Chris Sandow celebrates his try during the round 21 NRL match against the Canterbury Bulldogs. AAP Image/Action Photographics, Renee McKay
We have all been waiting patiently for the Independent Commission to get up and running. Everybody recognises its importance for the next stage of the game’s growth. But it has to be done properly.
I have a real fear that the current structure being proposed will in the long run lead to the same bureaucracy that has plagued our great game, and created the mismanagement that has held us back in recent times.
Underpinning this view is the fact that commissioners under this new structure will elect new commissioners to the board through succession planning.
How can there be any real accountability when they are answerable to themselves?
I know that clubs will have the right to remove a commissioner if there is just cause, but the clubs really only represent a small part of the rugby league community.
In essence, this process is flawed and will result in a significant power shift to clubs which may not necessarily be in the interests of all levels of rugby league long term. Good governance is what is needed to take the game forward.
It won’t be successful if it is not structured to suit the needs of all stakeholders in the game.
I think NRL club members should be eligible to both vote for commissioners (provided they have held a membership for at least three NRL seasons consecutively) and nominate to become a commissioner (again under the same above minimum criteria and other essential board member criteria that would be set-up in the commission charter).
The benefit that this would bring is true independence. It would ensure that stakeholders have a say in the running of the game and in my opinion bring the best candidates into the picture (those that would not otherwise get a look in as they are not in NRL cliques).
One only has to look at the current squabbling now by both News Limited and the ARL to know that this process is compromised and flawed.
If you need any more evidence have a look at the comments from South’s CEO Shane Richardson regarding the potential Lions tour for 2012. “Gone are the days when the English tell us they are going to have a tour and we acquiesce to it. It’s about protection of the players’ interests.
“It’s about protection of how many games they play. From the clubs’ point of view, too many times in the past they have been taken for granted that they’re just going to rubber-stamp things.
“Really that shouldn’t happen. What was pleasing last Tuesday was that the NRL got us involved in discussions regarding it.
“Moving forward with the commission it won’t be the way it was before, where decisions are made (by the Rugby League International Federation) in Singapore or Hong Kong without discussions with the clubs.
“It won’t happen again.”
It is already beginning and the Commission is not even up and running yet… let’s fix this before it is too late!
TV rights have been talked to death on this site since the AFL was able to overachieve on its last two TV deals. It is no coincidence that the AFL was able to achieve this. Their deals are built of the back of a strong and unified management that is able to sell the future prospects of their game better than we can.
There is no point arguing that the NRL out rates the AFL. This was the case the last time our deal went to the table. When TV companies look at rights they have one eye on the future and one eye on the present. The AFL sells its growth strategies better than we can and this is why they are able to keep growing their deals. This is why an effective independent commission is essential.
This will at a minimum give us a pro-active and unified management structure that will help us better sell the story of our game and its future direction. That in itself though is only half the battle. Where we can really grow our revenue streams through TV is through differentiating ourselves from our competitors.
Implementing the following points of differentiation will result in a deal that in my opinion will not only match the AFL’s current deal, but will eclipse it:
1. Multi-casting of Friday night football and Monday night football on both pay and FTA TV. This will increase the value of our product twofold. Firstly, Friday night football is currently being restricted to two states. Pay TV recognise the value of Friday night football and would pay a lot of money for access to this timeslot, particularly in the states where Channel Nine currently do not show league.
A win for the NRL both in enhancing their return on their product and on improving its market reach. In addition Monday night football would be a more valuable addition to FTA than any of the current weekend fixtures. It is already a high rating event on pay TV and it would have no competition from other sports on a Monday night on FTA.
It would also be more marketable to FTA because market reach would be higher on a week night when more viewers are tuned into television rather than weekends where viewer time is split with other activities. This is a no brainer!
2. If the NRL does expand by two teams in the near future, than the key timeslot that needs to be looked at is the Sunday 6:00pm kick off. Sunday night offers the advantage of a high market penetration TV timeslot. It is also a family friendly time and would allow parents to take their kids to games and still be home by a reasonable hour.
3. Dedicated State of Origin (SoO) program. This should be sold as a stand-alone product along with the introduction of a Pacific Islands versus NZ Origin contest. SoO should move to a Monday timeslot with the Pacific Island Origin to be played on the Saturday night before origin.
