries to justify the building of one stadium against the other, the more I and everyone else laughs.
Is criticising fellow AFL fans off-limits to you, Pip.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
Sorry Art – I’m not too sure what you’re referring to.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:04pm | Report comment
Art -
it (the Swans St stadium) would’ve been okay if perhaps the FFA had chipped in a bit, the NRL, ARU….etc, but, they’re all broke and it’s 100% govt funded welfare for the down trodden….
….I’ve seen that inoffensive young chap Harry isn’t it?? forced to kick crushed lemonade cans on the streets…..
….so, perhaps this charity venue will help get these poor unfortunates off the streets and out of harms way.
That’s what Govts are for………..
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
btw – Art,
aren’t you concerned that the new Swan St Stadium doesn’t even fit the criteria of helping win the FIFA WC hosting……because the roof prohibits expansion such that the FFA are having to nominate the MCG and Docklands as ‘their’ required Melb venues.
If you’re gonna build something, don’t stuff it up – - and this venue has been stuffed up. Oh, but it’ll look great.
Springs said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
Why is it all abut soccer? The new Melbourne Stadium is fine for NRL, Super 15, A-League, State of Origin, League tests, Union tests, Socceroos matches, RWC and RLWC. Etihad is fine for the damn soccer world cup.
Art Sapphire said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:28pm | Report comment
Michael – I’d rather see govt welfare go to the down trodden than to the fat cats, comrade.
I am not concerned about Swan St stadium not being able to host 3 or 4 World Cup Matches. I could not care less. What I and every other soccer, rugby fan is happy about is being able to go and see the code played in a suitable venue. That is all. Simple!!
If the Australian bid can convince FIFA we can host the WC in a number of oval stadiums then good luck to them. I am not going to lose any sleep over whether we win the bid or not.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
Art -
” I’d rather see govt welfare go to the down trodden than to the fat cats”
ah, excellent – so, you’d rather see govt welfare go to AFL member owned (y’know, mums, dads, 8 yr olds and 80 yr olds) clubs rather than the privately owned franchises owned by some of Australia’s biggest/wealthiest fat cats (eg Clive Palmer).
Excellent – - so we agree then. AFL in, private plaything franchises out.
Glad to chat.
Art Sapphire said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
Michael – I meant the poor down trodden soccer supporters
Personally, I am not a huge fan of franchises but if thats what it took to establish a national soccer competition. Well better to take that then nothing at all.
Hopefully, one day we might see the establishment of member owned clubs in the A-League. But until that happens, at least I can enjoy watch a soccer match in a proper venue.
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
Pip re your fairly inappropriate comments about a Minister of Her Majesty’s Government of the Commonwealth of Australia is fairly amusing but it is an insult to all South Australians even those raised in Melbourne
Y’know personally why does the minister for sport have to be fit/attractive…I mean the Minister of Finance (the NZ title for whatever you Aussies call it) is usually a useless budgeter, on this side of the Tasman 
Also I can attest to the fact that short of John Howard (on account of his staying in power so long amidst so much antipathy!) very few Australian Ministers could be considered ’smart’
Also I want to remind everyone that an Independent Comission should actually look to not be dependent on Govt funding, but alas the AFL has yet to achieve this has it
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
hang on, Bob Hawke was a Rhodes Scholar,
and dispite taking a short ball in the face/specs, he was a more accomplished cricketer than the ‘tragic’ Mr.Howard,
and, he luved a (fair swag of) beer(s)
…….don’t forget, the Crawford report gave us the FFA with all of it’s life support system plugged directly into Parliament House, Canberra, Australia.
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
Ah sorry what’s the point again?
Smart in terms of legal (or more often quasi-legal qualifications like BAs and being able to speak in a dozen languages a la Prime Minister Rudd) but hardly in terms of actually guiding the country to where we all want it to go, but don’t get me started on Democracy!!!!
These people are seldom in it for the right reasons most of the time and thus I have to think Minister Ellis is no different, but she happens to be attractive for our mutual friend Pip and if I were to grovel maybe I could agree that she is more attractive than the avg Parlimentarian…however she still doesn’t have my best interests at heart, but as I said don’t get me started on our system of governance
Which brings me back to my earlier point: why should we rely on the Govt for funding our Palace of Dreamses????
