The NRL clubs have issued a vote of no-confidence in independent commission chairman John Grant, the reasons for this lie in the breakdown of discussions over the apportioning of future NRL funding.
In a stunning turn of events, every single NRL club issued a vote of no-confidence in Independent Commission chairman John Grant on Thursday and called for his immediate resignation.
A letter which is to be sent to NRL Chief Executive Todd Greenberg apparently details a call for an emergency meeting about Grant and has been signed by the chairmen and women of all 16 NRL clubs.
The predicament is looking grim for Grant, who has been chairman of the Australian Rugby League Commission since its inception in 2012, he requires four votes in order to maintain his position.
It is believed a dispute over the NRL’s $1.8 billion TV deal led to the chairmen of four NRL clubs storming out of a meeting at NRL headquarters on Wednesday.
The breakdown of these talks has reportedly led to catastrophic developments with a number of key deals still not agreed upon.
At this point, there is no salary cap figure beyond next year, no future club funding plan, no collective bargaining agreement with players and no participation contracts with any of the clubs beyond 2018.
Essentially, it is believed the NRL clubs are unhappy with the Commission’s use of funds and are worried that they won’t receive as much funding from the windfall of the one billion plus dollar broadcast deal the NRL signed last year.
In December, it was reportedly agreed that from 2018 club funding would be 130 per cent of the salary cap. However, an official deal was never brokered and signed.
We’re a year down the track, and they still haven’t come to a conclusion despite the signing of this memorandum. This has club bosses frustrated and they believe that Grant is an obstacle standing in the way of getting what they want for their respective clubs.
Basically, we’re at an impasse. The clubs know what they want but Grant apparently doesn’t want to give it to them. By the sounds of it, they’ve got a case if they have this December agreement in writing.
We probably haven’t heard the last of this, considering Grant seems unwilling to stand aside and it doesn’t sound like the clubs are budging.
Practically, in the short term, this shouldn’t really affect anything other than the relationship between the Commission and the NRL clubs. The only real impact will be the inability of players to negotiate contracts considering no one knows what amount the NRL salary cap will be set in 2018 and beyond.
Keep an eye on this one, it could turn nasty.
Gary Magpie
Roar Guru
I agree with your conclusions. Who are you and what have you done with Crosscoder?
Gary Magpie
Roar Guru
Self-interest is clearly the domain of the NRL clubs. They are unreasonable and will forever be the blockers of any resources going to benefit the game of rugby league. Nothing wrong with Greenberg - he seems like he wants to improve all levels of the game. Let's focus on the real issues - the constitution needs to be amended to remove the power of the NRL clubs and give more to the Independent Commissions to act independently.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Gallop no ,no, no, short changed us in TV deal after Tv deal.He had no clue about lobbying Govt for funding, and was lame when it came to promoting his code on camera.He rarely ventured out to the bush or regionals.Lawyers love their offices. The Titans and Knights got into trouble during his tenure. The reason the RLPA agreement has not been finalised, is due and admitted by the head of the association(Prendergast) they are looking into complicated issues such as retirement funding.He admitted they do not want to rush it through.Once the CBA is sorted out ,salary caps follow suit. Further noted, understood the CBA for the AFL has been ongoing for 12 months ,so the NRL is not alone. If people believe bringing back the biff will help solve problems,I suggest they speak to mothers of the young Jonnies in this age of PC. It's a sport not a boxing tourno. As to Smith,yes he was a businessman with no rl empathy and did get the lobbying aspect into gear and infrastructure with Govt.He however it is est.cost the code an estimated $300m( 5years) by signing up with 9 first,getting Rupert offside, and leaving the scraps to be fought over for the final contract completion. Additionally a further $5m pa was spent on high flyers in admin, who contributed little and soon left or were pushed.That money has been saved. I have little time for Grant ,but he is a rl man played the game at Rep level.He intrudes too much in a benevolent dictatorship manner, instead of letting Greenberg be the face of the NRL admin.For him to make a verbal undertaking to proved NRL clubs with 130% of grants, without understanding the lie of the land in 2016 is mind boggling. From the conclusion of SL all administrations have neglected grassroots .either through naivety, greedy NRL clubs. Grassroots needs the funding and that is the NRL responsibility.The NRL clubs need also to live within their means .
