I'm sorry I thought you meant a proper international code. Perth has a team in every pro sport (except RL) played in the Australia I could follow. You must get off this AFL fixation!

not bad. i thought you might be going that way with the national sport comment, but thought, nah he couldnt be that intelligent to set me up like that.

shame the lack of intelligence doesnt go for sporting preferences but there you go

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/l...1129-jyzi.html Quote Independent body not all good News for avaricious code JACQUELIN MAGNAY November 30, 2009 COMMENT Wild dreams of pots of gold from broadcast rights fees are underpinning a push from certain elements of rugby league for an independent commission to run the code. While having the one body pushing the code in a cohesive direction can only be good for the game, there are some dangers in allowing the current cash cow - News Limited - to walk away. And the key one is money. Many people in the game believe the NRL has previously been stymied in television contract negotiations by News Limited's half-ownership and the conflicts of interest in securing pay television rights fees from Fox Sports, part-owned by News Limited. But it could be argued that the game's second-largest revenue raiser - major naming rights sponsor and internet rights holder Telstra - is most involved in the code because of its part ownership of Foxtel, alongside News Limited. The NRL might have boosted its television rights fees in the last negotiations - but not as much as its fierce rival, the AFL. And that had more to do with posturing from media moguls than any commonsense analysis of return on investment or the reach into key commercial markets. In essence, the pay television deals had nought to do with the differences between the code's contracts - but the free-to-air rights did. Significantly, all of the rights for the NRL - sponsorship, broadcast, radio, internet and new media - are up for renewal at the end of 2012. This was done deliberately by NRL executives to try to extract a premium from a telco or media company which might pay more to buy a whole product, and which could then subcontract out bits and pieces. Yet within the NRL there are subcommittees already working hard against that principle, preparing to split the game further than it already is - auctioning the State of Origin, or Monday Night Football, or Test matches into separate parcels. The theory is that perhaps the sum of the pieces will be greater than the whole, but this, too, is a gamble. Will a company that has only a small piece of the game leverage harder to promote it? Insiders say having everything available at the one time simply allows any negotiations to be maximised as various combinations can be put forward. The global financial crisis has caused a shift in the fortunes of media outlets such as Channel Nine, which has a first and last right of refusal for the free-to-air NRL broadcast rights. If Channel Seven and Ten successfully bid for the AFL rights - which critically expire a year before the NRL's - then the number of bidders for rugby league might be restricted. But of course the NRL has a great product which repeatedly draws in the ratings - a magnetic lure for television stations, even ones that are struggling. Let's hope that the blazer-wearing types that end up overseeing the game are business savvy, because the rainbow is a slippery slope indeed. Maybe the question should be posed: If the game is so robust, why is News Limited running out the door? '"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/l...1129-jyzi.html Quote Independent body not all good News for avaricious code JACQUELIN MAGNAY November 30, 2009 COMMENT Wild dreams of pots of gold from broadcast rights fees are underpinning a push from certain elements of rugby league for an independent commission to run the code. While having the one body pushing the code in a cohesive direction can only be good for the game, there are some dangers in allowing the current cash cow - News Limited - to walk away. And the key one is money. Many people in the game believe the NRL has previously been stymied in television contract negotiations by News Limited's half-ownership and the conflicts of interest in securing pay television rights fees from Fox Sports, part-owned by News Limited. But it could be argued that the game's second-largest revenue raiser - major naming rights sponsor and internet rights holder Telstra - is most involved in the code because of its part ownership of Foxtel, alongside News Limited. The NRL might have boosted its television rights fees in the last negotiations - but not as much as its fierce rival, the AFL. And that had more to do with posturing from media moguls than any commonsense analysis of return on investment or the reach into key commercial markets. In essence, the pay television deals had nought to do with the differences between the code's contracts - but the free-to-air rights did. Significantly, all of the rights for the NRL - sponsorship, broadcast, radio, internet and new media - are up for renewal at the end of 2012. This was done deliberately by NRL executives to try to extract a premium from a telco or media company which might pay more to buy a whole product, and which could then subcontract out bits and pieces. Yet within the NRL there are subcommittees already working hard against that principle, preparing to split the game further than it already is - auctioning the State of Origin, or Monday Night Football, or Test matches into separate parcels. The theory is that perhaps the sum of the pieces will be greater than the whole, but this, too, is a gamble. Will a company that has only a small piece of the game leverage harder to promote it? Insiders say having everything available at the one time simply allows any negotiations to be maximised as various combinations can be put forward. The global financial crisis has caused a shift in the fortunes of media outlets such as Channel Nine, which has a first and last right of refusal for the free-to-air NRL broadcast rights. If Channel Seven and Ten successfully bid for the AFL rights - which critically expire a year before the NRL's - then the number of bidders for rugby league might be restricted. But of course the NRL has a great product which repeatedly draws in the ratings - a magnetic lure for television stations, even ones that are struggling. Let's hope that the blazer-wearing types that end up overseeing the game are business savvy, because the rainbow is a slippery slope indeed. Maybe the question should be posed: If the game is so robust, why is News Limited running out the door? '"

www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...003409,00.html Quote Jobs for the boys fear haunts commission ideal Dean Ritchie | November 29, 2009 11:00pm SOUTH Sydney chief executive Shane Richardson last night described rugby league's independent commission as "the biggest step forward in 100 years of the game". "Everyone has to put their egos away – this has got to happen," Richardson stressed. In what shapes as a history-making administration shake-up, the commission is expected to be implemented early next year by current NRL stakeholders, News Ltd and the Australian Rugby League. The Courier-Mail understands all stakeholders in the game have agreed in principle to a commission. The only fear though among clubs is whether too many "jobs for the boys" will be handed out to veteran officials as a sweetener for their support. ARL and News Ltd will nominate the inaugural commission with the 16 clubs to then select the commissioners. Officials were ducking for cover yesterday, reluctant to discuss the matter publicly for fear of jeopardising any potential deal. The commission will however be discussed at an NRL partnership meeting today. "It will be the biggest step forward in 100 years of rugby league. It's crucial," Richardson said. "The biggest advantage AFL has over us is their commission – they have one voice. "It is vital at this stage that the clubs do everything they can to support this. "It would be a huge backward step (if it failed). All the stakeholders recognise how important this is. "Everyone has to out their egos away – and their attitudes – because it's got to happen." League sources fear "nepotism" may sneak into negotiations and that long-time officials will be included in the revised game. Asked about this, all Cronulla CEO Richard Fisk said was: "Everyone is aware we can move forward with one united body but the key will be in the detail and to ensure we have good, fresh and positives ideas brought to our game." There was speculation yesterday former Super League CEO John Ribot was part of a consortium to buy the Melbourne Storm, currently funded by News Ltd, in the revamped game. But Ribot, also a QRL director, said: "I don't want to be involved. I won't be involved. "We (QRL) want an independent commission but no one wants to meet with us. "I wish people would step up to the plate and tell us all about it. We don't know how it's all going to happen if no one wants to have a meeting. It is very unusual." One player manager said: "I'll believe it (a commission) when I see it." The man behind the commission, Gold Coast boss Michael Searle, said he hoped for an announcement by Christmas "if all the stars align". '"