Redb said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:58am | Report comment
It’s called getting on the front foot.
KB said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
No compensation nor should there be … from what Kate Ellis said on the ABC Offsider programme… She said there will be a Stadium legacy left behind that will be more than enough compensation for all codes … One thing I am against is that such structures don’t have a movable rectangle component… For that sort of cash that would be unacceptable in my view… After all it’s the Football WC that is making this all possible.. A movable rectangle configuration would service all codes not just for cricket and Marn Grooky, but for all of the rectangle codes as well, and allow future expansion for everyone .. Only then would this be a good plan for all…
~~~~~~~
KB
Springs said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:20pm | Report comment
So the NRL’s season will be destroyed not to mention the upgrading of stadiums likely to go for the best part of the previous year and we get no money. What Stadium legacy will the NRL get? NQ doesn’t need 40,000, either does Newcastle, Perth/Adelaide don’t have teams, an upgraded SFS will mean Roosters will now fill 20% of their stadium as opposed to 25%. Will FIFA/the government upgrade Brookvale or Toyota or CUA?
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
Springs -
a very salient point you make – that all these NRL venues would be undergoing major works…..so, a major interruption other than just during the WC itself…..or, would the FFA forego the 2021/22 HAL season and sit out whilst stadiums are redeveloped??? so as not to impact the NRL?
but, also, the WC host no has a new traditional role of hosting the Confederations Cup 12 months prior….so, look for a few weeks of interruption in 2021 as well.
(note, above dates work on hypothetical 2022 hosting, for 2018, subtract 4 in each case)
Springs said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
Really? So we could be looking at up to two years of interrupted NRL and AFL comps, that will mean a lot of lost revenue.
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
In regards to the NRL
Brisbane would lose Suncorp, Cowboys Dairy Farmers (unless they build a new stadium), Newcastle would lose their ground, the Roosters/Rabbitohs would lose SFS and the Bulldogs would lose Homebush. Canberra would lose Bruce stadium.
In a 16 team comp 9 of the teams would be completely unaffected and the Roosters and Rabbitohs could use the SCG for some sort of historical marketing push. You massage the draw a bit, have a SOO in New Zealand with no half arsed split round but an actual break and it starts too look all right.
The Broncos could play a game in PNG.
The Confed cup is only an 8 team comp that goes for a bout a fortnight so it is much less demanding scheduling wise.
I would also suggest Newcastle do need a new ground. One with ends and some sort of roof coverage.
Springs said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:30pm | Report comment
Newcastle have been upgrading their stadium over the past two years. I was saying that they don’t need a 40,000 capacity stadium.
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
Springs, they will by 2018/2022
You can probably add another 150k to Newcastles Population by then and the next generation of Johns boys will be in first grade.
I would expect that the avg crowd for an NRL game would be 25k by then.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:36pm | Report comment
In relation to the AFL, I did a quick back of the envelop calc, and worked out that they would need to be compensated between $100 – $200 milllion for lost earnings (that’s the full effect of lower gate takings, lost memberships and lost sponsorship).
What has to be factored into the calculation is the loss of future earnings – when you lose memberships and sponsorship because of a major disruption like that – it can take years to get back to where you were, because it’s a question of losing contracts and getting people back into the habit of renewing memberships.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
AndyRoo -
don’t forget though,
there’s not just the match day venues, there need to be initially a list of 64 to be culled to 32 stand alone ‘home base’ training venues for the 32 nations competing,
as well, each match day venue requires 2 ‘warm up’ venues available to the 2 competing teams in the immediate lead up to a game,
so, how many of the 32 actual training camp venues will be NRL venues taken off line for not just the period of the tournament, but, the x number of weeks lead in as teams ‘take up residence’,
and what is it, 12 match venues required and therefore 24 ‘warm up’ venues required,
that’s 68 venues that the FIFA WC want’s to consume…….and how long in the lead up do they want them ‘quarantined’ so as to ensure a ‘perfect’ surface?
