Will the IC have the power to... ???

[Professor47]

Will the IC have the power to change rules?

such as

1) Elimination of the corner post
2) Vid ref for groundings/offside only.

etc

If it will - then I can see some great times ahead for the game.

Will it also have power to change things such as allowing 3rd party sponsors/endorsements that don't count towards the cap?

Privatisation?

 

[Coxy]

I think these questions fall under bigger questions. For example, will the IC have control over the way the game is played at all levels? Or will the NRL still be able to have its own interpretations that are different to Q Cup, internationals etc, its own control of the salary cap, etc.

If it's the latter, there's no point. It's just same shit, different stink.

 

[Charmamba]

my view on what we have all seen in the articles ect is that its gonna run the lot so imo i think yes they will have full control

 

[Flutterby]

WAYNE Bennett says he, and most people in rugby league, are in the dark about the new Independent Commission and wants negotiations to be more transparent.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/nrl ... 5840815235

 

[Burg]

To me the plan is simple, get rid of the ARL, NRL, QRL, CRL and NSWRL, and have one governing body. They set the rules, the plan for the future, whatever.

 

[Coxy]

Plan is simple.
Execution of the plan is anything but simple.

 

[Flutterby]

Yep implementation is the key. A lot of people are scared that with this IC and it being essentially in the hands of the NRL clubs things like Country RL, local leagues, Q Cup, NSW Premier League, junior league etc will basically not be looked after properly or forgotten altogether.

Few people (if any) really know how the IC intends to run the game and look after it at all levels. And that is really Bennett's point - that it is all pretty secretive, so people aren't really able to comment with an informed opinion and don't really know what the effect is going to be to know whether it really is going to be a good thing and a positive move for the game.

 

[Coxy]

So an update on the Independent Commission...it seems the QRL are one of the stumbling blocks.

AS part of the QRL's commitment to keep our valued supporters and friends fully apprised of developments regarding the establishment of an Independent Commission for Rugby League, we wish to provide you with a further update on recent events.

The Independent Commission has far reaching implications for all stakeholders in the game of rugby league, from the grassroots to the elite level, and it is important that you understand the facts regarding its implementation.

You may be aware that the Australian Rugby League (ARL) announced on 11 March 2010 that it had agreed in principle with News Ltd. on the model for a single Independent Commission to conduct and control the sport in Australia.

While the QRL supports the creation of a Commission, its members on the ARL board did not agree with this model and voted against it adoption at the meeting, as they did not believe it serves the best interests of all stakeholders of the game, nor does it protect the ARL’s 50 percent ownership position.

Under the proposal for a new Independent Commission, News Ltd. has imposed numerous conditions on its exit from the National Rugby League (NRL), some of which the QRL finds unacceptable. These conditions include:

• A restructure of the code to create a not-for-profit organisation to include the 16 member clubs, eight commissioners, and the New South Wales Rugby League (NSWRL) and QRL.

• The NSWRL and QRL to have no role in the appointment of commissioners in the future;

• A $26 million financial package for the Melbourne Storm; and
• An extension on its first and last broadcasting rights, past 2022.

Key among our concerns is the ARL has agreed to a code restructure, which gives one vote each to the NSWRL and the QRL, providing them same membership rights as each of the 16 NRL clubs and the eight commissioners.

This decision effectively means that the ARL is prepared to walk away from its 50 percent stake in the game for a share equal to less than 8 percent (the NSWRL and QRL being 2 of 26 members), while handing the NRL clubs more than 60 percent control (16 of 26 members).

This position is highly advantageous to the NRL clubs who represent the game’s elite and disadvantageous to both the NSWRL and QRL who foster the game’s grassroots development and run representative programs including State of Origin.

The game has many more stakeholders than the elite NRL clubs, a number of which are privately owned, and includes senior, junior and school players, parents and supporters, volunteers and referees.

The QRL takes its role as a custodian of the game in Queensland seriously, and is prepared to take the strongest possible action to ensure the grassroots rugby league community is protected and represented under any new structure.

For the good of the game, the QRL has sought legal advice regarding the current Independent Commission proposal and this advice has raised some serious issues and concerns which the ARL must address before the proposed structure can be progressed.

This advice has prompted the QRL to call for a special meeting of the ARL’s board to discuss its concerns and reconsider the decision taken at the board meeting on March 11. This special meeting will take place on June 17.