www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...003409,00.html Quote Jobs for the boys fear haunts commission ideal Dean Ritchie | November 29, 2009 11:00pm SOUTH Sydney chief executive Shane Richardson last night described rugby league's independent commission as "the biggest step forward in 100 years of the game". "Everyone has to put their egos away – this has got to happen," Richardson stressed. In what shapes as a history-making administration shake-up, the commission is expected to be implemented early next year by current NRL stakeholders, News Ltd and the Australian Rugby League. The Courier-Mail understands all stakeholders in the game have agreed in principle to a commission. The only fear though among clubs is whether too many "jobs for the boys" will be handed out to veteran officials as a sweetener for their support. ARL and News Ltd will nominate the inaugural commission with the 16 clubs to then select the commissioners. Officials were ducking for cover yesterday, reluctant to discuss the matter publicly for fear of jeopardising any potential deal. The commission will however be discussed at an NRL partnership meeting today. "It will be the biggest step forward in 100 years of rugby league. It's crucial," Richardson said. "The biggest advantage AFL has over us is their commission – they have one voice. "It is vital at this stage that the clubs do everything they can to support this. "It would be a huge backward step (if it failed). All the stakeholders recognise how important this is. "Everyone has to out their egos away – and their attitudes – because it's got to happen." League sources fear "nepotism" may sneak into negotiations and that long-time officials will be included in the revised game. Asked about this, all Cronulla CEO Richard Fisk said was: "Everyone is aware we can move forward with one united body but the key will be in the detail and to ensure we have good, fresh and positives ideas brought to our game." There was speculation yesterday former Super League CEO John Ribot was part of a consortium to buy the Melbourne Storm, currently funded by News Ltd, in the revamped game. But Ribot, also a QRL director, said: "I don't want to be involved. I won't be involved. "We (QRL) want an independent commission but no one wants to meet with us. "I wish people would step up to the plate and tell us all about it. We don't know how it's all going to happen if no one wants to have a meeting. It is very unusual." One player manager said: "I'll believe it (a commission) when I see it." The man behind the commission, Gold Coast boss Michael Searle, said he hoped for an announcement by Christmas "if all the stars align". '"

Magnay and Ritchie are two ink-slingers whose opinions count for naught.

It takes a fair lack of self-respect and/or knowledge to post or even read anything from either of those two.

conveniant!

If you say so.

There are very few journos who write without agenda, Magnay and Ritchie aren't two of them.

Read them, take their words in, live by them for all I care but the fact is that they are rubbish journos who garner very little respect in the Rugby League community.

Can't say I disagree with that.

Most of the Australian rags are infested with rah rah types. Product of dodgy old school ties.

Hardly a reflection on the relative popularity of the codes.

The Australian is one example that leaps to mind.

I've never understood why the Australian media is so negative to a sport that is A) the most popular sport in the state and B) owned by the same media. In the West they are generally very positive and supportive of all the teams in the city.

Makes no sense to me!

this should be in your signature about your knowledge of the nrl

The West Australian would run a close second to worst behind The Australian.

And so it begins. With the clubs being put in charge of the NRL you can bet that anything that challenges the staus quo will be firmly put down. www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/n ... 5805908912 Quote No more clubs say league bosses * By Dean Ritchie * From: The Daily Telegraph * December 02, 2009 12:01AM THEY are queuing up to join the Telstra Premiership but all 16 club chief executives have told the NRL to abandon expansion plans. At a club CEOs' conference in Coogee, delegates agreed the existing 16 clubs must have financial stability - and survive - before any teams are added. It is the first time club CEOs have publicly voted against expanding from 16 teams to 18. The move was a nasty blow to the Central Coast, Central Queensland, a second Brisbane side and even Papua New Guinea - clubs wanting entry after the 2012 season. Asked about expansion, Penrith CEO Mick Leary said it would be "difficult at this stage". Broncos chief executive Bruno Cullen added: "That's the most important thing on the agenda at the moment - to ensure the 16 clubs we have continue in the NRL and survive and that we do everything in our power to make sure that happens. "That doesn't mean there definitely won't be an expansion but it isn't something that's on the table." NRL chief executive David Gallop confirmed that his clubs were against an expanded competition. "There was unanimous support that the game needs to be able to grow the existing pie so that we can increase revenue for the existing clubs, increase payments for players and increase the amount we can invest in junior development," Mr Gallop said afterwards. "You can't do those things and invest in expansion ... and until there is a strong business case for any expansion contributing to the growth of the competition, then it will not be part of [the NRL's immediate plans. "A key point remains the success and strength of the competition and the reach we have at the moment." Meanwhile, rugby league's brave new world moved a step closer to reality yesterday when the 16 CEOs agreed the game must be run by an independent commission. That new commission is expected to be finalised early next year. "The parties are certainly trying to support the process," Titans CEO Michael Searle said. "There isn't a firm timeline on it and people may need to be a bit more patient but there are some good signs for what can be achieved in the months ahead." The conference continues today. '"

And so it begins. With the clubs being put in charge of the NRL you can bet that anything that challenges the staus quo will be firmly put down. www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/n ... 5805908912 Quote No more clubs say league bosses * By Dean Ritchie * From: The Daily Telegraph * December 02, 2009 12:01AM THEY are queuing up to join the Telstra Premiership but all 16 club chief executives have told the NRL to abandon expansion plans. At a club CEOs' conference in Coogee, delegates agreed the existing 16 clubs must have financial stability - and survive - before any teams are added. It is the first time club CEOs have publicly voted against expanding from 16 teams to 18. The move was a nasty blow to the Central Coast, Central Queensland, a second Brisbane side and even Papua New Guinea - clubs wanting entry after the 2012 season. Asked about expansion, Penrith CEO Mick Leary said it would be "difficult at this stage". Broncos chief executive Bruno Cullen added: "That's the most important thing on the agenda at the moment - to ensure the 16 clubs we have continue in the NRL and survive and that we do everything in our power to make sure that happens. "That doesn't mean there definitely won't be an expansion but it isn't something that's on the table." NRL chief executive David Gallop confirmed that his clubs were against an expanded competition. "There was unanimous support that the game needs to be able to grow the existing pie so that we can increase revenue for the existing clubs, increase payments for players and increase the amount we can invest in junior development," Mr Gallop said afterwards. "You can't do those things and invest in expansion ... and until there is a strong business case for any expansion contributing to the growth of the competition, then it will not be part of [the NRL's immediate plans. "A key point remains the success and strength of the competition and the reach we have at the moment." Meanwhile, rugby league's brave new world moved a step closer to reality yesterday when the 16 CEOs agreed the game must be run by an independent commission. That new commission is expected to be finalised early next year. "The parties are certainly trying to support the process," Titans CEO Michael Searle said. "There isn't a firm timeline on it and people may need to be a bit more patient but there are some good signs for what can be achieved in the months ahead." The conference continues today. '"

The Game can't afford 2 new teams yet, let alone 4.

They need to see the next TV rights $'s before making a decision on expansion.

How hard is that to understand?

Would you like me to get it translated into gibberish for you?

where as every othe code is using expansion to drive the TV $'s. We've ben led by the nose by TV for the last decade, looks like nothing is going to change anytime soon.

Yeah, Rugby Union is doing that as are Soccer.

The big thing is, it isn't working. Soccer isn't getting bums on seats or TV ratings at A League level and Union's next TV deal will be a lot less than it got last time on the back of the 2003 RWC. Have you seen the crowds for Soccer's Gold Coast team?

They would embarrass Newtown circa 1978.

AFL have all but admitted they're taking a massive punt on their to new teams. They have the money to do so thanks to Kerry Packer and the 7/10 consortium, we don't.

Their new teams aren't going to mean to those codes, but you just want Rugby League to whack a team into Perth because it's all you've ever dreamed of.

Keep dreaming.

The man talks sense.... www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -k6cx.html Quote RICHARD HINDS December 3, 2009 To those outside tight-knit rugby league circles, the paradox was as striking as John Daly's new trousers. The chief executives of the 16 NRL clubs emerged from a conference proclaiming they opposed the expansion of the competition yet, in the next breath, professed their support for the formation of an independent commission. It's an example of the game's old-school governance in which self-interest and survival instincts regularly obscure long-term vision. Then an apparent willingness to hand power to a body that would, if properly constituted, make it difficult for clubs to have a strong influence on such wide-reaching strategic decisions as expansion or contraction. Which makes you wonder if the NRL clubs fully grasp the ramifications of handing total control to an impartial commission, or whether they are confident the commission would be so heavily loaded with vested interests, club puppets and myopic cheerleaders that it will not have the strength nor the inclination to make difficult and unpopular decisions - the only kind that usually lead to meaningful change. The concept of a rugby league commission is in its honeymoon period. Until its powers are established and its chairs are filled, it is whatever you want it to be - the supplier of more money for clubs from the improved rights deals and sponsorships it will negotiate; of higher wages for players; of better facilities or timeslots for fans and, for the true believers, a Stalingrad-style defence against the invading AFL forces and soccer's growing popularity. Apart from a few miffed blazers from the game's alphabet soup - ARL, NRL, NSWRL, QRL - who fear their own territory will be annexed, no one seems to have considered they might be the loser. Or, at the very least, that their lives might be made less comfortable by independent scrutiny. While any comparisons between the codes is fingernails-down-the-blackboard to NRL diehards, the successful AFL commission should provide some idea what NRL clubs are in for - assuming the NRL version contains the type of hard-headed businessman who sometimes erred on the side of brutality when modernising the once fiercely tribal VFL. The NRL clubs justify their opposition to expansion on the basis they need time to get their houses in order. If they are not forced to do that under the threat of merger or relocation as struggling VFL/AFL clubs were - the NRL has already experienced some natural attrition - at the very least a truly independent rugby league commission would impose strict financial criteria forcing some existing clubs to improve management and revenue streams. But the supposition of NRL clubs seems to be that a commission would, by unravelling the game's current structure and deals, produce a hidden pot of gold. Somewhat perversely, league banks on the fact that its governance has been so badly compromised and it has been short-changed so significantly on television rights particularly, it has forgone hundreds of millions of dollars. While opening up the game to genuine competition might improve the NRL's rights deals, it was largely through expansion and value-adding that the AFL has reached the point where it might garner $1 billion from its next five-year TV-rights deal. If the AFL's free-to-air ratings in Sydney and Brisbane still look sickly beside those for the NRL, the impression of a vibrant, growing national competition with successful franchises in five capital cities is powerful. For the NRL, the Storm has been successful on the field but neglected and the relatively small markets of Adelaide and Perth are in the too-hard basket. Yet the game would merely preach to the converted by starting expansion franchises in heartland areas such as Central Coast and Brisbane. Where can the value be added? It is just one issue upon which the game needs a clear vision. One provided by a commission without blinkers. '"

The man talks sense.... www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -k6cx.html Quote RICHARD HINDS December 3, 2009 To those outside tight-knit rugby league circles, the paradox was as striking as John Daly's new trousers. The chief executives of the 16 NRL clubs emerged from a conference proclaiming they opposed the expansion of the competition yet, in the next breath, professed their support for the formation of an independent commission. It's an example of the game's old-school governance in which self-interest and survival instincts regularly obscure long-term vision. Then an apparent willingness to hand power to a body that would, if properly constituted, make it difficult for clubs to have a strong influence on such wide-reaching strategic decisions as expansion or contraction. Which makes you wonder if the NRL clubs fully grasp the ramifications of handing total control to an impartial commission, or whether they are confident the commission would be so heavily loaded with vested interests, club puppets and myopic cheerleaders that it will not have the strength nor the inclination to make difficult and unpopular decisions - the only kind that usually lead to meaningful change. The concept of a rugby league commission is in its honeymoon period. Until its powers are established and its chairs are filled, it is whatever you want it to be - the supplier of more money for clubs from the improved rights deals and sponsorships it will negotiate; of higher wages for players; of better facilities or timeslots for fans and, for the true believers, a Stalingrad-style defence against the invading AFL forces and soccer's growing popularity. Apart from a few miffed blazers from the game's alphabet soup - ARL, NRL, NSWRL, QRL - who fear their own territory will be annexed, no one seems to have considered they might be the loser. Or, at the very least, that their lives might be made less comfortable by independent scrutiny. While any comparisons between the codes is fingernails-down-the-blackboard to NRL diehards, the successful AFL commission should provide some idea what NRL clubs are in for - assuming the NRL version contains the type of hard-headed businessman who sometimes erred on the side of brutality when modernising the once fiercely tribal VFL. The NRL clubs justify their opposition to expansion on the basis they need time to get their houses in order. If they are not forced to do that under the threat of merger or relocation as struggling VFL/AFL clubs were - the NRL has already experienced some natural attrition - at the very least a truly independent rugby league commission would impose strict financial criteria forcing some existing clubs to improve management and revenue streams. But the supposition of NRL clubs seems to be that a commission would, by unravelling the game's current structure and deals, produce a hidden pot of gold. Somewhat perversely, league banks on the fact that its governance has been so badly compromised and it has been short-changed so significantly on television rights particularly, it has forgone hundreds of millions of dollars. While opening up the game to genuine competition might improve the NRL's rights deals, it was largely through expansion and value-adding that the AFL has reached the point where it might garner $1 billion from its next five-year TV-rights deal. If the AFL's free-to-air ratings in Sydney and Brisbane still look sickly beside those for the NRL, the impression of a vibrant, growing national competition with successful franchises in five capital cities is powerful. For the NRL, the Storm has been successful on the field but neglected and the relatively small markets of Adelaide and Perth are in the too-hard basket. Yet the game would merely preach to the converted by starting expansion franchises in heartland areas such as Central Coast and Brisbane. Where can the value be added? It is just one issue upon which the game needs a clear vision. One provided by a commission without blinkers. '"

Yeah, he's an idiot.

Anyone who thinks the AFL commission runs their game has rocks in their head. The AFL commission is a group of sycophants who bend over for Demetriou.

The Rugby League commission should[i not [/ibe based on the AFL version.

So, you've gone from a couple of Sydney-based spastic journos to a Melbourne-based one.

Why not try posting something from a journo with, well, a modicum of legitimacy.

Like Roy Masters.

you did see the Masters piece fear mongering about the commision and the death of SOO I take it?

Roy won't be silenced about his concerns on the new commision. First he was worried about SOO, then internationals, now it is jnr RL he fears will suffer at the hands of private club owners! www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -k8su.html Quote An independent commission is not the answer for rugby league ROY MASTERS December 4, 2009 The NSWRL and QRL could fall further down the pecking order under the new NRL model. Once more I am being told to go sit in the rocking chair by the window, sip a cup of warm milk, nibble an Arrowroot biscuit and keep my nose out of the game I love. Well, I am staring out the window, trying to read the future and I don't like the shape of the independent commission being thrust upon rugby league. ''The AFL and NFL are two competitions that are built on a similar model and look how successful those organisations are,'' declared Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis in the Herald this week. The NFL doesn't have representative football, apart from a meaningless all-stars game played a week after the annual Super Bowl. The Super Bowl winners call themselves ''world champions'' even though the competition is played only by 32 teams from US cities. NFL Europe, a competition involving clubs such as the Barcelona Dragons and the London Monarchs, was abandoned in 2007 because it was costing the billionaire owners of the NFL's franchises too much money. Nor does the NFL pay for development. The US college system prepares players for the professional league. The AFL's representative program is restricted to an annual game with Ireland, played with a round ball and a net. Its State of Origin series was abandoned more than a decade ago when AFL coaches convinced their players to stand down for fear they would be injured and miss club matches. The AFL Commission meekly surrendered to pressure from the clubs and killed off Origin football. Rugby league's most valued property is its annual three-game NSW-Queensland series. International rugby league has also finally become competitive and TV networks are willing to pay for it. Overseas TV earnings are potentially the fastest growing source of money for the code, especially with all three free-to-air networks in Australia channelling every dollar of profit into redeeming debt. Yet rugby league appears willing to allow NRL clubs to vote on the commissioners and therefore determine the future of Origin and international football, justifying it by citing the success of two codes that don't have representative programs. Under the independent commission model being promoted, the NSWRL and QRL would become second-tier feeder leagues dependent on the central body for funding. Similarly, all revenue coming into Australia from Test matches would pour into the commission pot, leaving the Kangaroos to rely on hand-outs. So, when I stare into the future, past all the fellow fossils of my era, such as dinosaur bones and evidence of global cooling, I see Russell Crowe's jet taxiing down the runway of Sydney's second airport, loaded with the owners of the NRL's privately owned clubs. They are off to Rusty's ranch in Coffs Harbour to discuss their candidates for the Independent Commission. Representatives of the Delmege and Penn families sit at opposite ends of the plane but they agree on one thing: the private owners must support a commissioner who will increase the NRL's annual distribution to the 16 clubs. Because NRL broadcasting income is fixed, sponsorships locked in and the gate takings of finals series unlikely to rise, any increase to the clubs must come from cuts in the grants to the QRL, NSWRL, junior development and the international program. The NRL clubs are struggling to make ends meet. Rusty fell out with Peter Holmes a Court, his co-owner of Souths, when asked to tip in $5 million to cover the Rabbitohs' debts way back in 2007. Ditto the acrimony of the Delmeges and Penns when they argued over how much each was contributing to cover the Sea Eagles' losses. The AFL's Gold Coast team is biting into revenues of the privately owned Titans club. The private owners are sufficiently numerous to lobby a few commissioners to do their bidding. Like the Sea Eagles, the Rabbitohs and the Titans, the Warriors are also privately owned and the Storm will be purchased by a consortium of Melbourne businessmen when News Ltd relinquishes control. News Ltd also owns 67 per cent of the Broncos, the NRL's only publicly listed club. With six of the 16 clubs privately owned, their owners have collective clout. Crowe has already lamented the absence of an NRL owners' collective and has criticised the central administration's revenue-raising activities, including sale of TV rights. The inaugural independent commission will fund state leagues and development because the ARL will nominate four representatives, along with News Ltd's four. It will make a mockery of the word ''independent'' but will at least ensure ''the people'' - as a News Ltd paper piously said last week - ''get their game back'', albeit temporarily. As commissioners retire, or find their workloads onerous, the private owners will exercise more control. Roosters director Mark Bouris has been tipped as a future commissioner, yet he bailed out of the Crawford committee when his commitments became too great. The four Crawford people left included three with close AFL ties and their recommendation on the future of the $130 million Active After Schools and Community program is a replica of the AFL's submission. The AFL, which has no privately owned clubs, does invest heavily in junior development. Time will tell if rugby league junior development and representative football is ignored, as time followed the first gentle suggestion I should retire to a rocking chair. Nearly 20 years ago, when the game was rushing to full-time training and players were abandoning their jobs and tertiary studies, I warned they would have too much time on their hands. Now former St George captain Mark Coyne has surveyed the behavioural problems in the NRL and concluded most ''atrocities'' are associated with players who have no part-time work or tertiary studies. I loathe writing, ''I told you so pieces'' and using the personal pronoun but someone needs to warn the code of an independent commission based on models that have no representative football, or on an American system that has no responsibility for junior development. I support the idea of an independent commission but not in this proposed form. You can be in favour of a republic, an emissions trading scheme, yet disapprove of the model. '"