The thing at the moment is that no one really seems to know the answers…..and that’s perhaps because FIFA has never dealt with such a ‘hostile’ or ‘foreign’ (in many ways) sports/football market – - – because, even in RSA and USA, the prevalent fields are all rectangular, and soccer is effectively the only other ‘football’ code (with all respect to ‘Arena football league’ in the USofA).
……….the thing that comes to mind with all those venues out of action is that, even if we accept that the NRL and AFL will just take 8 to 10 to 12 weeks off?? or attempt to play somewhere out of the way?? that there’s presently 32 elite professional teams, but, likely by then to be 34 or 36 – - – and they all need to train somewhere…….if the AFL and NRL teams are displaced then they need some decent temporary accomodation, or – this may be the area for soccer to score it’s dedicated infrastructure bonus – - kick all the local soccer clubs off their grounds and up grade them all to FIFA WC training standard??
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:51pm | Report comment
How do you lose members that are already members.?
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:18pm | Report comment
Oikee
they re-suscribe every season – if all of a sudden there are only 5 games they can see at the MCG or Dome for the season – members will be lost – it’s very simple.
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:23pm | Report comment
M.C, i dont think the NRL will be overly worried, we also will have to be compensated , plus 2022 will be the year the NRL expands to where ever their is brand new stadium built, but perth should be ripe for us to put a team in there. If they expand before then, they have a new stadium to move into. AFL gets upgraded grounds as well. Either way, its a win win really.
If the QLD government uses its head right, we could have new grounds in central QLD. All the other stadiums are ok. Well we only really have 2 for the world cup. Gabba and Suncorp.
The Link said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
The Knights would fill a 40,000 stadium at least a couple of times a year.
The Jets by comparison could play in the carpark and have room for more spectators
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
Good one K.B, i was going to comment but you beat me to it. The whole purpose of building stadiums down south, (perth, adelaide and melbourne) is for 3 other codes to be played in those cities.. Dont get me wrong, AFL should have all the grounds they need, (150 years to do so) So its only obvious that rectangle stadiums are needed. Not oval grounds.
M.C, lets not harp on about the perfectly built bubble dome. Eteihad has a contract in place that no 50 thousand stadium was allowed be built, ? so knock that on the head willya. The 31 stadium is perfect, and can never be extended anyhows.
So, Aderlaide is still going to be a backward city, now we can only hope that Perth see’s the light and their government builds a porpose built rectangle stadium for 3 codes of football. cheers.
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
Yes expand into enemy territory, climb over the AFL guard’s ramparts and demand a ransom for the services of three rectangular codes. Did it not occur to anyone that this WC bid is actually just a gimmick, yes Oz is a great country to come to to see your favourite sport (coz you guys have quite a few!). Now a Minister/the Govt may be excused for exploring this type of rhetoric but unless you get all four codes to agree with FIFA there’s not going to be any traction…and I’m not sure if FIFA is willing or even able to change their rules just because they want Australia to host the Global Cup so badly.
Why would FIFA actually care enough to do the necessary networking…they’re not on the same page as the AFL/NRL/(SANZ)AR and unless they get on the same page this rhetoric is like building a brick wall and then going on a ciggy break and never returning to the job to build the necesssary portal to the other side
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
Its no gimmack , the NRL will support the world cup bid, and every league supporter will support it, WHy? because it will cause so much mayham to the AFL.
Anything to bring the dominate code down, hey? this is what aussies do, everyone hates the tall poppy. hahhahaha,, 
Springs said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:14pm | Report comment
Wrong, I do not support it.
And since everyone hates the tall poppy I guess that’s why our national RL team is so despised.
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:16pm | Report comment
No that’s just empty rhetoric Oikee. Do fans of other codes really want the FIFA WC in these parts, I do but that’s only if I put my Sports fan hat on and these kinds of inter-code debates are making it really hard to find
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
Sorry to hear that springs, oh well, anyhow, bring on the tall poppies, FIFA, we love ya, just remember, AFL is the tall poppy, not nrl fifa, I have the red carpet ready to roll baby.
Hey FIFA, remember us, the super league, yeah baby, we loves ya.
AndyRoo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 6:35pm | Report comment
It’s 6 weeks on inconvenience abd then its back to the same old same old like it was 100 years prior to the WC and as it will be 100 years afterwards. a brief respite wont kill anyone.
Consider it half time in the history of AFL and NRL….. i assume no one will be watching RU by then
Michael C said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:01am | Report comment
AR -
if it were only 6 weeks then perhaps no big concern, although – still a big ask if the soccer side is unable to make concessions and provide compensation and the AFL/NRL are expected to be totally flexible.
if it were only 6 weeks.
But we know that’s not the case – - not when you’re nabbing the 12 primary playing venues for 8-10-12 weeks (which is it),
and nabbing 32 high class training venues from whatever date the teams arrive and take up ‘residence’ plus how much lead in buffer to prepare the surface,
and nabbing 24 simple training venues around each match venue,
and forcing other codes during their locked in domestic season to not just vacate grounds but to move out of town altogether……..who is going to compensate me for having to travel to god knows where to see my team play their ‘home’ games??? Why should I accept that?
The AFL and NRL – for all anyone might glibly state that it’ll be okay and we can play games in NZ, or Tassie, or Darwin!!!…..but, why should (on current numbers) 550,000 paid up club members be forced to have to travel to such places…….I want compensation.
Let alone – that current costings sit b/w $6-8 billion to host – - it’s a lot, a lot of money to exit the public purse with stuff all of it ever destined (even in a best case scenario) to head back there.
I’m with Springs.
(it’s still a nice in principle idea – to host it, but, reality is that in a competitive market place, soccer just cannot hope to presently…..their bid is flawed without fed govt pulling some MAJOR rabbits out of the hat…..and the FFA should just host an Asian Cup first)
AndyRoo said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:35am | Report comment
Tournament goes for 4 weeks and their needs to be 2 week preparation time
2 + 4 = 6 weeks.
AFL and NRL will still be allowed to be played in the same city.
The status of Super 15 because of it’s large international component is still unclear.
By 2022 State league teams, Football academies, the Parklea complex and the training venues HAL teams use will provide enough suitable training venues.
Perhaps for the bid because of the short time frame we might use Redb’s strategy of telling them it’s all ok now (and then work it out later) by nominating say Nth Melbourne’s training venue but between now and the World Cup every state league team that does any improvements between now and then will do so with FIFA requirements in mind in order to try and get Brazil or Argentina training at their ground.
It’s the no worries World Cup MC…..stop reading the Terrorgraph.
The 12 week is just thrown out their so that the 6 weeks (the real figure) doesn’t seem so bad afterall. Remember how upset you guys were when you learnt about the two weeks prep time. Now you are begrudingly ok with 6 weeks
Redb said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:39am | Report comment
Reports in the Financial Review today suggest the MCG could be unavailable for 16 weeks!
So its gone from 4 to 8 to 12 to now 16 weeks.
Bye bye support.
Michael C said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:01am | Report comment
AR -
‘no worries’ then.
alas that doesn’t quite cut it.
Hearing Jeff Kennett wavering on it…….that’s very surprising from my perspective. But, for now – the ‘true believers’ can keep pushing the spin and assuming that FIFA officials only say nice things about Australia and no-one else.
Redb said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:09am | Report comment
Surely Jennifer Hawkins would have got the old fart’s hearts at FIFA more excited than Nicole Kidman.
AndyRoo said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:21am | Report comment
I think if you go overtley sexual (not suggesting Jennifer is anything other than a nice girl from next door) then you put people offside like Mrs Warner who judging from the Brits handbag presents must be a big player.
Jenifer is more of an NRL girl (Knights fan) whils’t Nicole is a Soccer Mom.
The Americans have sort of suffered from inserting fake fans who are big names in the past. plus it was a short film so someone who can act a bit is a big plus.
I am just glad it wasn’t Lara Bingle or Quatar would beat us.
Michael C said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Racheal Finch coulda cooked up a storm for them.
Redb said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:37am | Report comment
AndyRoo,
yeah I dont think Lara saying “were the bloody hell are you!” would go down particularly well.
Redb
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
So my weekly thermometer is out again and basically this thread has been hi-jacked (not one bit surprised to be honest) by talk of Expanding stadiums. C’mon people first you need to have expanded into these so-called hostile areas and then you’ll get the expansion/extension of stadiums if that’s what you truly want.
