Are the NRL trying to be the global governing body for RL?

[The Daddy]

Can't help but thinking with the way they've been going about their business recently that they're trying to overtake the RLIF as the global governing body for the sport. 

Saw a newspaper article where one of their chiefs was basically saying something along the lines of 'we should see ourselves like the nfl and nba etc and not be afraid to flex our muscles'. 

Considering they single handedly try to stop the Denver test from going ahead, they're sanctioning international games between island nations and they make up their own laws without consulting the rest of the RL world it's evident that's the direction they want to move to. 

I just hope that the RLIF can grow a pair and become the global authority for the sport that we know they can be. 

[Chamey]

RL has a similar problem to cricket. All the power is invested in just a few actors, so they control the RLIF/ICC, and hence the tail wags the dog. And yes, the separate set of rules, sanctioning internationals, not helping the WC to be a success etc all indicate that they want to preserve or expand their slice of the pie, yet don’t give a toss about expanding the pie. 

[rlno1]

If there is money to be made, I can guarantee the NRL will be interested......they are a poor mans NFL.

[Sports Prophet]

In my opinion the five sporting bodies/codes/events that threaten the profile, finances and assets of the NRL in order would be:

1. AFL

2. Rugby Union

3. Super League

4. Soccer 

5. International RL

Neutralising the RLIF and “owning” the international game certainly removes International RL from that list and turns it into an asset. The NRL’s power over international proceedings has been greatly diminished over recent years. It will be in the NRL’s interest to increase their “ownership” and influence of the international game, so power plays like not endorsing a Denver Test (a toothless threat in my opinion) will continue for some time yet.

[Sports Prophet]

1 hour ago, rlno1 said:

If there is money to be made, I can guarantee the NRL will be interested......they are a poor mans NFL.

A rich mans Super League!

I can guarantee, any organisation, either ambitious or endangered, will be interested if there is money to be made. The RFL are proven to be too useless to be ambitious and too stupid not to consider themselves endangered.

 

 

[bobbruce]

3 hours ago, The Daddy said:

Can't help but thinking with the way they've been going about their business recently that they're trying to overtake the RLIF as the global governing body for the sport. 

Saw a newspaper article where one of their chiefs was basically saying something along the lines of 'we should see ourselves like the nfl and nba etc and not be afraid to flex our muscles'. 

Considering they single handedly try to stop the Denver test from going ahead, they're sanctioning international games between island nations and they make up their own laws without consulting the rest of the RL world it's evident that's the direction they want to move to. 

I just hope that the RLIF can grow a pair and become the global authority for the sport that we know they can be. 

And people wonder why organisations like sport accord keep turning us away. 

[West Leeds Riviera]

It just seems to me that Australia arnt too bothered about International RL, which I can understand seeing as International RL isn't competitive for them.

Im sure if all the sports governing bodies rallied around the RLIF it would make them stronger.

Id try to rebrand the international game, rename the RLIF International Rugby League and RLEF Europe Rugby League plus implement and international calander:

have a WC every 4 years

a 4/6 Nations every 2 

and a European/Pacific/Americas Championship every year in between

  

[Lobbygobbler]

6 minutes ago, West Leeds Riviera said:

It just seems to me that Australia arnt too bothered about International RL, which I can understand seeing as International RL isn't competitive for them.

Im sure if all the sports governing bodies rallied around the RLIF it would make them stronger.

Id try to rebrand the international game, rename the RLIF International Rugby League and RLEF Europe Rugby League plus implement and international calander:

have a WC every 4 years

a 4/6 Nations every 2 

and a European/Pacific/Americas Championship every year in between

  

If international RL isnt competitive then why bother with an Australian ref all the time? IMO the NRL doesnt want international RL to be competitive. Why would they? Australia not being top dog would make their comp look second rate. That is why they ensure we cant win. The only chance we have is (a) to get a British ref who will not be biased in favour of Aus (l can recall many games when this has happened) in order no to offend, (b) not go upstairs at key moments (to an Aussie VR who will rule in favour of Aus), and (c) for us to have a good game. 

[West Leeds Riviera]

2 minutes ago, Lobbygobbler said:

If international RL isnt competitive then why bother with an Australian ref all the time? IMO the NRL doesnt want international RL to be competitive. Why would they? Australia not being top dog would make their comp look second rate. That is why they ensure we cant win. The only chance we have is (a) to get a British ref who will not be biased in favour of Aus (l can recall many games when this has happened) in order no to offend, (b) not go upstairs at key moments (to an Aussie VR who will rule in favour of Aus), and (c) for us to have a good game. 

TBH id only invole Australia in the WC and start having neural refs for every game. NRL clubs will release players if they want to play internationals.   

[Lobbygobbler]

1 minute ago, West Leeds Riviera said:

TBH id only invole Australia in the WC and start having neural refs for every game. NRL clubs will release players if they want to play internationals.   

