How to avoid a Super League War II

The independent commission needs to forget about News Ltd and focus on grassroots football, with extra focus on the game in the bush. I have some ideas about how they can do this, but I won't share them on here because I don't want them to be pinched by the AFL and ARU. I'll send my ideas to the QRL.

"SOO started in 82 after borrowing it from the AFL" It started in 1980.

Yes and a stunner.Motto: rugby league attracts stunning talented grandmothers. She helped provide one of the top advertising promos for sport worldwide ATT.

Johnno - Again, Mr Murdoch has never offered the world a piece of ingenuity at any level. He copies, steals, and dominates with money. The game he plays is called Monopoly - and Governments generally put rules in place to stop individuals controlling countries, or the entire world. You seem to have a belief that pay tv can somehow offer individuals more money than free-to-air. This is pure fantasy. If the NRL were to show all games live via a selection of different free-to-air stations, then the NRL's revenue stream would be the same as selling all, or part of the rights to pay tv. I would also have an extra thousand dollars in my pocket each year to spend on attending more games live, club merchandise, and a trip to Brisbane, and/or Melbourne to watch a State Of Origin game. I agree with you regarding the salary cap - I've never liked it. There should be an alternate system in place. I have always argued that a person's income is their own private affair. I've also said let the bigger boys move to "greener pastures" for more bucks if that's what they want. You'll find a lot of them won't make the move because of friends, family, and the lifestyle that Australia offers. For every one that jumps ship, there are two new ones chomping at the bit, to take his place.

Well Dean this is the question . You say stealing the game is immoral let spits this into place for what it is worth try and write it in really quikc short detail. Who is the owner of the gam eof rugby league. I say no one is no one has patented the exact rules. The uk super league had different rules, to NRL. Who owns the the so called game rules of rugby league, there are multiple versions just like rugby super 15 has different rules to test rugby. Who is the owner of rugby league and who is the copy cat is it rupert Murdoch via news corp , is it the NRL, QRL, NSWRL, ARL, Englsh super league, French rugby league, russian rugby league, USA rugby league, Countrt rugby league (CRL), just who is the owner and who is the copy cat. It makes it impossible to enforce. and why should the NRL own the rules to the game of rugby and which version , or who owns rugby union or who owns soccer or ice hockey which have different rules in different leagues. You open a huge amount of confusion and can of worms Dean . ANd as for greedy players wouldlike your attitude Dean they would look at you at restricting there ability to make as much dollars$$$$$$ as they want, because your restricting pay tv's dominance. The players would not buy you a free lunch(steak sandwich dean), SBW and Quade cooper would not like fans like you who stand in there way of potentialy ,making more $$$$ what do you have to say to players like SBW or QUade cooper, or players who could internationals plying there trade in the englsh super league(english super league() french rugby willie mason, SBW, and Japan rugby craig wing. Are these people bad, and the countless others Matt king, micheal monaghan, and all the other kiwi and aussie players over there. Heck craiig gower had a stint playing for italy and french rugby, are all these layer greedy i don't think players would like you mate, you would be stopping pay tv making big $$$$$ for them. What do you have to day to that Dean and others on my opinions here.

Johnno - The immoral one in my eyes, is the person who steels an idea and attempts to make it their own. In my eyes Johnno, Rupert stealing the game of Rugby League for his own personal profit, is no different to a Chinese company stealing the design of an I-Phone, I-Pad, Or I-Pod, and attempting to make that product their own. What Rupert attempted was theft - and Rupert achieved this via the protection of his solicitors, attorneys, and QC's. There's no difference to what Rupert did back then, to what he currently does - and again with protection from the legal system which somehow protects him from phone hacking charges - where as you or I would be spending a minimum of 20 years behind bars. If Rupert was creative enough to develop a new game and take that to the world, then I would take my hat off to him. However he doesn't, didn't , and won't - because there's not a single creative bone in the old bludger's body. He's a copy of Gordon Gecko from Oliver Stone's Wall Street. His only motto is that "Greed is good".

But kevin under your model would pay tv be able to have total control of rights and for the big matches or total control over the rights if they news corp owned the comp and on ly want dot show there super league comp on pay tv, or would you bring in restive laws about anti-siphoning for your business model that you propose here.

