David Gallop deserves his chance

Crosscoder, you keep talking about "right of veto". Why don't you ever address the issue - the 16 NRL clubs currently have no vote - nor should they - so why is the NSWRL selling - or giving - any vote to the 16 NRL clubs? If 48 people is a "cast of thousands" - why are you supporting a model of 26? Is 26 somehow less intrusive in the luxury meeting room in Sydney centre of the universe RLHQ? You're just subscribing - or pushing - the pseudo-logic that the brainless pokie-playing derro's in Sydney subscribe to. You haven't stated any case whatsoever why the NRL clubs should have any vote at all.

If it has so mny loopholes how have two clubs lost seasons to falling foul of it?

Rugby League is doing well. By now if all went the plan of other codes we should be attending its funeral. Its a far cry from that. League is doing very very well. despite the AFL saying it has our national game that is not true. 54% of the population dont consider it our national game. I think League can do very well. Despiite all its problems it is doing very very good.

If the IC is to succeed, all Rugby League entities should have a right to vote on all matters. The Queensland Cup and NSW cup (or whatever they are now called!) are both well run competitions and as such have as much right to representation as the NRL clubs!. The leader of the IC must be a person with a proven business acumen. I believe that the IC is a must for our sport, but the format of who is on the committee needs to b looked at. If this committee is not performing, there must be a way of initializing a 'vote of no confidence from the Rugby league community.

Don't the QRL and NSWRL have right of veto anyway?. Again the CEOs will not decide,they vote them in,the commissioners will.It may well not be to the club or clubs liking,but to the game.In fact the commissioners may well say ,we want a 2nd brisbane side,a CQld side.That would trhill QLd but not the other states. I reiterate the grassroots devopment headquarters of the rugby league will be sited ,in the very same building as the I.C.That suggests to me,a certain priority for grassroots. If somehow the suggestion that there should be a cast of thousands (48 on the I.C.),the word unwieldly immediately springs to mind.Bit like the various RLs in NSW . Well what happens 6 months down the line,through QRL tactics and still no agreement,with a TV contract to be negotiated,ad the game loses out.The grassroots IMO would be the first effected.Why? Because the game again would be undersold.If that happens,someone is going to get a real kick up the Kyber. If CEOS were on the new I.C. I would agree with you.They are not.There will be people no doubt of the highest regard,in business and sporting circles.The inference they will be stool pigeons for the clubs,could be classified as an effront to their integrity. I do not wnat anyone from the current NSWRL or QRL on the board.

Well Said Sporty.

The QRL doesn't want to dominate any vote - they want to retain the voting rights they currently have. It is the clubs that want to dominate. They currently have NO VOTE whatsoever, but seem to think a model that gives them 16 votes and the QRL and NSWRL 1 vote each is somehow independent or fair. Yes, I know your NSWRL is run by a bunch of puppets looking out for your broke Sydney clubs - and the NSWRL execs are being offered positions as commissioners if they vote in the IC. But the QRL looks out for all Queensland regions and ensures grassroots rugby league is looked after. Club officials are paid to look after their clubs - they are the least independent mob in the game and are attempting to scam the fans by pretending their proposal is independent. The QRL proposal seeks to achieve an equal vote for QRL and NSWRL combined as compared to the clubs combined. That is not just reasonable - it is a generous concession.

One thing I would respond to .Michael Searle tried to get the GC in a couple of years earlier than when they were accepted.It was in a story of how he built up the GC Titans.He was rejected ATT ,and he was determined to get back on the job to make the bid even more compelling. So the NRL under Gallop, in fact wanted to ensure any future bids were watertight.So Gallop was involved in them getting in eventaully ,and yes Searle did all the hard yakka. . The only major aspect of Gallop's admin I can criticise ,is the TV contract,first ,second and third.But offering the code to a TV station owned half by that station,makes it a double edged sword.the two masters theory holds up.There are other things i tajke issue with him on,but they are well down the pecking order. memberships? The NRL clubs relied individually on grants from league's clubs to fund additional monies.Maybe the clubs should have shown initiiative years ago ,to look into memberships.Clubs employ the players,they are responsible for income in additon to the NRL grants.Gallop doesn't employ the players nor does the NRL.None of these NRL clubs(with all the pokie profits) own their own ground,with the exception of the Sharks.that smackso of grossly inefficient management. I agree with Monday night football.A dog of an idea. My idea with an extra two teams ,is an addiitonal Sunday afternoon game,and a twilight Sunday game,and no Monday night football.That would keep the fans and Tv ststions happy. Please LOL,the NRL are not waiting for the Sharks to fall over,in fact they want them to survive.They most likely have seen the A League put dots on maps,and look right royal charlies on those decisions.eg GC and Nth Qld. Don't get me started on the i.C debate.ATM it looks like someone north of the border wants a QRL dominated one ,and wants to delay the process further geeez. Would the NSWRL and the QRL kindly leave stage left,this is the 21st century. In fact there will be a few from the old brigade pensioned off ,when the i.C rolls into town,and none too soon.

Karlos, The game continues to do well because of the quality of the product. Gallop and co have been riding its coat tails for years, without providing any real substance to its management.

Karlos In regards to the NZ Herald how times has changed League is slowly growing despite the conflict of interest and mishaps every now and again but I hope these mistakes are minimum once the IC come in. I'm sick of the die league die talk from various critics from other codes such O Neil i don't wish any death of any code even if I don't like I want all codes to prosper no matter how big they are domestically or internationally.

The deal he got with 9 was lauded as a great thing at the time and whilst he could have should have been able to squeeze more from 9 and fox considering what the AFL got with their ratings, overall he has done Rugby League a great service. Maybe News has told him to pull his socks up and look like an independent man so as to get enough support to be the new admin CEO only to fall back into line once he is there. The game has done remarkably well under Gallop considering how little money there has been and he has certainly outshone Decimeter or whatever his name is, O'Neill and Lowry in giving the game a very good look for advertisers and sponsors. See Bundy has left RU and are looking at NRL and AFL. I was shopping today with the Mrs and saw Wallabies Jersey's on sale for $39.95 (SML Adult) to $59.95 for large. Rugby: Union boss tips death of league 12:00AM Friday August 20, 1999 NZ Herald Australian Rugby Union chief John O'Neill yesterday predicted there would be no such thing as rugby league in 20 years. But O'Neill said earlier press reports that he wanted to kill off rugby league and had called on the International Rugby Board to fund a $A100 million takeover of the code were exaggerated. However, he believed globalisation would force a merger between the two codes, with rugby union dominating.

The only problem with giving an Independent Commission "a chance" is that, once they're in - they're in. Only the Independent Commissioners vote for future Commissioners. So if they don't get the right people at the start - it is too late to change them. No, the Independent Commission doesn't sound like a very good model, does it...

