NRL commission to finally become reality after agreement reached

[Kaz]

AFTER 1162 days of bickering, internal politics and grandstanding, rugby league has finally found peace.
An ARL board meeting in Brisbane yesterday agreed on the game's eight commissioners who will administer rugby league into the future.

It was a historic moment when the ARL's 10 directors emerged about 3pm yesterday from Suncorp Stadium to declare the independent commission had eventually been settled.


The commissioners: John Grant, Gary Pemberton, Peter Gregg, Wayne Pearce, Catherine Harris, Ian Elliott, Jeremy Sutcliffe, Chris Sarra



http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...greement-reached/story-e6frexnr-1226090309319


How can it be independent when Wayne Pearce is there.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Let's hope this actually happens

 

[Coxy]

What's wrong with Wayne Pearce? Why would he be any less independent than the others, who would all have their particular biases related to the game?

Seriously, this is a great moment for rugby league and we should look at it with optimism, not negativity.

 

[Kaz]

1. He played all his career with Balmain.

2. He has a son playing in the NRL.

 

[dukey]

That won't affect his objectivity, I don't think. There's no way he can overrule the other 7 commissioners in order to unfairly benefit Wests or Mitchell.
And in my opinion, it's important to have a former player on the board.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Lets hope the commission has the balls to relocate 1 or 2 teams out of Sydney. A big tv rights deal, better grass roots programs and expansion are a must.

 

[Je$ter]

That won't affect his objectivity, I don't think. There's no way he can overrule the other 7 commissioners in order to unfairly benefit Wests or Mitchell.
And in my opinion, it's important to have a former player on the board.

Mitchell needs all the help he can get. He's ordinary.

 

[dukey]

Mitchell needs all the help he can get. He's ordinary.

Yes, but it's doubtful his father being on the commission will provide him any help.

 

[Kaz]

Mitchell needs all the help he can get. He's ordinary.

All lies.

He's the best halfback in the world. :haha:

 

[Bucking Beads]

Let's hope the commission doesn't have your business skills.

Relocating teams out of Sydney is pointless and won't work. Expansion can't happen too soon, not until all clubs are financially stable for years to come. That pretty much means every club in the comp except Brisbane, Canterbury, Souths and Newcastle.

Also Kaz, Wayne Pearce is indepedant enough. I am sure some of those people have SOME sort of link to league in some way, shape or form so technically, going by your logic they wouldn't be worth to sit on the IC either.

There's a reason why they have someone like Pearce. Level headed guy, knows his stuff and is great for the game. Love listening to him, you can tell he has a lot to offer.

Only for Sydney teams to make more money is to have less teams in Sydney to begin with.... Lets hope the Commission has some business sense so the League doesn't continue to carry broke clubs into the future.

 

[Coxy]

Only for Sydney teams to make more money is to have less teams in Sydney to begin with.... Lets hope the Commission has some business sense so the League doesn't continue to carry broke clubs into the future.

Correct, Beads. In order for Sydney clubs to be financially competitive with one team towns they need to reduce the dilution in the market. Doesn't need to be a massive reduction, even taking out 2 Sydney teams would be enough. That should be part of any expansion plan.

Prime candidates should be teams in Sydney that have very close neighbours with overlapping supporter bases. Cronulla/St George-Illawarra is one. Canterbury/Parramatta/Tigers others. Souths/Roosters too.

Mergers? No, they don't work unless they're willing. Canterbury/Parra/Tigers? No. Western Sydney is an area that continues to grow and so having 3 teams in the region is appropriate. That said, of the three, Canterbury and Parramatta do have national support bases...could quite easily thrive in another area and take their history with them.

Souths/Roosters. Was a no brainer a decade ago, but Rusty's financially fired Souths up. Roosters have traditionally been strong financially, but their complete lack of a junior base and supporter base would probably render them irrelevant soon enough.

Cronulla will go. It's not a matter of if, but when. No real supporter base. No real history of success. Nobody would really miss them. The area itself is limited in how much it can grow and "new" people in the area would be comfortable supporting the Dragons. Merge or die, sharkies.

 

[dukey]

Correct, Beads. In order for Sydney clubs to be financially competitive with one team towns they need to reduce the dilution in the market. Doesn't need to be a massive reduction, even taking out 2 Sydney teams would be enough. That should be part of any expansion plan.

Prime candidates should be teams in Sydney that have very close neighbours with overlapping supporter bases. Cronulla/St George-Illawarra is one. Canterbury/Parramatta/Tigers others. Souths/Roosters too.

Mergers? No, they don't work unless they're willing. Canterbury/Parra/Tigers? No. Western Sydney is an area that continues to grow and so having 3 teams in the region is appropriate. That said, of the three, Canterbury and Parramatta do have national support bases...could quite easily thrive in another area and take their history with them.

Souths/Roosters. Was a no brainer a decade ago, but Rusty's financially fired Souths up. Roosters have traditionally been strong financially, but their complete lack of a junior base and supporter base would probably render them irrelevant soon enough.

Cronulla will go. It's not a matter of if, but when. No real supporter base. No real history of success. Nobody would really miss them. The area itself is limited in how much it can grow and "new" people in the area would be comfortable supporting the Dragons. Merge or die, sharkies.

The problem with culling existing teams that have up to 100 years of history is that you alienate established fan bases. Most Bears fans that I know haven't moved on to support Manly; they've just given the NRL up and don't follow it at all. Same with many fans of Wests and Balmain, although they got a far better deal than Steelers fans, who get a handful of games played by a team that didn't merge with Illawarra so much as it just absorbed it.
At a time when the AFL are pushing into NSW with money and gusto, the NRL can't afford to alienate existing fans.

 

[Coxy]

Yeah, but it's a matter of cost vs benefit. Sharks average what, 12000 people per game. If that's 5% of their total supporter base, the alienation risk is 240000 people.

Conversely, if you start a team in Perth with a population of over 1 million, you could easily generate more than 240000 new supporters, of which 12000+ could easily become regular attendees.

Similarly with North Sydney. Sure, their supporters may be lost to the game forever, but the Titans would already have as many current fans now as were lost from Norths.