Surely the long term aim is to have 16 teams from Australasia and 16 from Europe to from a World Super League, playing a similar fixture list to the current NFL of 16 matches over 18 weeks, plus play-offs. This could be done using the NFL style as teams from Europe would only be playing 2 matches in the SH and vice-versa. The best players in the game could be put into a draft to begin with, then local players would make up the squads. The top players from Aus could be playing in Europe and vice-versa. very season the draft would happen just like the NFL with the worst team getting 1st pick, trading would also mean movement of players to different teams. Obviously there would be a salary cap. The play-offs would be based in each region until the grand final, that could be played in a neutral venue, maybe South Africa, or Middle East, whoever wants to bid for the game. The teams would become franchises obviously, so who should the 32 teams be, remembering to ensure a national spread and maintaining a foundation link to NSW

Well yes Dean it is within there right it happens in reality now with all sports, at least outside Australia where there is less anti siphoning laws eg US.A and england. And this is the thing who are you blaming dean who is the bad or amoral or unethical one here the orginasiton who puts the money up, or the athletes who take the money. ANd apparently but i defiantly can't confirm but rupert murdoch a few years back attempted to buy the rights to the Olympics total rights on pay tv but was knocked back by the Olympic movement which is there right, but he offered huge dollars to show them. But the olympic movement made a business desicon thinking more people would watch via free to air anyway so more money, olympics is very unique like the soccer world cup as opposed to regula reason sports, it can generate enough money for advertisers and tv ratings as it only short tournament. But i would have zero objection to olympics or soccer world cup begin on pay tv. It is these sports bodies rights to make money and sell there product to who ever they want, and if you the fan want it you have to pay for it,. Why should proffesionalsports entertainment be any different ot any other capitalist industry. It breaks my heart to say this as a proud aussie , but i would not invest tin the uassie pro spirit industry if i had th money or desire to make a living out of pro sport, as the government here has to much control over sport in australia in my opinion due to the harsh a nit siphoning laws, when a sport or sports orginaztion format of the sport get popular they seem to slowly push the organization in having to be on free to air rather than pay tv. Will if the super 15 gets more popular be forced to go on to free to air for the big games, there is already talk that the A-LEAGUE MAY BE FORCED BY THE GOVERnment and soccer's matches be forced to go on free to air. But apparently the FFA is not happy as it will mean less money for them in the tv rigths deals, and you know what that means less money for aleague players, which means less quality imports and even more aussies will leave to play int he league so Aisa and europe..And also less money for socceroos development as les money to spend on grassroots so less quality soccer and rugby in this country. Are all the cricketers bad who went to the ICL. ANd the only reason IPL was formed was the board of india knew they had a rival orginaztion. And people jumped back to the system. Are players who are sacrificing test cricket with the establishment or the established board bad for taking the quick cash that T20 or IPl offer. Are Aussie , NEW Zealander, Fiji,Samoan,And Tongan rugbyplayers, all and for abandoning there home unions to play rugby in JApan and Europe. look at all the former all blacks and even curent all blacks who left when still in there prime and could of offered so much more. Are all the aussie league players bad for taking th money that the english supe rleague which is totally pay tv by the way like the EPL soccer, bad for taking the money rather than stay and play in the NRL for less. And the Olympics is a uniting thing for the world but it is a sport movement just like fifa. ANd both these movements or orginaztions have for years had allegations of corruption. And yes i see nothing wrong with it at all if athletes abadnon the olympics for another version of the olympics. Why don't you dean blame the players for taking more money.Are they the greedy ones. No one is forcing these players to sign contracts with these sports groups rung by rupert murdoch the icl, cricket australia, the NRL , japan rugby, french rugby, english super league, european soccer teams in favour of local teams. SO are the players morally bad for begin disloyal to the establishment or abounding national representation Dean. Capatioalist industries ar elike any other industry it should have no restrictions about who controls a industry. As for monopolies in sport as opposed to media, which for the ska eof democracy needs competition and multiple points of view. If say the NRL, or the ARL were aginst super league they had a monopoly on the game, and had an attitude if you don't like us leave and many teams did. It was only the federal governments in australia that is anti siphoning laws that prevented news having total control of the game here. There argument is thing silk national identity through sport. News wanted to have a private comp with the best players who signed or chose to sign. and the federal government brought in some strange laws that prevented any type of comp with the best players being shown totally on pay tv like say the EPL soccer for example. But who are they to judge who the best rugby league experts , and look what happens. You put restrictions on market revenue to grow in australia, and many of our best players in league and rugby union chase the riches in europe which has much more relaxed anti siphoning rules on sport in any sport. You can not put regulations on private orginastions, wanting to put a product totally on pay tv. The national identity argument is nonsense. Has the EPL being totally on pay tv outsid eof the F.A cup final impacted soccer's popularity. Quite the opposite, soccer has grown massivel yin uk since murdoch took over soccer there. Nice stadiums, best players in the world, big crowds, merchandise sales, better quality a win for the fans a win for the players bank balances and a win for the bank balances of rupert murdoch and news copra, and a win for companies that choose to buy clubs and companies that wish to advertis ein the EPL. To have a government tell an industry the only way you can how your product is on free to air is a constraint of trade on the orginzaiton that puts the money up to run the game, and a constraint of trade eon the players who wish to be part of that organisation. No wonder players in Australia,,NZ and pacific islands nations Fiji, Samoa, Tonga leave to play in Japan and Europe where more way moor erected anti siphoning let the market evolve naturally with out restrictions.