No other games to be played during Origin weekends (i.e. NRL byes) unless there is an equivalent under 20’s program introduced at the same time (as TV filler). What this would do is minimise the impact of market cannibalisation from the NRL and increase the focus on Origin (i.e. enhance its value to any FTA organisation).
The Monday timeslot gives Origin its own timeslot (like Wednesday nights) with no competition from other sports. It also allows supporters to plan long weekends where they can then attend both Origin games. A massive boost for tourism if scheduling packages are set-up to cater for this. Most importantly it gives the representative players an extra two days recovery to ensure they are available for the following weekend’s games.
To assist with any risk of scheduling issues, any rounds preceding Origin should commence on the Saturday (i.e. no Friday night games). This will ensure all players involved in Origin get a minimum five days recovery and the quality of the NRL is protected.
4. Introduce a three Test mid-season series between Aus vs. NZ multi cast on both pay TV and FTA on a Sunday night (exc. ANZAC day Test). The first Test should be played on ANZAC day as a stand-alone game with the remaining two Tests in this series to be played in July (after Origin) over two consecutive weekends (with no NRL played over these weekends – mid-season break).
In addition there should also be a Samoa vs. Tonga two Test series staged and a PNG vs. Fiji two Test series staged over the same consecutive weekends covering Friday and Saturday nights (both multi-cast on pay TV and FTA). What this will bring is a unique international program that over time will significantly grow the profile of rugby league, the NRL and most importantly the international game.
I also feel that this will be rugby league’s major weapon in the fight against the AFL as this will better enable the NRL to market the game to the many Pacific Island demographics which currently reside in Australia. It will also assist us in increasing our market penetration into the Pacific region and will greatly improve the profile of rugby league in the region.
People will probably criticise this by saying that the NRL season will go too long. My suggestion to fix this is to reduce the season by two rounds to twenty four and drop all byes and split rounds during the season. There will be enough breaks during the season under this schedule to cater for fatigue.
Any representative players can be rested by their clubs for a game here and there if they participate in all representative games. This in my opinion would be hugely successful in ensuring a significant TV deal.
And finally we come to State of Origin. The impact that Origin is having on international rugby league in our region is profound. The profile of this contest is now such that it is growing to the detriment of the international game in the Pacific. But it is part of the Australian game and must be preserved.
So where do you start with international rugby league? It seems every time we make significant strides in this area we seem to undermine the whole concept and give the game another uppercut. I can’t help but feel sick to my stomach with the prospect of a talent such as Uate being non eligible to represent Fiji given his inclusion for NSW in origin. It is time that the ARL stopped killing international rugby league for the benefit of the Kangaroos.
It is this self-interest that has resulted in the Kangaroos being unbeatable for many years and the international game gaining no traction whatsoever in new developing regions. What needs to happen for the good of the game is a relaxing of the Origin eligibility rules in Australia to ensure that Pacific rugby league players can play Origin and be eligible to represent their nation of birth. These are the rules that need to be introduced once the Pacific island origin program is introduced.
– To be eligible for Origin (both Australia and Pacific Island), a player must have played his first senior game (i.e. under 18 years) in or for that region/state and or be born in this respective region/state.
If a player satisfies the first step in this criteria, but was not born in this area, than they are only eligible to play origin provided that they are not from any of the advanced rugby league nations (i.e. Australia, NZ, England). Any person born in any these regions must play for their country of birth.
The advantage of this rule is that it restricts the large nations from stripping talent out of the Pacific regions for their own benefit, whist also protecting the integrity of Origin.
Origin must work for the betterment of the international game, not against it!
jonny boy
Guest
players should b allowed to play origin and for figi tonga
Fraser
Guest
Every person in PNG more than 5 years of age knows who Darren Lockeyer, Andrew Johns, Mal Meninga, or Jarrod Hayne is. We love Rugby League.
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
Phil Gould went to PNG either this year or last year. The greeting he received was out of this world! The sort of thing that you would expect for a royal. It was televised during a Frinday night NRL match on Channel 9. The annual PM XIII vs PNG match in Port Moresby ends with fans running onto the field to get up close to the Australian players. "For Meninga's team getting into Lloyd Robson Oval yesterday was the easy bit. Visiting international teams playing at the home of league in Port Moresby always get changed at the hotel, bus to the ground, and then leave in playing kit for the sanctity of their hotel showers. "Getting in was smooth, leaving was another thing,'' Hindmarsh said. "We were doing our little lap to thank everyone and pretty soon one person jumped the fence. Then there was another, and another and before you knew they were all there with us. "The police were there and they got out their sticks and their guns and they tried to keep people back.'' And so the trip to the bus from the middle of the field made the Pamplona running of the bulls look like a walk to the corner shop. "We had to stay together,'' Hindmarsh said. "Guards and police wielded their sticks and we got on the bus.'' But given past Australian visits to the league-mad nation have involved riot police, tear gas and beetlenut-chewing police trying to shoot the locks off stadium gates, yesterday's events merely made the afternoon more exciting. "That's what it's all about,'' Prince said with relish. "You know what to expect if you've been here before but it's still overwhelming.'' http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/hindmarshs-prime-time-in-png/story-e6frexq0-1111117608400 Is that enough evidence for you?
Emric
Guest
qgirl Then all you have to go on is rumour and here-say. Please provide links and evidence to back up what your saying. Thanks Daniel
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
PNG had defeated Great Britain Lions and New Zealand Kiwis. Both victories were posted about 20 years ago in PNG. Rugby league is bigger in PNG than it is in Australia and England. The only difference is infrastructure and wealth. PNG simply does not have the infrastructure or the wealth to fund large-scale competitions that are up to the same standards in Australia and England. When this changes or the NRL/QRL offers a bridge to talented juniors on PNG then you'll end up seeing PNG having the ability to defeat Australia, New Zealand and England.
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
" And all this talk about PNG, a country where most people struggle to put food on the table and are dependant on Australian aid, would hardly qualify as a powerhouse nation – have they ever beaten Australia, or for that matter NZ or Britain" PNG has defeated New Zealand and Great Britain. It was a couple of decades ago, but they were still victories and they still count. :D
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
"{q}Rugby union isn’t as popular in New Zealand, South Africa, the Pacific Islands, Scotland, Ireland and a few other places as rugby league is in PNG.{/q} I think you completely underestimate how popular Rugby Union in New Zealand is. The fact that a game played at 3AM in the morning gets more people out of bed then what the NRL can get to turn on their tv-sets at peek viewing time. As for PNG – there is no scientic way for us to measure the popularity of it in compared to the other nations you’ve meantioned without showing us what pecentage of PNG watches league games when compared." How many Papua New Guineans have access to a TV? How come 50% of the stadia in NZ are empty during rugby union games between professional rugby union sides? Sounds like New Zealanders just aren't that into union. In Papua New Guinea the people will risk death just to climb into a stadium for a rugby league match! I think that right there shows just how much more enthusiastic Papua New Guineans are for the game. Whenever Australian rugby league players make their way to PNG they are treated like movie stars. Even rugby league personalities who do not play the game are treated like royalty in PNG. Remember when Phil Gould went there? That doesn't happen to rugby union players/personalities in NZ. If John Eales or Gordon Bray were to go over to New Zealand then there wouldn't be an entire town out to greet them and carry them around on their shoulders.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Clipper. On that basis your analogy is not worth the keyboard you are utilising,for the very reasons,Tv contracts,qualifying tournaments,sponsorship,cities bidding and stadiums made available,crowds,National govt and local govt and council financial backing and support,womens and students tournaments on at the same time. The fact you note rl is played in pockets in 3-4 countries,spells out in pure unadulerated black and white ,your complete ignorance of the game.In fact there are many countries that play ru,where it is played in" pockets " or a minority sport. I can bore you and everone witless ,with a miriad of links to the event,which bears absolutely no comparison to intnl AFL or boot throwing or underwater hockey. As to your last line comparing a Finnish peasants enthusiasm for AFL to a PNG for rl.Let me advise you the passion is so great at times in PNG,people have gone to the extremes of killing someone.And pray tell how many Finnish players of the 4 post variety in Finalnd compared to PNG's rl tally.' You would have done yourself a favour if you had compared their Finnish enthusiasm with that of a Swedish or norwegian rl player,where the game is starting up. Get your code up professionally or semi pro in more than one country,then you can argue with some venom.
