ARL cant be that stupid

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
Rex, in relation to your points 1 to 4.
1.  I have no knowledge of conversations between Ribot and Murdoch leading up to and during the SL period.  I am not privy to Murdoch's current state of mind nor his current business plans, other than to say I have watched league game on pay TV in Vancouver.
2.  It is my understanding that no current NRL teams give/donate/fund the Melbourne Storm.  TV rights to broadcast are currently held by PBS who determine what is shown when and where on free to air TV.  Five games per week are broadcast on Fox pay TV and are shown live.  It seems to me that many current NRL players would benefit from being able to walk down streets unnoticed.   
3.  It is my understanding that the current financial position of the NRL is sound.  Gallop's latest pronouncement is that "Everything is positive, (1/12/08.)  This does not mean that all clubs are in a sound financial position.  The impact of NSW legislation in relation to gambling tax and other issues that impact on clubs should be noted.  In addition the contracts entered into by the NRL with PBS could be adversely impacted by the declining share value of PBS and its current private equity owner CVC Asia Pacific.  Rugby, having signed with News, is not predicted to suffer any adverse financial effects.
4  I have not alluded to any 'level' playing field in any of my comments regarding this matter.  Indeed a one team/one city concept is a good one, in my opinion.  I would venture to add that in a city the size of Sydney, four teams would be suitable.  The Brisbane Broncos were signed into the ARL by Arko (something he regrets now) but he did it, when it wasn't the only Brisbane bid at that time.

In conclusion the matters you raise are interesting up to a point.  When you ask the question you also supply the answer.  Yes.
My guess is that promises were 'underdelivered' because of the litigation and the costs involved once defensive positions were taken.  Too bad in my view.  End of story.  Now, can we all move on and agree to disagree.         
 
DSM,

Was Ribot a liar, incompetent, or naively sucked in by Murdoch?  There's no other possibilities are there?  Whatever the reason for him spectacularly underdelivering on his promise on what Murdoch would do ... it proves he is not to be trusted again. He ripped the game apart, gave every other sport a huge leg-up in taking League's market share, and delivered nothing - ZIP - of value.

Try doing some basic research on money taken out of the game by News Ltd and where Melbourne gets it's money.

The absence of any financial kitty was confirmed by Gallop himself.

A one-team town in Brissy a good idea DSM?  Wow.  Why not Sydney too?

Still waiting for your explanation of why SL was a good concept.
 
Rex let it go FFS.

Can't you see he is trying to withdraw from this merry go round while you all are moderately civil.

None of the points of view in this thread are going to change, just leave it at that.

If there is one thing I am sure of with DSM, he can hold his own in these "discussions".

I actually commend him for trying to move on, there was a time where he wouldn't have.
 
Rex, you're doing this 'answering your own questions' thing again.  Rex, with regard to your opinion of Ribot that's entirely up to you, and I can't comment on what went on between Ribot and Murdoch, I wasn't there.  The SL debate is surely a point of view of which we're all entitled to have.  We are really talking about a point in time that is now history, and I'm definitely not obsessed with Ribot's current comings and goings.  Rex, I want to move on with my life at this point.  I'll concede this unlevel playing field to you. 
 
Fro link said:
Rex let it go FFS.
Can't you see he is trying to withdraw from this merry go round while you all are moderately civil.
Fro,

You said you support DSM 100% when he said that SL was a good concept, poorly implemented.  Most Manly fans, myself included, would challenge that statement. 

SL all but destroyed the game, took the strong financial positions of Manly and the game and turned both virtually bankrupt, sold out the game in terms of both ownership and control, made us a subsidiary of News Ltd, disaffected huge slabs of long-term loyal rugby league supporters, etc, etc.  And all for what?  A Ribot "vision" that never happened, and was never going to happen?

I've asked for the positives as to why it was a good concept.  If DSM can't articulate them, perhaps you can.  And then if SL underperformed the concept, how is this due to anything other than Murdoch and his cronies not doing what they said they would? 

Meanwhile, due to their controlling interest, News Ltd now screw us at will, underpaying for TV rights, creating a non-level playing field so 100% owned News Ltd teams (Melbourne, Brisbane) win, and sucking huge amounts of money out of RL coffers every year.  The proposed Qld appointment of Ribot to the ARL board would be the Broncos (ie Murdoch) appointing a Murdoch crony (i.e. Ribot) to the part of the NRL (i.e. the ARL) not 100% controlled by Murdoch.  Is this not so?  When is enough enough?  Does Murdoch need 100% control of every decision? What else can he stuff up now?
 
DSM,

You claimed all was financially rosy with Leagues clubs.  In today's news:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/sport/its-tight-but-were-not-broke-sharks/1361293.aspx
It's tight but we're not broke - Sharks
JACQUELIN MAGNAY
15/11/2008 1:09:08 AM

Cronulla say they have enough cash flow to make payments to players and coaches for the next two months but will be relying on corporate sponsorship and club memberships to get them through a tight financial situation next season.