What’s this got to do with the Comission anyway…unless the Comission becomes a muppet for the FFA which would certainly spice things up wouldn’t it?
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
The NRL can just take their show to New Zealand, and get compensated without losing any dollars what-so-ever, i already have the plan in action.
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
Jaresbro, Fifa has told us that the host country cannot play their codes in that country, ? The NRL has already drawn up plans to play every home and away game out of new zealand, plus we get all games televised, and also get new grounds and updated facilities.
AFL will be scabbling over a few huindred million, the NRL will be beamed live into your faverite fox sports channell, and to top it off, they might even have full coverage of super league as well, a few million aussies watching rugby league wont up-set fifa now, will it. 
Why do you think its not a big deal to the NRL, they have already been dealing with this overseas for decades.
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:14pm | Report comment
SOO at Eden Park…can’t wait, but I wont be waiting because it’s not likely to ever happen, but I guess we both have a different view on the matter!
Basically I will clarify my above post: FIFA have their rules and agendas and the other codes do too, but until they all come together at the Boardroom in Lucerne or whereever FIFA’s situated these days the ‘Australian’ codes will always be disadvantaged in the partnership, why should we have to tolerate having FIFA tell us how to run our calendars…just not sure it’s worth missing out on our annual Bunnyraces y’know
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
jaredsbro
there is no partnership – when FIFA says jump – independent countries ask how high.
Personally I find it distasteful, and would be quite proud if the AFL were to turn around and say – bugger you lot – no foreign, unelected and corrupt sporting body tells us when and where we’ll play our footy.
However, we must give the AFL some credit.
They have worked out that the chances of winning the WC are small, in the meantime they might get re-developed oval stadiums in Adelaide, Perth and the Gold Coast out of it (maybe even the Showgrounds??) – so there might well be some method in the madness.
Jaredsbro said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:31pm | Report comment
Indeed now if you want to examine those who are really smart you have to first look at Sports administrators, thanks for proving my point Pip
Don’t get me wrong there’s much to gain if Oz wins the bid, particularly since the Crawford Report will likely steer Govt policy away from elite level /mega sporting events in favour of grassroots…but it’s one of those things that FIFA has to do right, the bidders themselves are not gonna have the nous or muscle to nut out a solution to this moratorium on sporting events. If they don’t many fans will be disillusioned methinks
As FIFA is king we need to make sure we’re not in an Absolute Monarchy before Australia goes about planning for the Best FIFA WC ever, else my points on earlier blogs about how FIFA views and depriviledges alternative Footballs may come all the truer
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
I love it, tell me how high to jump, get me a hoop, yeah baby. Fifa, we love ya,
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:27pm | Report comment
Yeah, ? never thought about that, imagine all the Kiwis wanting to watch Origin, its around the right time of year.
The truth is, at least the NRL will have over 10 years to plan all this, surely they cant stuff that up.
Michael C said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:27pm | Report comment
On SportsTonight on 3AW they were speaking to Jeff Kennett tonight, very interesting,
need to remember about JGK that he’s previously been highly involved with the old Soccer Australia, and as premier of Victoria he was seeking to bid to host the FIFA WC (but was warned off because Australia was also bidding for the Olympics and it was felt that a FIFA WC bid too would make the Chinese NOT vote for Australia for the Olympics…..well, Kennett pulled back….and the Chinese didn’t vote for Sydney anyway!!).
So…Kennett states clearly that as a private citizen, he’d absolutely LOVE to see Australia host the FIFA WC,
but,
he has huge reservations, and he’s been the most public supporter from the AFL ‘camp’. It was interesting listening.
Redb said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:12am | Report comment
The bottom line is for all the talk about how the AFL will benefit from a couple of upgraded grounds in Adelaide and Perth, the disruption, government funds, media attention, sponsor attrition,etc makes the WC bid a cost not a benefit.
Sth Auckland First XV said | January 20th 2010 @ 6:46pm (3 weeks ago) | Report comment
Don’t know where the NRL are going to play as we have ALL BLACKS, tri-nations, Super 14 and Rugby National Championship here, not to mention A-League football. There’s no room to play NRL here and most Kiwis don’t watch NRL anyway. Another NRL supporter in dreamland. Let’s face it the NRL has no international muscle at all.