rabby
Guest
I thought that Dave Smith was a bl**dy good CEO. He wasn't popular but that was largely because he was prepared to be unpopular to do the right things. He also had a vision for the NRL which was greater than most could understand. I think that Smith achieved more in his first week than Greenberg has achieved all year. That said, it does appear that the commission has a real problem on its hands with the clubs. All they can see is the dollars and they have no vision for the future of the game. I agree that they need their fair share of the pie but a formula needs to be set down for now and for the future and then set in stone.
Lachlan A
Guest
@Vincent Hugh Well it worked for 100 years. Bringing back the punching would cancel a hell of a lot of rubbish. There's no fear factor anymore. 10 years ago Thurston would not have slapped Beau Scott from behind Cam Smith. 10 years ago little blokes weren't in the middle of a scuffle between two front rowers chirping away. Quite frankly Ennis would deserve a haymaker from each player you mentioned.
Magnus M. Østergaard
Roar Guru
Contradiction.... You want to bring back punching (I assume) but also keep smaller players in the game. So we owuld have a player like Mick Ennis niggle like he always does then get haymakered by an out of control Kasiano or Fifita or Gallen or Papalii. Not sure thats gonna keep the younguns
Lachlan A
Guest
Really, all Smith did was make the NRL top heavy and employed Greenberg, Richardson, amongst others to do all the work and drain money that should have gone to the clubs. Smith went hard on no punching and that has resulted in constant niggle and grubby play, ruing the spectacle. He was hopeless. As for Grant, he has overseen as Chairman the rapid decline in the quality of the game. The game has become a straight power game like NFL. The skill level and reading of the game has declined and will likely die with when Smith and Thurston retire. Most players have the same body size and shape these days. However Gallop was in charge when the wrestle was introduced and he should have done more to remove it. Gallop also oversaw the period where the game stopped using the sin bin for professional fouls. Again another mistake. I would much rather someone other than Gallop, but he was miles in front of his successors.
no one in particular
Roar Guru
Smith > Gallop. Smith got demonised because he wouldn't play the media game and wasn't at their beck and call like his predecessor and successor. Grant is Chairman, not CEO. Different roles. Compare Grant to Love
Lachlan A
Guest
Im not saying Gallop was great, but he was better and the game was better before Grant, Smith and Greenberg.
no one in particular
Roar Guru
Gallop? LOL
Rossco
Guest
No! No! No, Gallop was awful and is showing the same signs of poor leadership in the A-League now.
Lachlan A
Guest
The NRL has been on a downward slope since Grant and the commission took control of the game. I think we would all jump at the chance to have David Gallop back, even considering the mistakes he made.
Parra
Guest
Grant is chairman but seems to take on an executive role that is the role of the CEO. I would let Greenberg take control of the outstanding issues and see how he goes. I suspect he's just a puppet of grant who has real control. agree smith for all his faults was a real CEO in every sense of the word. He would have resolved all these issues by now. On the other side of the coin, I think the club chairman need to give the nrl more time to propose change without pressure as everything that is being done is new to the commission and everyone. I also think the commission so far has done a great job.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Another sticking point was the creation of a fund to help troubled clubs from falling over. My view there is that these are businesses and if they can't stay afloat, there are others ready to take their place. On Grant, The only times we appear to see him is at the big show: finals, GF, SOO and at internationals. The television deal was brokered by Smith and Grant appears to be making hay out of that deal
Jacko
Guest
Greenberg is interested in one thing in this world. Himself. Pitty they couldnt keep this other bloke and get rid of Greenberg
Mike from tari
Guest
So what has Greenberg been doing with the RLPA agreement, the salary cap for 2018 & the club funding for 2018, much as the clubs & everybody hated David Smith, he would have already put all these outstanding agreements in place. Greenberg has not been doing his job, sorry he's been very busy looking after Ben Barba welfare to worry about thos other things.