However, legal costs surrounding a possible Greg Bird sacking, and a junior league fraud case, have many club insiders nervous about the future.

In the first of what is expected to be several cash crises among NRL clubs as the financial markets squeeze tighter, the Sharks have been waiting for an independent review of their lean operation before slashing costs.
 
Rex, you're obviously still hurting from the SL days and maybe should see someone for professional help in moving on.  I can provide you privately with an excellent Macquarie St therapist.  Also Rex, I would advise you to take up the current ownership structure and state of the game with David Gallop.  Although I think he's stupid, he's usually cordial and quite easy to contact.  Your questions would be more useful not directed at mere fans, but at the persons who make decisions.  You should also write of your concern regarding Ribot to the QRL.  (you can google the address).    And lastly Rex, you need to carefully read my posts.  No more please.  I'm exhausted and need to walk the dog.   
 
DSM,

Thanks (but no thanks) for your thoughtful offer of your Macquarie St therapist.  You must be very happy with your progress to offer his/her services out to strangers.  :)

Cheers mate.  Thanks for all your prolific advice, and if I wasn't real happy with whatever happens, I might actually consider reading it.
 
Rex Just because i agreed with his post or indeed the concept  (but not the implementation) doesnt mean that I am going to crap on ad nauseum about it for days on end. Just as DSM is doing his best to try and stop doing.

But I am well aware that you will reply to this post, just so that you can have the last word, and in your sad little mind, claim to yourself that you "won the argument" and fought for the forces of good.

But go on, prove me wrong and dont reply. I'll bet you can't resist and by the time I check this in the morning you will have posted some meandering reply.
 
I have been enjoying  the various comments and perspectives on Super League. There is no Conga line on this forum, with people able to express their views.

Just don't take yourselves too seriously - as in the end all are welcome to their views. Keep the entertaining stuff going too - I am enjoying the funny wisecracks and comebacks!!
 
Arko and Rex

Regarding the joint venture.
All good guys and the result was certainly a good one. But it all transpired so seemless and almost clinical.
I reckon the JV was a setup (ie the creation and breakup was intended) from the start and maybe even Norths were in on the imminent break up of the JV to help them out of debts owed.

I just wonder if any of the people involved would ever admit to it.

Shame they had to go to such lengths for a few million bucks. Which is were Ribot and Superleague are answerable to.
 
What rankles with me (apart from the history) is that the game is owned by a media company who answer to their shareholders based on profits they make from Pay TV etc. I would much rather the game being directed by those that know the game, love the game and with the game's best interests at heart. I can't see that at present. That was my problem with SuperLeague as well - it wasn't about the game but subscription to Pay TV.

The fact that Melbourne lose millions every year and yet are propped up by News shows that ridiculous state the game is in. Have you ever heard of a company owning teams in a comp that they own and run???? Cowboys, Broncos and Storm. See how Raiders are going financially now that they have lost their free subsidy.

A game doing well financially back in 96 is now struggling - and all so that subscriptions for Pay TV can be sold. Murdoch won but the game lost.
 
I said I would dip out the dispute and intend to (for the record though - SuperLeague evil, those who perpetrated it scum and concept a sham and a disaster).

However just for the sake of accuracy I believe (and Wikipedia agrees) News sold the Cowboys (who are profitable) to the Cowboy Leagues club so they only own two clubs.
 
I've enjoyed the to-ing and fro-ing.  As much as I've put opposing arguments and stirred (just a tad), I actually love the fact that Manly fans include opposing views like DSM's and Fro's.  And I love that we as Manly fans, can put opposing views here on this forum, so that News Ltd's voice isn't the only one heard.  Vive l'internet.

To me it's not primarily about moral rights or wrongs, just consequences of decisions taken.  News Ltd now owns and runs the game, owns two teams, and is in a position to effectively sell Rugby League Pay TV rights to itself, effectively at the price it decides.  How much bigger of a conflict of interests could there possibly be? And who, effectively, pays the referees?  Answer: primarily the owner of the Storm & Broncos, of course.  Until News Ltd divests itself of its controlling interest, every match result involving Storm and Broncos is suspect, and every RL decision (based on forces of market pressures and shareholder demands) would logically be made in the interests of News Ltd, not Rugby League.
 
By your reckoning 40 - nil wouldn't have gone down well in the boardroom in New York.  Yes.  Have I got the last word in?  Yes.
 
you pair are as bad as one another at gettign the last word.

thanks for proving me 100% correct rex, you couldnt let it rest :)
 
Ho Fro, I love the fact that you desperately seek to get the last word in yourself all the while whingeing that you perceive others are doing the same.  Very funny indeed.  Feel free to keep whingeing ... or not.  I don't mind.

Hi DSM.  The two News Ltd teams, Melbourne and Brisbane, dominate the competition and dominate the premierships in the post_SL era, and you clasp onto one result in one year as proof in your world that there is no bias to Murdoch teams, so your hero Murdoch comes out smelling like roses.

Every noticed yourself filtering all experiences according to your pre-existing beliefs?
 
Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom