NRL stakeholders need to embrace change, not fight it

these clowns need to stop fighting about money and get on with running the code

There is a solution if you are open to having a look. The administration is well aware of it. It has been on paper for almost 20 years. They wont allow Rugby League players to test & trial it because they dont own the Intellectual Property & every time the creator of the rules gets close to having them tested, a sledge hammer comes down on the development officer wanting it to happen. It is called Universal Pro League. Played over 3 x 30min periods, 10 Players on the field, 5m defence, no markers, no scrums, no points scored from penalties & more.

AR The figures you provided initially were outdated which you concede.therefore stats applicable to 2011,show for the NRL a 28% membership increase and the Sharks a huge increase.As a result they undermine your very argument,the code is stagnating. If any business grows something they'"aint"stagnating.

You have a funny way of showing it AR..

I'm an NRL supporter and explained my views above. Get over yourself mate.

AR Wonder why,would not be due to the fact,as one of only a few rl contributors, as the majority of contributions to this thread have come from AFL people .Rl fans in general steer clear of this site,due to the preponderence of other code flag wavers, that dominate rl forums.Especially as some lecture us on how we should do things and promote their own code as the golden elixir(when in fact it has some shortcomings)... When people make generalisations or cite incorrect/outdated figures such as you did with the Sharks,expect to get hammered.You were wrong and won't admit it.You were wrong on stagnation in the NRL(used as a generalisation) and won't admit it.The State of the Game details spell it out clearly and concisely.Ill informed statements make people emotional. I am glad you noted GWS.might i refer you to today's Australian and some salient quotes." Dale Holmes was sacked yesterday amid claims the comp's 18th team is grappling with mounting budget shortfalls and compliance issues even before it has played a match".So much for the effect of 10,000 members. Then "murmurs of disorganisation have been constant and it is believed that much of the responsibility for compliance with the AFL's rules around contracts has been left with silvagni" Then yet again "Although the Giants are expected to lose substantial amounts of money for years(funny that),financial targets were set that according to club sources,will not be met". Please do not hold GWS up as a shining light. The NRL does not of late ,plant teams in new areas and spend zillions on propping them up.That is why they have a bid system in place,which does not impinge on the codes finances or cash holdings.Money in the end comes from grants via the tv contracts.Again the Tv contracts are the major money earner for the code,which you guys cannot get through your noggins. You need to read carefully what i stated,not what you think I may have stated.Did I suggest the current membership numbers were the be all?I stated the clubs are not just relying on the NRL grants which is a major component,but growing their membership base,sponsorship and merchandising.I even cited the membership growth figures,which you obviously ignored for whatever reason.The clubs(and that includes the Sharks of which I am a long time member) are not sitting idly back ,and ignoring other revenue sources.The sharks grew by 56% in 2011 FHS,and I have no doubt they will grow further next year.. So before you tell us all how to suck eggs,have a look at GWS learning how to restrain expenditure, by working within budgetary guidelines .There are also clubs within your code,that need propping up or handouts,despite the larger numbers of members.

Of course this is a totally crap article that says absolutely nothing constructive by a useless writer and has thus attracted nobody but the usual negative creeps.

They were the 2010 figures. Granted. But either way (looking at 2010 or 2011) they're hardly numbers that set the world on fire. I mean, GWS has 10,000 members and that club barely exists yet. Ultimately, the thrust of all the arguments above remain. What you see as "invading rl boards"..."ridiculous generalisations"..."swamping a rl thread"..."hijacking"...are just people posting their opinions on a sports opinion site. You're the only one here that packs such an emotional and insecure punch. Most people above seem to agree with the bleeding obvious: It's more than just a big TV cheque, NRL clubs needs to be self-sustainable, crowds must lift (esp in Sydney), Memberships (even a whopping 6,500) must improve and there needs to be clear direction from the I.C before expansion. Hardly controversial stuff...and hardly an attack on the NRL or the game, just commonsense opinions. I suggest you read the second line of the article up top.

AR Becoming a habit to set you straight yet once again, you got it wrong .The Sharks memberships for 2011,are not 2,500 but in fact 6,789 up 56% on 2010.The NRL memberships were 180,824 up 28% on 2010. QED the clubs are pushing other revenue sources in addition to Tv contracts. If you guys(the same half dozen) from the AFL who enjoy invading rl boards ,please at least come armed with facts not ridiculous generalisations,flippancy or figures plucked out of the air,the Age or some Melbourne FM station.The research I have to say is sadly lacking. It's amazing r fans are called obsessive because Tv ratings are viewed as being extrememly important.Yet it appears swamping a rl thread to do a little AFL promotion can also be viewed as being obsessive,more so when the stats presented are incorrect in trying to criticise rl.One could use the term hijacking to be a little cloeser to the mark. Rugby league has its shortcomings,yet the figures suggest it is hardly resting on its laurels depsite all the rls and club obstinance.Rad the 2011 State of the Gae report,you may be enlightened.