Roy won't be silenced about his concerns on the new commision. First he was worried about SOO, then internationals, now it is jnr RL he fears will suffer at the hands of private club owners! www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -k8su.html Quote An independent commission is not the answer for rugby league ROY MASTERS December 4, 2009 The NSWRL and QRL could fall further down the pecking order under the new NRL model. Once more I am being told to go sit in the rocking chair by the window, sip a cup of warm milk, nibble an Arrowroot biscuit and keep my nose out of the game I love. Well, I am staring out the window, trying to read the future and I don't like the shape of the independent commission being thrust upon rugby league. ''The AFL and NFL are two competitions that are built on a similar model and look how successful those organisations are,'' declared Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis in the Herald this week. The NFL doesn't have representative football, apart from a meaningless all-stars game played a week after the annual Super Bowl. The Super Bowl winners call themselves ''world champions'' even though the competition is played only by 32 teams from US cities. NFL Europe, a competition involving clubs such as the Barcelona Dragons and the London Monarchs, was abandoned in 2007 because it was costing the billionaire owners of the NFL's franchises too much money. Nor does the NFL pay for development. The US college system prepares players for the professional league. The AFL's representative program is restricted to an annual game with Ireland, played with a round ball and a net. Its State of Origin series was abandoned more than a decade ago when AFL coaches convinced their players to stand down for fear they would be injured and miss club matches. The AFL Commission meekly surrendered to pressure from the clubs and killed off Origin football. Rugby league's most valued property is its annual three-game NSW-Queensland series. International rugby league has also finally become competitive and TV networks are willing to pay for it. Overseas TV earnings are potentially the fastest growing source of money for the code, especially with all three free-to-air networks in Australia channelling every dollar of profit into redeeming debt. Yet rugby league appears willing to allow NRL clubs to vote on the commissioners and therefore determine the future of Origin and international football, justifying it by citing the success of two codes that don't have representative programs. Under the independent commission model being promoted, the NSWRL and QRL would become second-tier feeder leagues dependent on the central body for funding. Similarly, all revenue coming into Australia from Test matches would pour into the commission pot, leaving the Kangaroos to rely on hand-outs. So, when I stare into the future, past all the fellow fossils of my era, such as dinosaur bones and evidence of global cooling, I see Russell Crowe's jet taxiing down the runway of Sydney's second airport, loaded with the owners of the NRL's privately owned clubs. They are off to Rusty's ranch in Coffs Harbour to discuss their candidates for the Independent Commission. Representatives of the Delmege and Penn families sit at opposite ends of the plane but they agree on one thing: the private owners must support a commissioner who will increase the NRL's annual distribution to the 16 clubs. Because NRL broadcasting income is fixed, sponsorships locked in and the gate takings of finals series unlikely to rise, any increase to the clubs must come from cuts in the grants to the QRL, NSWRL, junior development and the international program. The NRL clubs are struggling to make ends meet. Rusty fell out with Peter Holmes a Court, his co-owner of Souths, when asked to tip in $5 million to cover the Rabbitohs' debts way back in 2007. Ditto the acrimony of the Delmeges and Penns when they argued over how much each was contributing to cover the Sea Eagles' losses. The AFL's Gold Coast team is biting into revenues of the privately owned Titans club. The private owners are sufficiently numerous to lobby a few commissioners to do their bidding. Like the Sea Eagles, the Rabbitohs and the Titans, the Warriors are also privately owned and the Storm will be purchased by a consortium of Melbourne businessmen when News Ltd relinquishes control. News Ltd also owns 67 per cent of the Broncos, the NRL's only publicly listed club. With six of the 16 clubs privately owned, their owners have collective clout. Crowe has already lamented the absence of an NRL owners' collective and has criticised the central administration's revenue-raising activities, including sale of TV rights. The inaugural independent commission will fund state leagues and development because the ARL will nominate four representatives, along with News Ltd's four. It will make a mockery of the word ''independent'' but will at least ensure ''the people'' - as a News Ltd paper piously said last week - ''get their game back'', albeit temporarily. As commissioners retire, or find their workloads onerous, the private owners will exercise more control. Roosters director Mark Bouris has been tipped as a future commissioner, yet he bailed out of the Crawford committee when his commitments became too great. The four Crawford people left included three with close AFL ties and their recommendation on the future of the $130 million Active After Schools and Community program is a replica of the AFL's submission. The AFL, which has no privately owned clubs, does invest heavily in junior development. Time will tell if rugby league junior development and representative football is ignored, as time followed the first gentle suggestion I should retire to a rocking chair. Nearly 20 years ago, when the game was rushing to full-time training and players were abandoning their jobs and tertiary studies, I warned they would have too much time on their hands. Now former St George captain Mark Coyne has surveyed the behavioural problems in the NRL and concluded most ''atrocities'' are associated with players who have no part-time work or tertiary studies. I loathe writing, ''I told you so pieces'' and using the personal pronoun but someone needs to warn the code of an independent commission based on models that have no representative football, or on an American system that has no responsibility for junior development. I support the idea of an independent commission but not in this proposed form. You can be in favour of a republic, an emissions trading scheme, yet disapprove of the model. '"

It's like trying to explain the theory of relativity to a really stupid stick.

Agree with him or not, Roy Masters is 100 times the Rugby League scribe anyone else you've posted an article from in this thread is.

I don't necessarily agree with him on this one, but I'll certainly take notice of what he says. As for Magnay, Hinds, Ritchie etc... I wouldn't wipe my clacker with anything they write for fear of getting an STD that sheds IQ points...

The worse thing about it all so far is that in the name of compromise we are going to get stuck with Love and Gallop for the next couple of years. Seems there's not much Love for Love! www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -kbyz.html Quote No Love lost as ex-greats agree he's not the man ADRIAN PROSZENKO AND JOSH RAKIC December 6, 2009 SOME OF the most respected figures in rugby league fear the game's new independent commission will never live up to its name if current Australian Rugby League chief Colin Love is appointed as its inaugural chairman. The greatest administrative shake-up in over a century of rugby league could be just weeks away, with the ARL and News Limited set to relinquish control of the NRL to a new eight-person committee. However, there are concerns the new regime will simply be a mirror image of the previous one unless new and independent officials comprise the committee. Love is currently the chairman of the Rugby League International Federation, the NSW Rugby League and the ARL. It's understood that he will be offered the chairmanship of the commission for its first two years. The majority of league luminaries polled by The Sun-Herald were concerned that Love would remain the chief powerbroker in rugby league. ''I'm struggling to come up with a better name on the spot, but I'm sure I can come up with a better one than Colin Love,'' respected player-turned-analyst Greg Alexander fumed. ''I've got nothing personal against Colin, I think he's a terrific bloke. But if we're going to have an independent commission, f--- me dead, how can you have Colin Love as the chairman? You can quote me on that. ''Let's be serious. Really, there wouldn't be a league fan that would cop that.'' Former Brisbane prop Shane Webcke, touted in some circles as a potential commissioner, added: ''This isn't against Colin Love, but if it's going to be a new independent commission, then that's what it should be. ''Inevitably, people who have been mired in either side of the organisation in the past will have their bias towards the way their bit of the company used to think. And you can't blame people for that. ''The danger you run into there is you bring across the old ways of thinking. It would almost be a disadvantage to be involved in the administration of the game towards this point. What will really make this thing take off is if you've got some dynamic thinkers in there who have a passion for our game, business acumen and fresh ideas. ''To have change, you need to make change. For our game to move forward … you need a fresh approach. That's not a slur on anyone involved in the game at the moment, but if we're going to do it, let's do it on that basis.'' Former prime minister John Howard was initially sounded out for the position, but that plan was scrapped in favour of appointing Love. Several people currently involved in the game, who didn't want to be quoted, believe the move is a poor compromise in order to get the commission over the line. Manly co-owner Max Delmege said the initial choice of Howard, an avid league fan, would have been the ''perfect'' choice. Asked about other potential candidates, the property magnate simply said: ''If it's going to be an independent commission, it's got to be independent.'' Several league greats, including Wally Lewis and Warren Ryan, nominated Gold Coast chief executive Michael Searle - the driving force behind the commission - as a potential chairman. While Ryan didn't have a definitive answer on the identity of the new chief, he stated: ''You'd tend to think if they wanted a fresh look, a new beginning, one of the current gang shouldn't be the boss.'' Those sentiments were echoed by former Broncos centre Steve Renouf, Kangaroos great Brad Clyde, former NSW hooker Ben Elias and the latest addition to Wayne Bennett's coaching staff, former Rooster Adrian Lam. There was some support for Love, with Steve Mortimer, Wayne Pearce and Gary Belcher comfortable with his appointment. ''Colin is not linked to any NRL club and in my lifetime as a rugby league player, playing for the Bulldogs, NSW and Australia, I have found him to be a very decent person,'' Mortimer said. '"

The worse thing about it all so far is that in the name of compromise we are going to get stuck with Love and Gallop for the next couple of years. Seems there's not much Love for Love! www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -kbyz.html Quote No Love lost as ex-greats agree he's not the man ADRIAN PROSZENKO AND JOSH RAKIC December 6, 2009 SOME OF the most respected figures in rugby league fear the game's new independent commission will never live up to its name if current Australian Rugby League chief Colin Love is appointed as its inaugural chairman. The greatest administrative shake-up in over a century of rugby league could be just weeks away, with the ARL and News Limited set to relinquish control of the NRL to a new eight-person committee. However, there are concerns the new regime will simply be a mirror image of the previous one unless new and independent officials comprise the committee. Love is currently the chairman of the Rugby League International Federation, the NSW Rugby League and the ARL. It's understood that he will be offered the chairmanship of the commission for its first two years. The majority of league luminaries polled by The Sun-Herald were concerned that Love would remain the chief powerbroker in rugby league. ''I'm struggling to come up with a better name on the spot, but I'm sure I can come up with a better one than Colin Love,'' respected player-turned-analyst Greg Alexander fumed. ''I've got nothing personal against Colin, I think he's a terrific bloke. But if we're going to have an independent commission, f--- me dead, how can you have Colin Love as the chairman? You can quote me on that. ''Let's be serious. Really, there wouldn't be a league fan that would cop that.'' Former Brisbane prop Shane Webcke, touted in some circles as a potential commissioner, added: ''This isn't against Colin Love, but if it's going to be a new independent commission, then that's what it should be. ''Inevitably, people who have been mired in either side of the organisation in the past will have their bias towards the way their bit of the company used to think. And you can't blame people for that. ''The danger you run into there is you bring across the old ways of thinking. It would almost be a disadvantage to be involved in the administration of the game towards this point. What will really make this thing take off is if you've got some dynamic thinkers in there who have a passion for our game, business acumen and fresh ideas. ''To have change, you need to make change. For our game to move forward … you need a fresh approach. That's not a slur on anyone involved in the game at the moment, but if we're going to do it, let's do it on that basis.'' Former prime minister John Howard was initially sounded out for the position, but that plan was scrapped in favour of appointing Love. Several people currently involved in the game, who didn't want to be quoted, believe the move is a poor compromise in order to get the commission over the line. Manly co-owner Max Delmege said the initial choice of Howard, an avid league fan, would have been the ''perfect'' choice. Asked about other potential candidates, the property magnate simply said: ''If it's going to be an independent commission, it's got to be independent.'' Several league greats, including Wally Lewis and Warren Ryan, nominated Gold Coast chief executive Michael Searle - the driving force behind the commission - as a potential chairman. While Ryan didn't have a definitive answer on the identity of the new chief, he stated: ''You'd tend to think if they wanted a fresh look, a new beginning, one of the current gang shouldn't be the boss.'' Those sentiments were echoed by former Broncos centre Steve Renouf, Kangaroos great Brad Clyde, former NSW hooker Ben Elias and the latest addition to Wayne Bennett's coaching staff, former Rooster Adrian Lam. There was some support for Love, with Steve Mortimer, Wayne Pearce and Gary Belcher comfortable with his appointment. ''Colin is not linked to any NRL club and in my lifetime as a rugby league player, playing for the Bulldogs, NSW and Australia, I have found him to be a very decent person,'' Mortimer said. '"

