How embarrassing for rugby league that NRL clubs can stop England and New Zealand playing in Denver?

[redjonn]

Do players that play in the SOO get paid for doing so... I don't know but if so..

Preventing non eligible SOO from earning monies in a similar way if say picked for internationals is surely an legitimate issue than a player or organisation could consider for legal grounds.

[Mattrhino]

Just now, redjonn said:

Do players that play in the SOO get paid for doing so... I don't know but if so..

Preventing non eligible SOO from earning monies in a similar way if say picked for internationals is surely an legitimate issue than a player or organisation could consider for legal grounds.

I think it is 20k a game same as a Kangaroo cap.

[Scubby]

The RLIF rule is that all clubs must release players for international games. It has been enforced previously, particularly in the 1990s and early 2000s. What has happened since then? Well the ARL appears to have gone and the NRL pretty much rules everything.

Saying that we have a RLIF CEO and RLIF Chairman (earning a big salary) who could put out a statement reinforcing clubs of their responsibility to release players for internationals. 

[Mattrhino]

RL players are a strange breed it seems, most athlete's  in the world play sports to earn money and travel the world. But RL players only want to get paid to go on tour every few years when it suits. While International Union players play 12 months a year. Tennis and F1 drivers spend 10 months travelling the world 

[redjonn]

Just now, Scubby said:

The RLIF rule is that all clubs must release players for international games. It has been enforced previously, particularly in the 1990s and early 2000s. What has happened since then? Well the ARL appears to have gone and the NRL pretty much rules everything.

Saying that we have a RLIF CEO and RLIF Chairman (earning a big salary) who could put out a statement reinforcing clubs of their responsibility to release players for internationals. 

and if they don't release them they have to pay the players an extra amount to compensate for loss of earning.... plus compensation to international bodies for loss of revenues.

[Scubby]

1 minute ago, redjonn said:

and if they don't release them they have to pay the players an extra amount to compensate for loss of earning.... plus compensation to international bodies for loss of revenues.

It used to be that they were not allowed to play for their club in the next fixture I think.

[RLfave]

There's nothing stopping RLEF or the RLIF from supplying, paying and developing their own players to play internationals. I mean, what a disgrace a National club competition, would want to look after their business first? Who would've funked it?  

Origin probably makes more money in 3 games than Superleague does for an entire season. Why should NRL give up a concept that is financially rewarding, that helps pay players, help start a professional women's comp, along with other initiatives like NRL9s and raise club salary cap? They have every right to value Origin as much as they do, and incorporate into the NRL calendar. As much as NRL clubs complain about weakened teams come Origin, Origin makes money for them. 

I really don't understand some people. Why should an Australian club comp governing body, value an International game more than then their own product? Especially since the majority of the time, they end up covering all the expenses.

All RLIF needs to do is get their #### together, guarantee some sort of incentive to compensate the costs that the NRL, or SL would lose if Internationals are played.

Or just do what some people on here are asking, just leave the NRL and Australia out of the International game, and start paying and developing your own pool of players for Internationals and move on without us. I'm sure the rest of the RL world have cashed up club comps, and a RLIF that have been dying for the NRL to stop footing the bill for Internationals all these years, so they can finally do what they've always wanted to do...their job.

Okay, now that's out of the way...the stand alone Origin is the perfect time to have this match. It'll be a great way to kick start a  weekend of footy. 

 

[Scubby]

2 minutes ago, RLfave said:

There's nothing stopping RLEF or the RLIF from supplying, paying and developing their own players to play internationals. I mean, what a disgrace a National club competition, would want to look after their business first? Who would've funked it?  

Origin probably makes more money in 3 games than Superleague does for an entire season. Why should NRL give up a concept that is financially rewarding, that helps pay players, help start a professional women's comp, along with other initiatives like NRL9s and raise club salary cap? They have every right to value Origin as much as they do, and incorporate into the NRL calendar. As much as NRL clubs complain about weakened teams come Origin, Origin makes money for them. 

I really don't understand some people. Why should an Australian club comp governing body, value an International game more than then their own product? Especially since the majority of the time, they end up covering all the expenses.

All RLIF needs to do is get their #### together, guarantee some sort of incentive to compensate the costs that the NRL, or SL would lose if Internationals are played.

Or just do what some people on here are asking, just leave the NRL and Australia out of the International game, and start paying and developing your own pool of players for Internationals and move on without us. I'm sure the rest of the RL world have cashed up club comps, and a RLIF that have been dying for the NRL to stop footing the bill for Internationals all these years, so they can finally do what they've always wanted to do...their job.

Okay, now that's out of the way...the stand alone Origin is the perfect time to have this match. It'll be a great way to kick start a  weekend of footy. 

 

I think a NZ v England mid-season test is leaving Australia out of the international game. They are busy playing with themselves in the "ultimate" physical challenge. Yet clubs apparently don't want England and NZ players to have a "less intense" run out in the mid-season game. The phrase that was put earlier that Australians are happy to support international RL if it is within driving distance of the NRL HQ is right on the money.

[GeordieSaint]

Truly selfish and out right double standards from those individuals in the NRL. They are a disgrace to the sport.

[Scubby]

10 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

Truly selfish and out right double standards from those individuals in the NRL. They are a disgrace to the sport.

To be fair, this article is only the Daily Telegraph quoting 3 clubs and of those clubs one of them doesn't like the timing and the other one wants salary cap compensation for injuries. Steve Mascord may well have written the article on the back of this article and put two and two together.

I think it certainly highlights the lack of leadership from NZ and the UK. They should announce the game and then deal with the clubs afterwards. The RLIF rule is that they have to release players. They should quote this in every statement they make.

[Jim Prendle]

22 minutes ago, RLfave said:

There's nothing stopping RLEF or the RLIF from supplying, paying and developing their own players to play internationals. I mean, what a disgrace a National club competition, would want to look after their business first? Who would've funked it?  

Origin probably makes more money in 3 games than Superleague does for an entire season. Why should NRL give up a concept that is financially rewarding, that helps pay players, help start a professional women's comp, along with other initiatives like NRL9s and raise club salary cap? They have every right to value Origin as much as they do, and incorporate into the NRL calendar. As much as NRL clubs complain about weakened teams come Origin, Origin makes money for them. 

I really don't understand some people. Why should an Australian club comp governing body, value an International game more than then their own product? Especially since the majority of the time, they end up covering all the expenses.

All RLIF needs to do is get their #### together, guarantee some sort of incentive to compensate the costs that the NRL, or SL would lose if Internationals are played.

Or just do what some people on here are asking, just leave the NRL and Australia out of the International game, and start paying and developing your own pool of players for Internationals and move on without us. I'm sure the rest of the RL world have cashed up club comps, and a RLIF that have been dying for the NRL to stop footing the bill for Internationals all these years, so they can finally do what they've always wanted to do...their job.

Okay, now that's out of the way...the stand alone Origin is the perfect time to have this match. It'll be a great way to kick start a  weekend of footy. 

 

But it's not all about money is it?

Take football as an example. A relegated Premier League club is probably worth more money than our whole game, yet football take internationals seriously. The way we, and particularly the NRL, look at internationals is just plain stupid. 

If it is, indeed, all about money, and the NRL would rather make money than play international RL, then fine, get on with it, go away and play your game in your little corner of the world.

I agree with the poster above who says that this is a fight worth having, and the right time to have it. The NRL should be told to stick it up their jacksie, and if they are really that bothered about player welfare (Which they aren't really, they are bothered about the money), then they should cancel SOO because it's boring, rigid, and so one-sided it's becoming a joke.