It would have to be non-NRL refs and non-Aussie

[Dunbar]

26 minutes ago, West Leeds Riviera said:

It just seems to me that Australia arnt too bothered about International RL, which I can understand seeing as International RL isn't competitive for them.

If competitiveness is a pre-requisite to Australians being bothered about sport why did they still care about State of Origin when Queensland won 11 out of 12 series between 2006 and 2017.

[Lobbygobbler]

8 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

If competitiveness is a pre-requisite to Australians being bothered about sport why did they still care about State of Origin when Queensland won 11 out of 12 series between 2006 and 2017.

Of coure State of Origin strongly showcases and benefits NRL as everyone in the state teams plays NRL (has there been an example where this is not the case?)

[Oliver Clothesoff]

The NRL, who are on course for $40m profit this year, want a bigger say in the way the game is run the world over? Why are people surprised by that? They’re the leaders within our game and really, their clubs’ opinion(s) should be heard and should have some weight. 

I can totally understand NRL clubs being peeved at their player’s being sent half way round the world for what was a friendly at the weekend during the season. I’m a bit peeved that so many Saints players went to America and I’m hoping that there’s not a knock-on effect on Friday vs Wakefield. It’s only natural to look out for yourselves. Saints’ interests right now is securing top spot and a home Semi-Final in the Play-Off’s later this year. Dare I say the same thing about the NRL clubs. They’re not thinking of the wider game, they’re thinking of their short-term goals of success as a team. I don’t blame anyone for doing so. 

I was listening to ‘Six Tackles with Gus’ the podcast with Gus Gould. For me, it’s the best of it’s kind out there and Gould himself was calling for less league games with more international rugby league scheduled in the calendar. That sounds like it’s a winner both in the Southern Hemisphere and up here, too. Less games also equates to less fatigue, less injury and (hopefully) a higher quality of game and that can only be a good thing. 

 

[West Leeds Riviera]

16 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

If competitiveness is a pre-requisite to Australians being bothered about sport why did they still care about State of Origin when Queensland won 11 out of 12 series between 2006 and 2017.

Most Origin games are competitive. It's not like Australia beating Fiji 64-0 plus Origin gets big crowds whereas internationals dont

[Dunbar]

37 minutes ago, West Leeds Riviera said:

Most Origin games are competitive. It's not like Australia beating Fiji 64-0 plus Origin gets big crowds whereas internationals dont

My point is simply this.

Queensland were dominating Origin during a period when the Kangaroos were losing World Cup finals and Four Nations finals to the Kiwi's and yet a lack of competitiveness is often cited for the reason why Australians are not invested in international league.  If that is the case then they should have turned their backs on Origin as well.

[Damien]

Well if the NRL arrange matches involving other nations, such as Tonga, without even having the manners to consult with the governing body of the nations involved and sell TV rights to games involving other countries then Id say they are indeed trying to be the global governing for RL. This is even more so when they actively try to undermine the actual global governing body, in the RLIF, and undermine other nations test matches that have been arranged on designated representative weekends. 

[Exiled Wiganer]

There will always be club v country tensions, but for what it's worth the NRL has done far more good for the international game than harm. PNG Hunters, NZ Warriors, potentially the Fiji NSW team, Pacific Tests... they develop all the players and have set up a structure in which players across the region can contribute. Through the NRL we are the top football code in the whole region. 

They will always want everything, and all club chairmen will be parochial at times, but we have far more international structure than we have ever had in our history, and the majority of the pro players are paid by NRL clubs. 

They did object to the Denver Test, but their argument focussed on playing it there (at altitude, a long way away, in virgin league territory) rather than playing at all. 

Finally, the NRL does not speak for all Australians. There are many Aussies interested in the international game, and many who long for competitive football. Is it their fault they have had no serious opposition for nearly 40 years? 

[Tommygilf]

To be fair this shows another element of why having more professional Northern Hemisphere teams is a must; and if the money isn't there in the UK then Europe and North America must be encouraged. Only with financial clout will the NRL be brought back into the fold.

Right now we need to address the imbalance towards Sydney. 

[thirteenthman]

11 hours ago, Dunbar said:

My point is simply this.

Queensland were dominating Origin during a period when the Kangaroos were losing World Cup finals and Four Nations finals to the Kiwi's and yet a lack of competitiveness is often cited for the reason why Australians are not invested in international league.  If that is the case then they should have turned their backs on Origin as well.

Of the last 50 matches Australia have played since the start of 2008, they have only lost 5 times (1 draw). All those games were against NZ. The last time someone other than NZ beat the Aussies is 12 years ago. They now haven't lost a match in 2 years. And in the last 2 World Cup's Australia's points for and against is 482-40. 

In Origin, only one of the series since 2008 has been a 3-0 whitewash, and on 6 occasions the series has been decided in the last game.

The other thing worth remembering is that both teams in origin are Australian, so while one team was winning most of the series over the last decade, you had another Australian team losing. The hype from the Sydney media has got bigger as NSW has become more desperate to beat the Queenslanders.