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
Jarredsbro, dont under-estimate FiFa, very big, same as IRB, huge organisations, but they do serve a purpose. And if it benifits your code, so be it, embrace them, Why, because in your life-time you will never see them again. It only happens once. The sooner it happens, the better. cheers.
Deja Roo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
Col the Bear,
Whats the point of expanding into NSW? People in the Central coast area already watch RL. Do you really think it’s realistic to have 11 teams in NSW. Teams will just topple over like dominos. It’s the same dilemma the AFL has had with Tassie
If anything the NRL will be forced to relocate a Sydney club their like the Cronulla Sharks or Sydney Roosters. That way thier is one less team in Sydney that is not struggling and they have pleased the relocated clubs fans by keeping the club alive. Rather then just handing out another license down the road at the expense of an existing Sydney club folding under the pressure of maintaining and building a solid fan base.
The only bargaining chip is an extra game with TV rights but at the end of the day some of these lowly sydney clubs will not survive with NSW overflowing with clubs all fighting for sponsors and fans, if one club from Sydney dies it will undermine the whole point of expanding to get an extra game a week to increase TV revenue.
It makes no sense to expand into NSW with a new license. But then again the NRL doesn’t have the money nor the balls to expand into AFL turf.
Paul J said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:38am | Report comment
Deja Roo
It makes perfect sense to expand to the CC, don’t worry it won’t kill the Mariners. There are over 300K living at the CC and the CC Bears will help re engage the 700K living in North Sydney. It will bring back the rivalry game between the Bears and the Sea Eagles and the symbolism of reserecting a team killed off by RL darkest days will be huge.
The IC now gives Sydney clubs more chance than they ever had, they will be fine.
The ARL IC does have the balls, but won’t have the money for at least 3 years, to expand into AFL heartland but they need to tick other boxes first.
Springs said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:44pm | Report comment
If we let the Bears in – Two sets of fans have a team/get their team back. Relocate Sharks/Roosters, two sets of fans are mighty angry. Central Coast does not want the worst team in the League, the Sharks. Cronulla fans don’t want their team to move. Roosters fans don’t want to travel to the Central Coast – The Roosters/Titans game was the lowest crowd of the year. Nothing wrong with 11 teams in NSW.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:47pm | Report comment
Yes, true, these are the sorts of complexities administrators have to sift through before making rash decisions.
Col the Bear said | December 2nd 2009 @ 5:54pm | Report comment
Deja roo.. mate i’m telling you the CCBears will be in and either in 2012 or 2013.. no one is going to relocate.. money is off the table..
The 8 commissioners will pick the 2 teams.. and the CCBears and the Sqld “jets” are the 2 areas with available stadiums.. NO money has to be spent on them…
3rd highest population of RL juniors in Australia.. thats why you expand to Central Coast..all clubs will survive.. and they won’t have to relocate.. the time for relocation is over.. 2010 is going to be a big year..wait and see…this is just the beginning..
Gallop has made it clear Manly and cronulla have to stay where they are ..
reinstating the Bears is just something that should of happened 10 years ago…correcting the final wrong of Super League..as spoken from D gallop himself..
You are not going to convince me otherwise, and there are many many who agree with this point of view..
mark my words the CC Bears will be there..we can go around in circles.. but I truly believe this is what will happen.. and I don’t think this is going to change in the next year or 2..
do you think I would have put 10 years into this if I didn’t think it wasn’t going to get up..and there are Bears supporters everywhere who think the same as me.. “So sit back Roo and enjoy the fun until the CCBears are in..
Redb said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:34am | Report comment
Col,
No doubt you’ve seen this:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/bears-will-keep-banging-on-the-nrl-door-20091202-k6cw.html
Redb
Jay said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:48am | Report comment
It would be great if the Bears came back. JT is also helping them out, and ideally should be their first first-grade coach.
But 2017 is what Gallop is saying, so may want to wait until then. Unless you can prove that CC Bears will increase tv revenue, it aint gonna happen by 2013.