Are you kidding? Simply compare what the NRLs greatest competitior has acheived in the last 10 years up against what Gallop has acheived at the NRL and its glaringly obvious he has to go. Michael Searle was the leading force behind the Gold Coast consortium with little impact from NRL HQ so dont count this as a Gallop achievement. The last TV deal was horrendous and the guy that signed off on that deal =s still employed at the NRL. Fancy signing a deal that allows Channel to dictate when NRL games are played. Fancy signing a deal that allows channel 9 to decide if it will broadcast NRL into Melbourne. (despite the poor ratings down there, the contract should have stipulated Storm game slive into Vic., like the AFL did in sydney where even though the Swans continue to rate behind the Iron chef on SBS, it is shown live). Monday night Footy ?- A crock of an idea that continuees to bleed the clubs.Allowing the 3rd best match of the round to be played on a Monday night is a fair dinkum joke. The fans are crying out for more daytime footy. Have we seen any sort of strategy from the NRL on expansion? No. If they were fair dinkim about the Central coast or Perth they would implement a strict criteria for these teams to be even considered for inclusion. (Suns already have 10,000 Members prior to kick off next year - a condition imposed from the AFL prior to entry). From afar it looks liek the NRLs strategy is to wait for the Sharks to fall over and then simply replace with CC or Perth. Brilliant. Why wasnt the NRL focussed on Membership 10 years ago? Surely one must look at what their competitors are doing and if they are doing it well, look to replicate it. Not our David, it took a few of the Sydney clubs to take the initiative (Rabbitohs and Bulldogs) and commence replicatiing the AFL business model. The NRL have only since woken up in the past 2 years to the opportunties that a strong Membership base can provude clubs. David was brought in as a peace maker 10 years ago and did a good job for 2 years during the turbulence. Its now time for a younger, more commercially astute CEO that will bring along a broom and clean those at NRL HQ that are past their expiry date (their are alot of them) and someone that is willing and able to take Demetriou and his mob from down south.

Hopefully common sense will prevail. The ideal scenario for absolutely everyone (broadcasters, AFL/NRL, fans in minor states),is that you get to see the minor code on the secondary channel in the minor state - it's so logical it absolutely hurts to think that anyone would try and stop that!! If that were to occur - exect Nine to make a big play to absolutely sew up Friday nights (and Monday nights) right around the nation with the rights to both codes - and they will pay top dollar to do it.

Changes to the anti-siphoning laws are expected to be released in weeks. All the talk has been about what this will mean for the next TV deal for the NRL and AFL. But what does it mean for the current deal? Will we see Channel 9 able to broadcast Friday and Sunday NRL games on GO in the southern states in 2011? The current laws prevent prescribed events being broadcast on secondary digital channels before they have been braodcast on the main channel. Digital channels didn't exist when the last AFL deal was signed. Does the AFL agreement prevent Channels 7 and 10 broadcasting games on their digital channels in NSW and QLD in 2011?

Great article Mrs Gallop!. -- sorry guys, he has to go if ONLY for his inability to make Channel Nine give most of Australia a bad deal!. not to mention a salary cap that has been rorted (Legally or illegally) and make no mistake the current salary cap has more loopholes in it than an Woollen Jumper. If Gallop leads the IC, not much will change unless News LTD and Channel Nine allow him to do it!!.

While Gallop is not at fault for players indiscretions his response is too often "those found guilty will be severely punished." The proper path is to first establish IF an offense was committed, and only then IF an offense WAS committed what the severity of the offense WAS, AND ONLY THEN decide if/what punishment is appropriate. His statements always indicate an immediate presumption there is guilt to answer for, and a pre-decision of punishment is designed to completely protect the business - at the cost of offering absolutely no protection to the player(s); in short it is pure self interest. In the long term this separation of the business from the machine will only lead to disaster. The protection the interests of the NRL must extend to the entire organisation: the offices AND the machine. Those parts of the organisation wearing shorts and jerseys rolling around in the mud each weekend deserve 100% as much protection as those in suits sitting in the boardroom. Gallop is not providing the players that right, he is not offering the players the protection they deserve, he is not the right man for the job.

I believe Gallop has paid his dues running the show,and having to front the media when some indiscretion alleged or factual hits the newstands.He has come down hard ,which is obvious,and is in the awkward situation of having ,two masters,within the one administration,one his former employer. The game is hardly going backwards under his current regime, and no doubt under a new non involved News I.C,will have the opportunity to manage without the perception of bias or "the lackey' aspersion, being cast his way. The fact he looks to have aged quickly in the last couple of years, indicates to me he puts his body on the line(full committment), when it comes to the code he manages. But I will say this David if you are "listening"', $1billion is the word, you go get em.

Agree he deserves a chance without News looking over his shoulder - his handling of the Storm case and his comments pro expansion to the Central Coast Bears and WA Reds in the past 6 months have been promisising.