Wont News run the hybrid rugby game over summer to get some leverage...

Let me see Canberra cheated the salary cap (and obviously did so) Harrigan evened up the 1989 GF with a ridiculous penalty to Raiders when Tigers had the ball and were in front SOO started in 82 after borrowing it from the AFL And more importantly they were warned about rebel leagues after the US NFL experience and Pay Tv was coming so they didnt sign up the clubs and were left floundering.. Brisabne entered the comp and created a monopoly in Brisbane (admittedly Murdoch had a hand in that).

Or the gross under achievement

Johnno - Do you think Rupert and NEWS would be within their own rights, based on the model that you have presented above - to begin their own version of the Olympic Games ? NEWS can call it SUPER OLYMPICS. They can have a yearly event - based out of Homebush. They could pay top dollar for the athletes to compete, and beam all events on Pay TV throughout the world - and within a decade would probably make the 4 yearly Olympic Games obsolete.

'1990 - Salary Cap introduced by NSWRL with a cap ranging from $800,000 to $1.5m depending on individual Club circumstances.' That is the history, but do you know, which team got 800 and which 1.5 mill ? I'd say the new ones had the higher ones, please let me know if you have any details. Also my logic is that, if we have had an equal chance for every team to win the comp, perhaps few teams would not have jumped over to SL . From he original 10 teams in SL, only 4 won the GF before 1997, while 11 of the ARL 12 teams won it before (except the Knights). Can you see that some team were dissatisfied with the State of Play at that time? Only 2 new teams started (Mariners and Rams) in the SL so the 8 others were hoping for better Administration beside the money. Look, plenty will be written about Arko in the future, but let’s be fair, sex sells (ask (Hugh Heffner/Playboy) so Arko may have got a good advice from someone, (I doubt from his wife) we’ll never know.

Wasn't Tina Turner already a grandmother at the time ?

Just a quick note, salary cap exemptions were in place for new teams in NSW, but I will come back to you in this subject soon

Arko definitely will go down in History as a very good Administrator, but not a Visionary like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. Putting a sexy girl on stage with big boobs and a good arse is always a guarantied succes, but SEEING the future is another thing. Regardless, that he is Manly man; he filled a ‘sport vacuum’ in Sydney with new teams. I lived in Sydney in the 80’s and amateur Rugby was shown on ABC in Saturday’s arvo, AFL was shown only the highlights. So the rapidly growing population demanded more sporting teams and League filled the vacuum. I hope that the new IC will have visionaries as well not than just paper pushers.