Emric
Guest
{q}Rugby union isn’t as popular in New Zealand, South Africa, the Pacific Islands, Scotland, Ireland and a few other places as rugby league is in PNG.{/q} I think you completely underestimate how popular Rugby Union in New Zealand is. The fact that a game played at 3AM in the morning gets more people out of bed then what the NRL can get to turn on their tv-sets at peek viewing time. As for PNG - there is no scientic way for us to measure the popularity of it in compared to the other nations you've meantioned without showing us what pecentage of PNG watches league games when compared. Aren't the reds posting better attendence figures then the broncos?
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
Isn't the Bank of Beirut the major sponsor of the Lebanese rugby league competition? Who sponsors the rugby union competition of Lebanon?
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
"png are just coming out of their shell and the passion they show for league is the same in samoa, tonga, cook island, fiji, new zealand, wales and south africa for rugby but they have televisions." I guess that's why half of the stadiums in NZ and SA are empty for the national competitions? I remember reading some where that some of the teams in the Currie Cup average no more than 900 per match. Sure doesn't sound like there isn't that much passion for THOSE teams.
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
Emric, What are you on about? I never spoke about rugby league's popularity in NZ. I spoke about the respective popularity of rugby league and rugby union in PNG and New Zealand. I wasn't comparing rugby union in PNG with rugby league in NZ.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Frustrating Dave.Read what I stated,the RLWC 1954 had 4 teams involved.The instigator was France who were short of funds(wonder why ,nothing to do with what happened in the preceeding years LOL). There were in fact handful of other countries involved playing the game at the time.Any expansion of note, did not happen til the 90s (eg Fiji after the world 7s).Also some countries started ,then fell by the wayside. The real growth in numbers of countries playing came in the 2000s onwards.More so because of the hard work (voluntary) by many individuals in those countries.You can google every which way,and check on RLEF websites,to get a clue.
Dave
Guest
people get killed in samoa, tonga and fiji for following the wrong rugby team or school team but its more civilised now but still happening now and then. png are just coming out of their shell and the passion they show for league is the same in samoa, tonga, cook island, fiji, new zealand, wales and south africa for rugby but they have televisions.
Dave
Guest
murdoch wanted both league and rugby but fell for it and the irb, nzru, saru and aru didnt sell the game out like rugby league innz, australia and northern england.
Dave
Guest
Are you saying from1950 to1988 there were only four nations that played rugby league?
kovana
Guest
Okay... @ Parra.. What has happened to you?
King of the Gorgonites
Roar Guru
i am of the opinion that they have made a mistake by expanding the next WC to 14 teams. im not sold on the idea. I liked the idea of the super pool. it created more meaningful and high quality games. that will be lost with the new format. over expansion of the WC concept will help enable its critics. just my thoughts. i would hav left it as an 8 - 10? team tournamment.
clipper
Guest
Crosscoder - you have misread my reply. I did not say Finnish and Latvian cities would be interested in hosting an Aussie Rules WC - I said they would be interested in hosting a Boot Throwing WC! I continually say the AFL thinking they have a WC is laughable, like the league WC - I'm not talking it up at all. But good on both of them for trying, I never said PNG should be excluded, just highlighting the fact that they could never be seen as contenders, and the fact that it is one of the strongest RL nations doesn't say much for the depth of competition. My analogy with boot throwing is thus: They are both played a lot in two countries; they are both played in pockets in 3-4 countries, and they both have a few teams in other countries. RL may have more financial clout, but would you say a Finnish peasant would be less fervent about his game than a PNG highlander?
GrecoRoman
Guest
I think you are overstating the strength of the situation for Rugby League in Lebanon. Things are going great there in terms of developing the game from nothing, but it's still only a small comp of a handful of clubs (7 teams). The exciting thing is that even though the number of clubs is small, they are running some junior age group comps and really that's where the future lies. I don't know why, but here in Australia there is this view that the game is massive there with lots of TV coverage and interest. It's still a tiny sport there, but does have a base there now, especially amongst the Palestinian diaspora. I can assure you that it is developing, slowly but surely.