At the same time, the QRL has developed a model for the game’s future and has requested the ARL board considers an alternative streamlined structure for the Independent Commission, which equally serves the interests of all of the game’s stakeholders, not just the game’s elite.

The QRL’s proposed simplified structure reduces the current unwieldy 26-member format to just eight members: one representative each nominated by the privately-owned NRL clubs and the not for profit NRL clubs; one representative each from the QRL and NSWRL; and four independent commissioners to be appointed by the four groups.

We will continue to keep you informed about important developments regarding the Independent Commission. Thank you for your continued support of the QRL and our great game. If you have any views or further questions regarding the independent commission, please contact the QRL via email rugbyleague@qrl.com.au or phone (07) 3367 6000.

Yours sincerely,

Ross Livermore - Managing Director

John McDonald - Chairman

http://www.qrl.com.au/default.aspx?s=ar ... y&id=26564

I can understand their point of view, but this is exactly what I thought would happen. Dinosaurs reluctant to let go of their control of the game.

If I believed they were really worried about the NRL clubs being in control and "looking after the elite" at the detriment of the grassroots I'd applaud them. But the reality is they have their nose out of joint that, eg, Cronulla have as much say as they do in the running of the game in Australia.

 

[m1c]

Ah I was just about to post that Coxy. IMO the QRLs model is an improvement purely for the fact I also don't agree there should be any group with the power to be the dominant shareholder. It really dilutes the voice of other parties represented on the board. For instance players could have the support of all other representatives for a particular motion, but if the clubs don't agree then it's a no go. Perhaps if they broke them up into regions?

 

[Coxy]

I agree, I think the individual clubs have too much power. Personally I think the clubs should be represented with 4-6 places on the commission and the 16 clubs vote for those representatives. That's fairer.

But I still question their motives for objecting.

 

[Flutterby]

Coxy, Ifrom various conversations I have had with various people in the QRL I believe their motives for objecting are mostly pure. As they say, the QRL and NSWRL are responsible for a much larger chunk of the game than the 16 elite clubs - the fear is that with the NRL clubs having sooooo much say grassroots development, juniors, country RL, schools comps etc will get a much much smaller slice of the pie and will fall away due to lack of funding. Ultimately this will down the line dilute the standard of the elite competition; however in my experience most of the clubs take a short-term 'here and now' view over a longer term looking after the game view.

And to their great credit, they are not just criticising/rejecting what has been proposed; but have put forward an alternative (and IMO fairer) structure for the IC. This is another reason why I think it isn't all just about 'dinosaurs' trying to protect their own interests.

Quite frankly I'm a bit surprised the NSWRL aren't taking a similar view/stance to the QRL

 

[Fozz]

I'd say the NSWRL is just looking at the numbers and thinking "10 NSW clubs...excellent!".

 

[Foordy]

The NSWRL have the view of we think the opposite of the QRL.

probably why the QLD cup is the stronger one, because NSWRL wanted the opposite of the QRL [icon_razz1

 

[Flutterby]

The Queensland Rugby League says it has taken the first conciliatory steps but the formation of rugby league’s independent commission seems as far away as ever after a high-powered meeting in Brisbane.

Both parties emerged saying a deadline of October or November remained viable but with the NSW and Queensland rugby leagues at a stalemate over the proposed make-up of the commission, it will take a substantial backdown from one side to expedite proceedings.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rugby-l ... -z95j.html


I really really hope this doesn't end up in the courts, last thing we need is more court drama deciding the future of the game.

 

[Flutterby]

The final stumbling block in the establishment of an independent commission appears to have been removed and the November 1 target for its inception is within reach.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 66,00.html

 

[The Brizz]

Hopefully the IC removes Shane Hayne from rugby league permanently.

 

[Foordy]

I have to say my real concern to the clubs having power is that they will eliminate origin from the calender for fear of their players getting injured in rep footy.

the AFL had origin before the commission came in to power and the clubs wanted it gone for fear of their players getting injured (so it went)

the other real concern i have is that they allocate too much of the financial pie to top level footy and neglect the grass roots of the game. the players are whinging about not getting paid enough and i hope the don't allocate the majority of the money to them otherwise league will die a very quick death. the players already apparently get a bigger percentage of the financial pie than any other sport in this country.

 

[Mister Wright]

The clubs would be very stupid to get rid of State of Origin. It is a massive money earner, and should be used to generate more money. I don't think the players would go for it either.