and the rest of the initial commision will be nominated by the ARL and News Ltd. as well www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -kbyy.html Quote Top line-up for the game's fresh start IAN HEADS December 6, 2009 RUGBY league's leaders have promisingly nailed the first step as the game sets out on the pathway that will define its second century of existence. The 16 NRL clubs have been summarily excused from duty when it comes to the all-important task of selecting the first eight members of the long-awaited independent commission. And that's exactly as it should be, considering the historical penchant of clubs for the old standby of self-interest, a reality illuminated yet again by the decision (via club chief executives) during the week to flick-pass any expansion of the game for some years. It may well turn out to be one of those decisions that is considered - then calmly set aside by the new commission. With no club input, the eight men (and/or women) of the C21 Commission will be picked instead by representatives of those on the opposite sides of the Great Divide - News Ltd and the ARL - in a final gesture before (hopefully) unity and professionalism reign at last, and the bells ring out. The second leg of the Great Question remains unanswered: will the two sides at this last round-up have the guts and gumption, the genuine care for the game, to ignore past feuds and appeasing mates and politics and old favours owed - and pick instead a commission that is simply the best: a blue riband line-up of diverse, talented people to guide the game onwards and upwards in the face of a particularly challenging future? Watch this space … The gentler decisions have already been made. Legal eagles Colin Love (ARL) and David Gallop will stay on - Love for two years to chair the commission and Gallop, secure as NRL chief executive for three to five years. That in place, now comes the harder, more lofty stuff. The quest must be for nothing less than recruitment of the best talent available, providing a commission that reflects a genuinely wide body of knowledge - sweeping all the way from deeply ingrained nous concerning the game itself to high-range media savvy, to financial expertise, to the ability to engage the community, to impeccable commercial and marketing skills, even to the rarified air of spectacular entrepreneurial flights. This new and history-making body needs to be a resilient one, made up of tough, skilful and non-aligned people. Their job collectively will be to soar high above the other shareholders in rugby league's firmament - the clubs, players, coaches and referees - when it comes to the big calls, to at times make objective decisions that may bruise and disappoint but always with only one thing in mind: the greater good of the game. To nudge the debate along, I'll respectfully throw in a name or two without notice from my distant vantage point of the recent seasons. If the decision-makers can be big enough to forget the bloody noses of the Super League years, the bloke who now works from dawn to dusk on a magnificent Hunter Valley property should be a shoo-in for a call. If John Quayle, an outstanding general manager of the NSWRL (1983-96), still has enemies in the game, even they would surely agree that, in 2010, as a more polished and rounded campaigner, he possesses an unsurpassed pedigree for what is required, his skills honed in the recent years by his fine work on many of the world's major sporting festivals, starting with SOCOG at the Sydney Olympics of 2000. Quayle loves rugby league from the top of his head to the soles of his feet. He should be invited back. John Coates, the blunt and skilful Australian Olympic supremo, ranks as one of the world's premier sporting officials. Does he have an interest in rugby league? Well, yes - to the extent that he was even at one stage ABC radio's around-the grounds man at Lidcombe Oval! Would he be interested in or available for the commission? I have no idea. Shane Webcke, a highly successful businessman, ranks as one of the most interesting, intelligent and forthright players I have met in my (almost) 50 years in and around the game. He has trodden on (official) toes in things he has said in his books but is deeply passionate about league, rails against misbehaviour by players, is both an internationalist and an expansionist - and is a tough hombre inclined to say exactly what he thinks. As a recent retiree he would link the commission with the arcane world of the modern professional player, providing a valuable insight into that world. Wayne Bennett rates him so highly he once declared: "If he decides to go into [Queensland politics, I can see him becoming premier." Other names have been aired these recent weeks and there seems no doubt the selection panel will have a rich crop from which to pick, with someone like the highly regarded Katie Page near the top of that list. If they can get it right - without succumbing to matey old ways - it's a wonderfully exciting prospect for the game. Beneath the supreme decision-making body, the other stakeholders will make their contributions and their recommendations - the clubs, the coaches, the country and junior bodies, the technical panel. But the big calls about the game will be made at an entirely different altitude, where the word "independent" is the key to all. Rugby league's ghosts of administrators past may well be circling this coming Christmas. I'm sure that the likes of J.J. Giltinan, Vic Trumper, Harry Sunderland, Jersey Flegg, Bill Buckley and all the rest would be chuffed by the giant leap that the game they helped create and shape is about to take. Foundation day of the commission will take its place alongside epic administrative milestones of earlier years: the brave beginning, via the formation of the NSWRL (1907) and the QRA (later QRL) in 1908; the birth of the wider reaching Australian RL Board of Control (later ARL) in 1924; the arrival of the CRL in 1934; the rise of Kevin Humphreys with his New Deal of 1973; John Quayle and his ambitious and further-sighted reconstruction and Newer Deal (1983); then, the pulling out of the rug via the disastrous Super League split of 1995-97 and the fragile restoration of "peace" in December 1997, leading to the formation of the NRL in 1998 in and tentative steps back towards dry land. Praise in the current process is due for sure to the likes of Michael Searle, who has been at the heart of this latest revolution; Steve "Turvey" Mortimer, who has championed it whenever the chance has arisen; and this newspaper's Phil Gould, who has campaigned so hard - plus, seemingly joining the throng, today's officials, who have taken a collective deep breath and with some pragmatism accepted the reality of irresistible change, even though it will diminish the role of numbers of them. Potentially these are good times for rugby league as it muscles up for the challenges of the other codes. The remnants of the Super League era are to be finally flushed away. To celebrate, I would do only one more thing: rebrand the "new game" - call it Rugby League Australia - and under that unified banner set the sails for the 21st century.'"