Well Ken good comeback but i will back my points and your points up to say your points in my opinion have no validity or relevance in professional sport , and that is the key word ken Proffesional Sport, not amatuer sport. In amatuer sport the roles of loyalty and virtue to say ones own local district or country for example are valid, and giving what say 1 group of fans want valid, and also playing by the rules to. But in capatilsim where money is on the line and winning is everything, yes proffesionalsim it is about money and entertainment and providing a competition that will win over fans.' And fans run sport in capitalism in any industry the market, not the administrators and defiantly not it should not be the politicians. Pro Sport is not for free. If you want super human athletes, nice stadiums, top coaches, top sport science doctors, top camera technology it is not for free money is part of life. And a pro sports company that wants ot invest tin a game and manipulate there own rules or version of agame are well with in there right to. iT IS THERE MONEY THEY ar einvesitng and putting up. Just as it is the players rights ot sign for any team that gives them the most money or for any sports orginaziton that they want to be employed by. Are all the pacific islander players that have played for Australia and NZ in rugby league, or all the south afircna cricketers who have played for england in cricket, disloyal to the country of births if on the basis that they ar employing for these nations because they are being offered more money than there nations of birth can offer them. Well yes they ar ebbing disloyal technically and ethically and morally yes they are, but in the name of MONEY WHICH IS PART OF LIFE HAVE to put food on the table , pay off the house, support the family they want to go for the highest bidder, and the players themselves do not want to be restricted by contrants of trade saying they can't sign for such and such based on principles of ethics and morality. some players have not chosen to play in the RWC so they can stay loyal and fresh to there clubs who are paying them big $$$$, ar ethyl disloyal to there country , yes technically but in pro sport it is all about money. SBW was right to leave on the basis that he was offered more money. ANd all those pacifc islander player show leave to play for other countires ho pay them more or cricket players to as examples, pro spor tis about money money is part of life in capitalism and in the world we live in, just the relaity weather we like it or not. But in ametruism ethics and morels should be high rlike for example loyalty to the geographic area you grew up in but in pro sport, ;ike any other captaislist industry money and profit and getting your edge on competitors is the only thing that counts. AN loyalty is only bought by money and agreeing to the specific terms of ones contract. Look at all the aussies and kiwis to that have left auST AND NZ to play in engilsh super league (rugby league), french rugby and japan, and forgo the chance at national selection and playing locally. ANd all the majority of the top aussie soccer players playing in europe compared to australia. Are those players morally bad and greedy to Ken , that they put the dollar ahead of local clubs and country, all in the name of making more money. Why i put the argument out there should pro sport as a industry be treated with any moor emotions or contrast or restriction of trade on players and what goes on free to air or pay tv than any other industry. it is undemocratic and a contrast of trade. I would like to hear a comeback ken to your argument and my most recent pints mate or anyone else that wants to comments.

I'm going a little off tangent perhaps but I don't think the fact that we're a 'capitalist' society means that we want everything in our lives to be bought and sold for nothing but maximising profit. The capitalist way is the best of a bad bunch so we accept it, it doesn't mean you can't annoy people by buying and selling their passions. How could you as a fan possibly find the interest to come here and debate these things if you believe sport is only about '1 thing making money and making a profit'? It's similar to the old argument that is sometimes proffered by the RL-hating element of the Union crowd. 'Who are you to complain about players jumping codes for more money when RL was all about getting paid?'. Of course things are not black and white, the original League players wanting a cut of the gate put aside to cover injuries doesn't actually have any correlation with SBW sneaking off from his team and million dollar contract to take up a bigger million dollar contract elsewhere. In the same way, just because we recognise that this is a professional age, we don't want players to simply be a team of hired guns, we're happy for them to get paid - but we still want our players to be passionate and take pride in their jumpers. On your other point, yeah I agree, even though they technically didn't 'win' News has done very well out of the SL war in the end

That's simply not true though, the only comp the Bronco's won without a salary cap was the 97 Super League title. The NSWRL introduced a salary cap in 1990, during Arthurson's time, before Brisbane won their first title in 1992. Even if this wasn't the case though I'm not following your logic, you seem to be saying they should have introduced a salary cap to ward off Super League - which did not have a cap itself. I should clarify that I'm not suggesting that Arko never made an error. Just that the idea being floated that he was a bumbling fool doesn't wash, he was a long term administrator of a successful, growing competition during a difficult transition (to professionalism) - Murdoch never would have thrown that sort of money around in trying to buy it up if the NSWRL/ARL had been a basketcase.