 

[RLfave]

17 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I think a NZ v England mid-season test is leaving Australia out of the international game. They are busy playing with themselves in the "ultimate" physical challenge. Yet clubs apparently don't want England and NZ players to have a "less intense" run out in the mid-season game. The phrase that was put earlier that Australians are happy to support international RL if it is within driving distance of the NRL HQ is right on the money.

Which is why I suggested that everyone else should stop relying on NRL contracted, paid, developed players and  develop and pay your own, or start picking International players from somewhere else to play all the Internationals your hearts desire. 

[westside]

Hopefully the clubs come to their senses or have their bluff called. This fixture needs to go ahead if RL is serious about 2025.

[Scubby]

14 minutes ago, RLfave said:

Which is why I suggested that everyone else should stop relying on NRL contracted, paid, developed players and  develop and pay your own, or start picking International players from somewhere else to play all the Internationals your hearts desire. 

With respect, that is a load of insular tosh.

Where do you think all the England, NZ and Fijian players in the NRL actually came from? When NRL clubs sign Graham, Asofa-Solomona, Rapana, Burgess, Whitehead, Vunivalu, Kikau etc. do they then own them like some kind of property after they've lured them to the East coast of Australia? 

[RLfave]

3 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

But it's not all about money is it?

Take football as an example. A relegated Premier League club is probably worth more money than our whole game, yet football take internationals seriously. The way we, and particularly the NRL, look at internationals is just plain stupid. 

If it is, indeed, all about money, and the NRL would rather make money than play international RL, then fine, get on with it, go away and play your game in your little corner of the world.

I agree with the poster above who says that this is a fight worth having, and the right time to have it. The NRL should be told to stick it up their jacksie, and if they are really that bothered about player welfare (Which they aren't really, they are bothered about the money), then they should cancel SOO because it's boring, rigid, and so one-sided it's becoming a joke.

 

The difference with Football is their club comps are ALL strong financially. Their International governing body is financially strong. The financial weight, is therefore, distributed evenly.

We have one club comp in RL that is financially strong. And because even our International gb is a basketcase, we now have that one comp, support and even pay one of our best International team to play. How is that fair? Considering there are other projects that they could use the money in.

JT and Fifita would not have walked out on NZ or Roos if they didn't have guaranteed NRL contracts worth a large sum of money. I'd say money has plenty to do with it. 

The green is shining through, saying a successful  comp should cancel a series, that paves the way financially for players and their family to live comfortably, and support other initiatives, because a few people find it boring and rigid, and a joke.

SL must be doing a great job spreading the RL gospel in your country. How many projects have they started? How much money they making from their series similar to Origin? How much is their club comp worth? Do they have a pro women's comp in the works?

Reminds me a bit like Australia rugby union. They built a International team so strong before building a strong national club comp, now nearly 15 years later they're a few years from being extinct.

It'll be nicer to scream, complain and want to showboat on an International level, if it was your club comp that is a multi billion dollar business, and not tucked away in the corner of a country somewhere, not on FTA, or barely getting a mention in the media.

Beggars can't be choosers.

[Dave T]

55 minutes ago, RLfave said:

Which is why I suggested that everyone else should stop relying on NRL contracted, paid, developed players and  develop and pay your own, or start picking International players from somewhere else to play all the Internationals your hearts desire. 

There are plenty of internationals played each year that are not gifted to us by the NRL.

[RLfave]

47 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Sounds brilliant, we get Burgess and Graham back.

All the NZRL developed players can leave the NRL, that includes all the NZRL developed kids scouted and trafficked at a young age by the NRL they can come join the rest of the world. So say bye bye to Taumalolo

Put the warriors and another Kiwi side in Super League fill them with all those young island kids the NRL likes to claim and Brisbane and Sydney can carry on playing with themselves and pretending it has some sort of outside relevance.

Im in, lets get it done.

All those Australian born Pacific Islanders, and all the talented youngsters in the divisions under NRL...All that money they're guaranteed in getting if they leave....I wonder how many big 3 type players coming up...