It's similar to how you'll get more interest here in England for a series against the Aussies than for one against the French. Everyone wants to put one over on the Aussies because of their record against us, so there's huge interest. But because we usually beat the French, the interest isn't the same. 

To try and say that Australia's dominance of the international game hasn't affected the Australian perception of the game would be foolish. And as EW alludes to above, the biggest problem the international game has is the dominance of the clubs. Certain NRL clubs may prefer self-interest, but having read some of the thoughts of Mr Lenagan and co., I suspect it's not something unique to the southern hemisphere. 

[ghost crayfish]

Wow, a couple of good balanced posts about the NRL! I had started to lose hope that I would see this day... Bravo!

[Harry Stottle]

Are the NRL trying to be the global governing body for RL?

And so they should be, what is the point of the tail wagging the dog!

[Damien]

11 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

To be fair this shows another element of why having more professional Northern Hemisphere teams is a must; and if the money isn't there in the UK then Europe and North America must be encouraged. Only with financial clout will the NRL be brought back into the fold.

Right now we need to address the imbalance towards Sydney. 

Exactly. RL desperately needs a 3rd professional sporting league and failing this at least at least many more North American, and French, teams in a much better funded and more powerful English structure.

[Sports Prophet]

14 hours ago, Damien said:

Well if the NRL arrange matches involving other nations, such as Tonga, without even having the manners to consult with the governing body of the nations involved and sell TV rights to games involving other countries then Id say they are indeed trying to be the global governing for RL. This is even more so when they actively try to undermine the actual global governing body, in the RLIF, and undermine other nations test matches that have been arranged on designated representative weekends. 

I’m not sure where this idea that the NRL organised international fixtures without the consultation of the respective governing bodies. From my understanding, Tonga and Samoa signed multi year contracts with the NRL to participate in NRL arranges mid season internationals. 

When signing multi-year contracts like this, don’t expect the NRL to consult with the governing bodies at every stage of preparations. If Tonga or Samoa want to make amends to that contract, I am sure they are welcome to approach the NRL with a plan, but I don’t think that was forthcoming prior to 2018 plans being finalised.

[Dunbar]

3 hours ago, thirteenthman said:

Of the last 50 matches Australia have played since the start of 2008, they have only lost 5 times (1 draw). All those games were against NZ. The last time someone other than NZ beat the Aussies is 12 years ago. They now haven't lost a match in 2 years. And in the last 2 World Cup's Australia's points for and against is 482-40. 

In Origin, only one of the series since 2008 has been a 3-0 whitewash, and on 6 occasions the series has been decided in the last game.

The other thing worth remembering is that both teams in origin are Australian, so while one team was winning most of the series over the last decade, you had another Australian team losing. The hype from the Sydney media has got bigger as NSW has become more desperate to beat the Queenslanders.

It's similar to how you'll get more interest here in England for a series against the Aussies than for one against the French. Everyone wants to put one over on the Aussies because of their record against us, so there's huge interest. But because we usually beat the French, the interest isn't the same. 

To try and say that Australia's dominance of the international game hasn't affected the Australian perception of the game would be foolish. And as EW alludes to above, the biggest problem the international game has is the dominance of the clubs. Certain NRL clubs may prefer self-interest, but having read some of the thoughts of Mr Lenagan and co., I suspect it's not something unique to the southern hemisphere. 

Yes, I do accept these points and they are quite right.

I have watched every game of every State of Origin series (either live or via VHS back in the day) and so I know how competitive they are.  It is not the responsibility of the Kangaroos to get worse it is the responsibility of the other nations to get better... I think we are seeing some signs of that at least.

I guess my frustration is that Australia were still bemoaning the competitiveness of international League even when they were being beaten in finals by the Kiwi's.

I am just a huge fan of international Rugby League.  The All Blacks have a better win% that the Kangaroos... does that stop then from playing test matches - no it helps them build a reputation as the premier rugby team on the planet.  I would rather than title belonged to the Kangaroos, and who cares if that includes a few one sided matches along the way!

[Damien]

1 hour ago, Sports Prophet said:

I’m not sure where this idea that the NRL organised international fixtures without the consultation of the respective governing bodies. From my understanding, Tonga and Samoa signed multi year contracts with the NRL to participate in NRL arranges mid season internationals. 

When signing multi-year contracts like this, don’t expect the NRL to consult with the governing bodies at every stage of preparations. If Tonga or Samoa want to make amends to that contract, I am sure they are welcome to approach the NRL with a plan, but I don’t think that was forthcoming prior to 2018 plans being finalised.

The last time you defended and denied this I replied to you directly which you conveniently ignored. Here you go again though:

However, by that time, the NRL had already announced that Tonga was in line to play Samoa as part of next year's Pacific test triple header in Sydney during the stand-alone State of Origin weekend in June – without first checking with the second-tier Pacific island side. 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/league/news/article.cfm?c_id=79&objectid=11958299