and the rest of the initial commision will be nominated by the ARL and News Ltd. as well www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -kbyy.html Quote Top line-up for the game's fresh start IAN HEADS December 6, 2009 RUGBY league's leaders have promisingly nailed the first step as the game sets out on the pathway that will define its second century of existence. The 16 NRL clubs have been summarily excused from duty when it comes to the all-important task of selecting the first eight members of the long-awaited independent commission. And that's exactly as it should be, considering the historical penchant of clubs for the old standby of self-interest, a reality illuminated yet again by the decision (via club chief executives) during the week to flick-pass any expansion of the game for some years. It may well turn out to be one of those decisions that is considered - then calmly set aside by the new commission. With no club input, the eight men (and/or women) of the C21 Commission will be picked instead by representatives of those on the opposite sides of the Great Divide - News Ltd and the ARL - in a final gesture before (hopefully) unity and professionalism reign at last, and the bells ring out. The second leg of the Great Question remains unanswered: will the two sides at this last round-up have the guts and gumption, the genuine care for the game, to ignore past feuds and appeasing mates and politics and old favours owed - and pick instead a commission that is simply the best: a blue riband line-up of diverse, talented people to guide the game onwards and upwards in the face of a particularly challenging future? Watch this space … The gentler decisions have already been made. Legal eagles Colin Love (ARL) and David Gallop will stay on - Love for two years to chair the commission and Gallop, secure as NRL chief executive for three to five years. That in place, now comes the harder, more lofty stuff. The quest must be for nothing less than recruitment of the best talent available, providing a commission that reflects a genuinely wide body of knowledge - sweeping all the way from deeply ingrained nous concerning the game itself to high-range media savvy, to financial expertise, to the ability to engage the community, to impeccable commercial and marketing skills, even to the rarified air of spectacular entrepreneurial flights. This new and history-making body needs to be a resilient one, made up of tough, skilful and non-aligned people. Their job collectively will be to soar high above the other shareholders in rugby league's firmament - the clubs, players, coaches and referees - when it comes to the big calls, to at times make objective decisions that may bruise and disappoint but always with only one thing in mind: the greater good of the game. To nudge the debate along, I'll respectfully throw in a name or two without notice from my distant vantage point of the recent seasons. If the decision-makers can be big enough to forget the bloody noses of the Super League years, the bloke who now works from dawn to dusk on a magnificent Hunter Valley property should be a shoo-in for a call. If John Quayle, an outstanding general manager of the NSWRL (1983-96), still has enemies in the game, even they would surely agree that, in 2010, as a more polished and rounded campaigner, he possesses an unsurpassed pedigree for what is required, his skills honed in the recent years by his fine work on many of the world's major sporting festivals, starting with SOCOG at the Sydney Olympics of 2000. Quayle loves rugby league from the top of his head to the soles of his feet. He should be invited back. John Coates, the blunt and skilful Australian Olympic supremo, ranks as one of the world's premier sporting officials. Does he have an interest in rugby league? Well, yes - to the extent that he was even at one stage ABC radio's around-the grounds man at Lidcombe Oval! Would he be interested in or available for the commission? I have no idea. Shane Webcke, a highly successful businessman, ranks as one of the most interesting, intelligent and forthright players I have met in my (almost) 50 years in and around the game. He has trodden on (official) toes in things he has said in his books but is deeply passionate about league, rails against misbehaviour by players, is both an internationalist and an expansionist - and is a tough hombre inclined to say exactly what he thinks. As a recent retiree he would link the commission with the arcane world of the modern professional player, providing a valuable insight into that world. Wayne Bennett rates him so highly he once declared: "If he decides to go into [Queensland politics, I can see him becoming premier." Other names have been aired these recent weeks and there seems no doubt the selection panel will have a rich crop from which to pick, with someone like the highly regarded Katie Page near the top of that list. If they can get it right - without succumbing to matey old ways - it's a wonderfully exciting prospect for the game. Beneath the supreme decision-making body, the other stakeholders will make their contributions and their recommendations - the clubs, the coaches, the country and junior bodies, the technical panel. But the big calls about the game will be made at an entirely different altitude, where the word "independent" is the key to all. Rugby league's ghosts of administrators past may well be circling this coming Christmas. I'm sure that the likes of J.J. Giltinan, Vic Trumper, Harry Sunderland, Jersey Flegg, Bill Buckley and all the rest would be chuffed by the giant leap that the game they helped create and shape is about to take. Foundation day of the commission will take its place alongside epic administrative milestones of earlier years: the brave beginning, via the formation of the NSWRL (1907) and the QRA (later QRL) in 1908; the birth of the wider reaching Australian RL Board of Control (later ARL) in 1924; the arrival of the CRL in 1934; the rise of Kevin Humphreys with his New Deal of 1973; John Quayle and his ambitious and further-sighted reconstruction and Newer Deal (1983); then, the pulling out of the rug via the disastrous Super League split of 1995-97 and the fragile restoration of "peace" in December 1997, leading to the formation of the NRL in 1998 in and tentative steps back towards dry land. Praise in the current process is due for sure to the likes of Michael Searle, who has been at the heart of this latest revolution; Steve "Turvey" Mortimer, who has championed it whenever the chance has arisen; and this newspaper's Phil Gould, who has campaigned so hard - plus, seemingly joining the throng, today's officials, who have taken a collective deep breath and with some pragmatism accepted the reality of irresistible change, even though it will diminish the role of numbers of them. Potentially these are good times for rugby league as it muscles up for the challenges of the other codes. The remnants of the Super League era are to be finally flushed away. To celebrate, I would do only one more thing: rebrand the "new game" - call it Rugby League Australia - and under that unified banner set the sails for the 21st century.'"

Quote ="JB Down Under"The man talks sense.... www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -k6cx.html'" He is another rah rah/AFL sycophant. You sure can pick 'em...

Quote ="JB Down Under"The man talks sense.... www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -k6cx.html'" He is another rah rah/AFL sycophant. You sure can pick 'em...

is there any journalist you rate?

Not many I'll give you the tip...

Steve Ricketts is a true believer - and a nice guy - at The Courier Mail. Same with Bernie Pramberg there.

Steve Mascord's heart is in the right place.

Roy Masters is a good friend and highly knowledgeable about the game.

(This is Australia only)

Few others are worth a pinch of crap.