NRL is soooo gonna fold without them...

[MrPosh]

3 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

Well once internationals are more profitable then SOO and the NRL that wont be the case, as I said before people follow the money and the money is in SOO and the NRL, not in internationals...

Which is why RL is likely to become the fourth ball sport of Australia soon.

It's already way behind cricket and Aussie Rules and the international nature of football means it will inevitably overtake a parochial, two-state sport.

[MrPosh]

2 hours ago, DoubleD said:

That's a nonsense argument, blaming internationals for that. That is what happens to less professional/dedicated players during the off season. The internationals actually would have kept them in some resemblance of shape and fitness! If you have issues with players turning up unfit to pre-season training, you should direct your anger at the players in question. It has absolutely nothing to do with international footy

Like most Australians, it would seem to have racial undertones - because Samoans are like that, you see.

[Lowdesert]

2 hours ago, Mattrhino said:

RL players are a strange breed it seems, most athlete's  in the world play sports to earn money and travel the world. But RL players only want to get paid to go on tour every few years when it suits. While International Union players play 12 months a year. Tennis and F1 drivers spend 10 months travelling the world 

What a load of rubbish.

[RLfave]

5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

You wanna try that in English?

Gimme a break, its 1am I'm typsy and I'm getting my kicks on a English RL forum.

 

 

[Mattrhino]

Just now, Lowdesert said:

What a load of rubbish.

What is rubbish about it? The NRL players union made sure its players get every other year off from International duties. Does that happen anywhere else?

I'm sure it has to do with pressure from the clubs also, but if the players felt strongly about it they wouldn't let the clubs make it so easy for them to block international games.

The RFL had to cancel a one week training trip to Dubai earlier this year. Its ridiculous.

 

[Lowdesert]

12 minutes ago, Mattrhino said:

What is rubbish about it? The NRL players union made sure its players get every other year off from International duties. Does that happen anywhere else?

I'm sure it has to do with pressure from the clubs also, but if the players felt strongly about it they wouldn't let the clubs make it so easy for them to block international games.

The RFL had to cancel a one week training trip to Dubai earlier this year. Its ridiculous.

 

That RL players only want to play when it suits.  English lads seem to be doing quite the opposite and continuing the train - on squad.  If they had had the chance to play more Internationals they would play.

The RFL cancelled the trip as a result of they’re own stupidity.

Iirc English RU have a capped amount of games agreed through a players union and comparing it, tennis and F1 is just daft comparing physical demands alone.

 

[Mattrhino]

22 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

That RL players only want to play when it suits.  English lads seem to be doing quite the opposite and continuing the train - on squad.  If they had had the chance to play more Internationals they would play.

The RFL cancelled the trip as a result of they’re own stupidity.

Iirc English RU have a capped amount of games agreed through a players union and comparing it, tennis and F1 is just daft comparing physical demands alone.

 

Who says I'm comparing the physical demands of sports although playing 3 hrs of elite Tennis 7 times in two weeks then travelling across the world to do the same again for nearly the whole year is pretty demanding. 

I don't claim to know what each player thinks, but from the outside it doesn't seem they are busting a gut to get more internationals played. Its not their job I know. But they could do a hell of alot from their position of influence. But they want to cut the amounts of games play. It is a fact our top players in our top domestic league want every other year off from i'ntl footy.

Could you imangine Messi or Ronaldo tell the world I'm gonna take every other year off? Even though they have much more right too as they make more money in a year than Cam Smith will make in his career.

[RLfave]

1 hour ago, MrPosh said:

Which is why RL is likely to become the fourth ball sport of Australia soon.

It's already way behind cricket and Aussie Rules and the international nature of football means it will inevitably overtake a parochial, two-state sport.

People have been saying that for the last couple of decades. Yet people still pay billions for tv rights and it still has some of the highest rated shows every year. 

In 10 years, this sentiment will be repeated while RL is on a even bigger tv deal.