AR and FT Whilst the peas in a pod consensus may look good,the reality is digffferent. One dimensional LOL. When the major source of your income is Tv rights ,and your ratings more than match your main competitor,emphaisis is on your major income source is a no brainer .Especially when that source could well double in value.. The code is not ignoring other sources of income,please keep up to speed,with what is happpening with memberships,negotiating new sponsorship deals with major companies and merchandising. Expansion is not the first focus,again you guys are on a another tangent.The order of action is the I.C ,the strengthening of the current 16 clubs via the new TV deal monies,then expansion.The code is not going to rush into expansion for the sake of it such as GWS and the GC17.IOW just lob in a team,without the area being fully prepared and wanting to get in. Sometimes you guys read what you want to read,and are not willing to delve a little deeper. You see when you secure large sums from Tv deals,you are able to spend more on promotion/hype,development and in fact subsidise to a degree ,ticket prices.In fact ATM the GC Titans is one of the moist expensive in the NRL. I am so glad you referred to the last Tv deal.It did not assist clubs,because it was badly handled.The clubs have stated this is so.Naturally News part owners think it was a commercially sound one.Yeah right,selling to oneself I hate to broadcast it ,but the subs from NRL Pay fans are assisting the AFL deal.Be thankful for small mercies. The sharks crowd average this year was not 11,000 (again you are incorrect)but 12,094(up 14.6% on 2010) despite them down the rear end of the ladder and the inclement weather they experienced with no cover.. In fact it appears you know nothing of the Cronulla development proposal,which will reduce the need for licensed club monies and in fact ensure the club is in the top 4 financially.You obviously have little apreciation with the facilities or lack thereof(cover) at Cronulla. The clubs are hardly just sitting back and expecting the Tv money to roll in ,they are also very active in securing other income sources as mentioned.So Ian,FT and yourself are barking up the wrong tree,to suggest the efforts are solely on TV monies. I just wish sometimes some would spend a little time in assessing what clubs are doing apart from getting a slice of the Tv income.

Wow, as usual the most interest in any RL thread is shown by the same 4 or 5 AFL obsessives who coopt every other NRL thread with their uninformed advice. Clipper, republican? How come you haven't come out to play?

stabpass Still ether crowds were well down.also meaning a drop in income.

AR Jumped up and down!!!! because you were incorrect,with that description,which came across as a pure generalisation,AFLers are prone to do when discussing rl. No one is disputing the effect of the various rls in the game,and the effect that it has,but I repeat the game is not stagnating. Crowds may have marked time for reasons i will explain,but other pointers showed growth.,whether you like it or not you cannot ignore . "No clear plans"on expansion.Point one there will be expansion.Point two.Th two most advantageous bids for the code will I suggest be the ones accepted.It is a tad hard to make plans,when the I.C the final arbiter as to who gets in ,is not yet in place to do so. The code hads learnt its lesson and will not locate a club in an area for the sake of pins on a map,as they did in the past t and as GWS and GC is doing. Threatened a breakaway!! Or maybe papertalk going overboard.Trodden stated there was no such plan.A couple of execs may have suggested it,but that is all. The average crowd figures were down .4% on 2010.your mob nearly 4%.On your scenario your code is going backwards and the NRL is therefore stagnating. The big supporting sydney clubs Parramatta and the Bulldogs and to a lesser extent Sourths affected the crowd averages ,as well as one of the worst winters for some time.Parramatta down 11.8% Souths down 17.2% even the West Tigers down 5.1%. You say the code has not grown outside its strongholds.That is BS The NZ Warrriors crowds were up 19.5% on 2010,and participation has grown also in that country .Participation has also increased inWA ,SA and Vic. The rot will be removed when the rls are removed and the i.c is in place unfettered .The rot was nurtured partially by an inept Tv contract negotiation.When NRL clubs are not receiving the monies they should be getting in grants via Tv contracts (as they supply the entertainment),it is hardly a rot,but lack of entitilement.

