Jump to content

Todd Greenberg steps down as NRL CEO


Recommended Posts

Just now, The Great Dane said:

Your reliance on disingenuous word games is sad.

I will take that avoidance as a no. You can’t argue about an annual report and it’s facts, rather than choosing to believe the spiel the News Corp is peddling, without having read the annual report. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Have you read the annual report?

Not from 2019, haven't had time, but I've read most of the others from the last decade or so.

My general experience is that everything in them is spun to make the NRL look as good as possible, which isn't surprising given that it's written by, you know, the NRL.

I mean do you take everything that your government says at face value as well? 

What about the AFL, you read one of their annual reports recently. Would you take all of their numbers at face value?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Not from 2019, haven't had time, but I've read most of the others from the last decade or so.

My general experience is that everything in them is spun to make the NRL look as good as possible, which isn't surprising given that it's written by, you know, the NRL.

I mean do you take everything that your government says at face value as well? 

What about the AFL, you read one of their annual reports recently. Would you take all of their numbers at face value?

 

So you’re arguing about something you’ve not read? Can you not see you’re on the back foot already. 

Not sure what the government or Aussie Rules have anything to do with this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

I will take that avoidance as a no. You can’t argue about an annual report and it’s facts, rather than choosing to believe the spiel the News Corp is peddling, without having read the annual report. 

Again News Corp didn't peddle what I told you. In fact, broadly speaking they were supportive of Magic Round, and they were supportive of the NRL being screwed by the NSW government and the grand final staying in Sydney as a result, even if it wasn't what was best for the sport as a whole.

"We're for Sydney" is kind of their thing, I mean it is their motto and all...

You'd know that if you knew anything about the subject and weren't somebody on the other side of the world trying to interpret events that happened a couple of years ago.

The only person who has been avoiding anything is you, you've used word games and the party line to dodge having to address every argument that has been presented to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

So you’re arguing about something you’ve not read? Can you not see you’re on the back foot already. 

Not sure what the government or Aussie Rules have anything to do with this. 

Considering that I've not argued anything in the annual report, not really anyway, I don't see why I'd need to have read it.

I'm arguing that the annual report doesn't give a full picture, not that what's in the annual report is necessarily wrong.

For example, If you were taking the AFL participation numbers from their annual reports at face value, just like you are taking the NRL's statistics at face value without any outside context, then those numbers would include tens of thousands of school children that are forced to participate in Auskick programs in school.

Auskick's school program doesn't include actually playing Aussie Rules (it's a marketing exercise disguised as a skill develop program for young kids), so just on that point alone it's disingenuous to include it in Aussie Rules participation numbers, but I think that even if it did include playing the actual sport, that we could both agree that using a captive audience in participation numbers is an egregious case of padding out numbers.

The NRL does the same thing with their numbers in their annual reports all the time (in fact they've tried to do a similar thing with participation numbers as well), which I'm not blaming them for as every sport does it, you kind of have to, but it does mean that you can't just take what they say in their annual reports at face value.

There's a reason why the saying "lies, damn lies, and statistics" exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

Considering that I've not argued anything in the annual report, not really anyway, I don't see why I'd need to have read it.

I'm arguing that the annual report doesn't give a full picture, not that what's in the annual report is necessarily wrong.

For example, If you were taking the AFL participation numbers from their annual reports at face value, just like you are taking the NRL's statistics at face value without any outside context, then those numbers would include tens of thousands of school children that are forced to participate in Auskick programs in school.

Auskick's school program doesn't include actually playing Aussie Rules (it's a marketing exercise disguised as a skill develop program for young kids), so just on that point alone it's disingenuous to include it in Aussie Rules participation numbers, but I think that even if it did include playing the actual sport, that we could both agree that using a captive audience in participation numbers is an egregious case of padding out numbers.

The NRL does the same thing with their numbers in their annual reports all the time (in fact they've tried to do a similar thing with participation numbers as well), which I'm not blaming them for as every sport does it, you kind of have to, but it does mean that you can't just take what they say in their annual reports at face value.

There's a reason why the saying "lies, damn lies, and statistics" exists.

This is why Sport England stopped taking governing bodies' figures at face value and started doing their own assessments.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/04/2020 at 20:55, Allora said:

What have News Ltd got to do with Channel Nine?

Nothing....however he obviously wasn't willing to bend for them. 

Nine and News are concerned about the NRL's digital arm which is growing and they see it as competition.

He also had the clubs/Politis after him as they want on the commission. 

As I said previous the scary thing is News Ltd attack hounds are all happy and they haven't been since Gallop was in charge. We know how useless he was.

The clubs wanting on the commission is also a worry. The first thing the successful AFL did was punt the clubs off any commission, they aren't happy about that but have to live.

Have the AFL been asked to take smaller deals with Foxtel and Seven?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/04/2020 at 09:18, Hela Wigmen said:

V’landys first day in office has gone well. A new TV deal worth less, after backing himself in October to re-negotiate for more, and the streaming rights in tatters. 

And we're under the thumb of News Ltd again after fighting for 20 years to free ourselves. So much for an independent game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually think V'landys is only going to be around for a short time. It is telling he hasn't relinquished his CEO role at racing NSW which is his true passion.

No one in the media is putting that under the spotlight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...