Also – I have a feeling that the NRL by that stage will make it a tender process, so it will be quite competitive with NZ, PNG, QLD, CC, possibly WA bidding for inclusion. I suppose it can only be for the good of the game, but on a sentimental note, the Bears should be reinstated asap.
oikee said | December 2nd 2009 @ 6:09pm | Report comment
Love the Bears, still remember the support and joy they brought to the game. Nice work Col.
Col the Bear said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:38pm | Report comment
2017 yes maybe for wellington and Perth or PNG ..it’ll be 2013. for us. and thats what we are all working towards..As I said we are going to continue to fight and this time we are not walking away.. the 8 team commission will make the decision on the next 2 franchises.. our business plan will be second to none..you can’t ignore 1 million people and 101 years of history..and as I said we still have a 20% stake in Blue tongue and playing rights for another 11 years.. are they going to sit by for another 11 years before putting another team at gosford..?? don’t think so…
Flo is upbeat, jubilant and determined today.. to see this through..he said we’re not taking one step backwards now, it’s full steam ahead, and we won’t stop until the CC Bears are in the NRL…and he has a great dedicated team behind him including very strong support from the Norths leagues club.. and thats a big help to us this time around…
David Fairleigh will be the first grade Coach thats a given.. not sure what capacity JT will be..that’ll come later but he has given us a lot of support over the years, when he would continue to turn up at NSO to watch the Bears in the NSW Cup.. kicking Coach is always a good option.. Michael Buettner is also lending a lot of support,.. Now there’s the guy who should run the CRL… he has a great track record being boss of the Toyota Cup..and he actually lives on the CC..
Sth Auckland First XV said | January 20th 2010 @ 6:53pm (3 weeks ago) | Report comment
You league supporters are in DREAMLAND!! You guys constantly talk about a new team in NZ, Wellington, but there is no support for a second NRL team in NZ. If there was, the NRL would have done it already. Wellington already have well-supported Super 14 and NPC Union teams. They have the A-League soccer, and of course the All Blacks roll into town every now and then. The market is saturated with high quality sport. The last Kiwi v Kangaroo test there drew less than 10,000, less than 33% stadium capacity, and most of those tickets were free giveaways to Rugby Union members. No one is interested in NRL in Wellington (in fact outside of South Auckland). Face it, the only place the NRL can expand into is PNG but who wants to go into a country where 99% of the people don’t have enough money to buy a flushing toilet??? Wake up and smell the coffee please!!!
Col the Bear said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
gallop probably won’t be around in 2017 and onto other projects, isn’t his tenure up in 3 years..probably helping out with the soccer world cup if Aust gets up..
oikee said | December 3rd 2009 @ 4:13pm | Report comment
To be honest, i think 3 years and the next t/v deal with a new commission is enough time to build a warchest, if they really need a war chest. We have run on the smell of a oily rag now for a century, why do we need money. ? It only brings out a aggressive nature. I dont even want to see a NRL worried about other codes, just worry about making your own prioduct the best it can be, everyone will be happy.
They should bring back the bears, and have another team ready to go by then. If the storm are bought by someone, then Perth could be a good option for expansion. Cheers.
Jaredsbro said | December 3rd 2009 @ 5:18pm | Report comment
Hey Col is there a bidding website or something. Being a fan of the Red and Blacks (well the North Sydney Red and Blacks anyway
) I’d love to find out what’s going on and when and what I can do (on this side of the dirch) and when
By the way why was the NRL working under any other system than a tender process: AFL, FFA (I think) and SANZAR all work under that kind of approach…was it something to do with overexpansion growing pains a la Superleague?