My point exactly AC. You just summarized it in a much more eloquent and intelligent manner! :) I don't believe anyone is suggesting that expansion is not a good focus for the game...it just shouldn't be first focus. The clubs security and financial stability should be first. The competiton foundations are shaky at best so why try and build onto it only to have everything crashing down when existing clubs buckle under the financial strain. Clubs such as the Bronco's are miles ahead of the rest of the clubs in terms of revenue, facilities, memberships and general support (yes, I know one team city). They could afford a much larger salary cap which would stop the 'player drain' but they can't can they because a larger salary cap would sink many existing, weaker clubs. People argue that the NRL/ IC shouldn't give them additional funding to have them throw it away on coaches contracts etc. Well perhaps the ruling body should create a provisional grant for these clubs - step in, send in some experts to assist the clubs in creating a profitiable and sustainable financial model/plan. If they want the money then they need to ensure it is spent on diminishing dept and investing in long term, secure outlays. Any additional money raised by the NRL at the next rights deal needs to be firstly used to get their house in order - predominately in helping the clubs and grass root football. NRL supporters should be patient and not try and compete with the expansion efforts of other codes in the short term. The IC has a mountain of work to do and I believe people like Gallop bring up these 'pe in the sky' plans of expansion as smoke and mirrors - to appease the masses and make them feel that the code can compete. NRL has a lot of ground to make up and stupid decisions with money will only make it worse.....

The most overlooked person in Rugby League is the fan, they are the ultimate shareholder of the game, not the players, not the clubs, not the blazeer wearing officals. We the fans, the shareholders, are the ones who fork out the money to pay these guys. And we get NO say. I find the current position the Clubs are taking to be disgraceful. How many of them have been proactive in running their clubs? The money from the new TV deal concerns me greatly, instead of it going to into the future development of the game, there is a great chance that it will be spent on mismanaged clubs.

CC, your comment actually re-inforces FT's statement completely. That is, the NRL obsession with TV Rights and Ratings IS one-dimensional. Yes, the TV Deal is important - that's obvious. But did the last one actually help the 16 clubs? Most clubs are still in a dire state financially. Expecting the TV cash to come rushing in to save everyone is not how to run a club...or a competition. FT's point (and Ian's) was that there needs to be a more holistic approach in order to achieve sustainability. The clubs must be able to sustain themselves first and foremost. This happens primarily thru gate takings and memberships. The Sharks get about 11,000 to each game and have less than 2,500 members. The 2 things that promote club independence and financial sustainability are also the 2 weakest aspects of the NRL competition. There's more to it than just a big TV cheque.

You've jumped up and down about the "stagnating" comment, so I'll clarify. The lack of unity and co-operation between League administrations (NSW, QLD AND AUS) has a stagnating effect on the game - unquestionably. Yes, there are broad plans to expand but no clear cut direction on where and how. That is the purview of the IC but the clubs hikacked the valuable time and energy in its launch by squabbling for a few extra bucks (even threatening a breakaway, tho they denied it later when they were howled down) - short sighted. This attitude has meant the game has not grown outside its strongholds and so, has stagnated. Total aggregate crowd figures dropped between 2009 and 2010 and the average crowd figures in 2011 were down on 2010. With no new teams, that is stagnation. 2 things must be done: fix the rot in Sydney and make a clear decision on where the new team will be. Undoubtedly the NRL will receive a huge swag of cash when the TV Rights deal is done. But a unified consensus on how to spend it is seriously lacking.

The SL war highlighted the massive flaw in the ARL business model. Strongish central body and weakish clubs...left the clubs ripe for bribes to hop on the SL train. We need the Sharks-Easts merger yesterday! Lets get those costs down for the benefit of the league as a whole. Add a team in Perth - 16 teams would be sweet.

The Brisbane Lions built a leagues style clubhouse in Springwood, which no doubt has set them back some money.

Football Tragic. The tv rights are in fact a very largeproportion(not just a part) of a very large pie.The so called "obsession"with Tv rights by rugby league people is not only understandable but obvious.The code delivers on Tv ratings as well as if not better than other codes and should be rewarded accordingly. It is plainly not being done so. The reason they are delaying expansion to 2015 is to provide the needed consolidation and strengthening of the current 16 clubs.Without expansion in 2015 ,the chances of securing a $1b Tv deal would be minimised dramatically.With this deal the dependence on poker machines will be lessened greatly,and sufficient grants to satisfy not only the current 16 clubs ,but the two additionals that will come in.repeat wil come in. AFL have had the added luxury(largesse) of two huge Tv deals,compared to the ARL/NRL,which had a super league war cleaning out the $22m the code had in the bank in 95,and a poorly negotiated Tv deal last times(with one party selling to half itself).The code in effect has been growing on the s smell of an oil rag ever since. Given the opportunity of securing a vastly improved Tv deal,the clubs and indeed the game will be a more than able competitor in the sporting stakes.More so with two expansion clubs one in heartland and one in non heartland.