Australian Rugby League chairman John Chalk has extended an olive branch to disgruntled NRL clubs conceding their demands for extra funding are “affordable and sustainable”.
It wasn’t immediately clear however if Chalk’s comments referred to an up front payment clubs are seeking in 2012 as well as their demands for a TV rights bonus payment adding up to $36 million.
Some of the 16 NRL clubs have reportedly threatened not to sign club agreements to play in the 2012 competition without assurances of extra funding.
They’re seeking an extra $8 million dollars ($500,000 per club) paid in quarterly instalments next year and also want a $1.6 million advance payment on the next broadcast rights TV deal which will be thrashed out next year.
The partnership committee of News Limited and the NRL which controls the financial arm of the game, met last week and rejected plunging the game into debt by taking out an $8 million loan.
Their view was they weren’t prepared to put the game into debt to get some clubs out of debt which didn’t sit well with some club bosses.
Chalk said on Monday before an ARL board meeting in Sydney to discuss the hot topic that in his personal view the NRL clubs’ funding request represented an affordable and sustainable increase for the 2012 season.
“Contrary to reports, the ARL has not taken a position to oppose NRL club requests for additional funding for the 2012 season,” Chalk said in a statement.
“I have called for an urgent meeting of the ARL (board) tomorrow (Tuesday) to discuss the issue and for a position.”
The cash-strapped clubs have adopted a hard line approach saying they either get a $500,000 payment or they won’t be signing any agreements for 2012.
There are fears however the stand-off could seriously harm the incoming independent commission’s ability to get on with the job and also make administrators look amateurish in their dealings.
A couple of NRL clubs already on the financial brink say they can’t hang on until a new TV deal is stitched up and need the funding now to survive.
© AAP 2012Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
The Crowd Says (4) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Australian Rugby league, John Chalk, NRL, Rugby League
October 25th 2011 @ 8:02am
BA Sports said | October 25th 2011 @ 8:02am | Report comment
Being an NRL club CEO must be the easiest job in the world! You don’t need to develop sustainable business plans, you just run things at a loss and ask for handouts! If clubs are running at a loss, giving them hand outs isn’t going to make them any better…
End of the day, there is one club who makes money, they are the only club who is currently sustainable – handouts don’t make clubs sustainable, they make them complacent and lazy. The Broncos clearly have the model that works which is what should be duplicated, but as we know that would mean rationalisation of clubs in Sydney which we all know won’t happen because nobody will make the tough call.
October 25th 2011 @ 1:20pm
mushi said | October 25th 2011 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Um you know that would mean a competition with only 3 teams right? 1 team per 2 million people in a rugby league heartland so 2 in Sydney and 1 in brsibane.
October 25th 2011 @ 2:33pm
BA Sports said | October 25th 2011 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Oh well – I guess that means the league isn’t viable…
October 26th 2011 @ 1:01am
Ian Whitchurch said | October 26th 2011 @ 1:01am | Report comment
Its pretty clear to me that sports clubs – of *any* code – will always overspend to achieve success.
Therefore, it doesnt matter how much you give them, they’ll just spend it and come back whining for more.
In the specific case of the NRL, the same clubs who are whining they are poor are also simultaneously overspending on upcapped coaching contracts (ie Hasler to Canterbury on 4 years $3m), and any money the NRL gives the clubs will disappear either into the same black hole, or into player salaries as the players ask for an increase in the salary cap.
The solution is to follow the best-administered league in Australia, which is linking extra funding to club-by-club plans of how the money will be spent and the outcomes from it.
This is the key paragraph on page 16 of the AFL’s Future Funding package
“If during the period 2012 14 departures from budgets/forecast and /or agreed strategy and the club requires additional funding support, the AFL will:
– Conduct a detailed review (internal or independent) of strategy, operations, management and Board of the club
– Have the right to change 2012‐14 funding packages dis‐equal component only) in light of departures from forecast and/or
plan”.
http://mm.afl.com.au/portals/0/2011/finals/club_funding_presentation_260911.pdf