Col the Bear said | December 5th 2009 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
Jaredsbro; we have our official website up at http://www.centralcoastbears.com.au that is where the membership is and also merchandise. launched a couple of weeks ago
there is also the 50 000 bears supporter site.. at last count 11.750 members..
on other news a quick turn around and Cronulla will field a team in the 12 team NSW cup next year.. and the Bulls gone back to being Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs.. . comp extended to 25 rounds to coincide with the NRL.. seems the NSW RL are starting to get a move on now with the new commission about to kick off.. in 2011 Manly and canberra are also expected to return to the NSW Cup…other teams.. Balmain, Western suburbs, Newtown, Auckland, Melbourne,shellharbour dragons, windsor, wenty, and the Newcastle feeder club..
oikee said | December 8th 2009 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
Stop wasting your time Col, you might be better off starting up a a-league club, with the dinosaurs we have running the game, read below.
oikee said | December 8th 2009 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
So they had their meeting today, the ARL and News limited, and what have we found out, whoever wrote this article, you are spot on. Just more of the same. As a matter of fact, its that more of the same we wont be having another meeting about it for a month and a half,. And further more, to top it off, i see the old dinosaurs are out in force, all of which i thought were long gone. Ross livermore, John Quale, and many other mates of mates, all poking their nose into the limelight again. Why dont we just dig up dally, see if he wants onto the commission.
Hey Steve, do me a favor will you, no more Commission posts now for a least a year. And even then if we are any closer to a deal, like you said buddy, just more of the same. R.I.P rugby league. I am off, i have to get the chook raffles started up again.
oikee said | December 8th 2009 @ 5:38pm | Report comment
Come on Steve, let these posts through mate, it makes for good reading, listen to this one, Ken Arthurson,? Now dont get me wrong, but he is still making money from the game somewhere in QLD, this guy must have been sixty when i first started going to State of Origin, and he is still around somewhere running something, ? Mate, the game is being run and has been run by, not just dinosaurs, but living fossils. Dead set.
Anyhow, back to packaging me birds for the leagues club, they need all the help they can get.
Col the Bear said | December 9th 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment
Doesn’t deter us oikee. at all. we will keep going and going and going.. gone to far now, and we are not taking a backward step anymore..the RL is changing almost daily …it could be a different story next week.. what it is showing to me is that, there appears to be a power struggle going on somewhere.. News want to exit.. but looks like not sure how to do it….They do need some true independents running the Commission.Dr Merv Cross name has been mentioned I see..he’s not on the NRL board anymore and is highly commended in society..
Maybe there has been a bit fo a backlash with Colin Love.at the helm….
On the WC,Maybe what the NRL should do is try and and get along with the Soccer..and work out a solution.. whereas the AFL have taken a hard line..remember it’s the federal govt who is pushing for the WC throwing in all the money for the bid.. might just work in the NRLs favour..
oikee said | December 9th 2009 @ 11:50am | Report comment
Fair enough Col, if anything, i would rather see Bears in, Manly out. Yes i have just been onto the AFL site and given them a look at the future, instead of spending hundreds of millions on old stadium, just build a brand new one in Brisbane, the only city that does not have a 80-100 thousand stadium. We have the builders, best stadium builders in the world, and we need more than just patch work to look good. Anyhow, we will see if any dinosaurs in the government dont realise that this is a oppotunity to build something special.
Ships, (new docks) boats ferries, mono rails, clubs shops, access to the islands, access to the gold coast, it will have everything we need to promote to the world, but no, dinosaurs will just plug holes in old stadiums.
Brisbane has the port area and could build a stadium right out over part of moreton bay. Turn the whole area into party central.
Sth Auckland First XV said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:07pm (3 weeks ago) | Report comment
There was so much hype about this commission being a “New Dawn”, but in actual fact, 16 blokes have written their signature on a piece of paper and nothing will change. This Commission is just a smokescreen to focus people’s attention away from the real issues facing league, namely the likelihood that it will not survive the next decade or two. The NRL crow about how 2009 was the best year it’s ever had, and yet the major stakeholder in the game, News Limited, is pulling out. Doesn’t anyone smell a rat here? League is not a game with strong foundations – News Limited’s takeover of league was a sign of a weak sport, not a strong one – there’s no way News Limited could take control of rugby union or cricket worldwide for example. Those shaky league foundations are still there. Why do you think Crowe has bought Souths. Crowe’s a Rugby Union supporter from way back. He’s a kiwi for God’s sake! It won’t surprise me if his long term aim is to bring Souths back to their rightful home in the Australian Rugby Union. I just don’t think the average league supporter understands how much danger their game is in. The News Limited gravy train is drying up fast. That’s why the 16 clubs are trying to move fast on this…watch this space.