NRL and clubs at loggerheads over licence negotiations

DON’T mention the war. The latest round of licence negotiations between the NRL and clubs could yet catch alight, writes PAUL KENT.

FIRST off, let’s not mention the war.

The last thing anybody wants in times of peace and harmony with their fuel is the mere mention of little ... shh, s-u-p-e-r l-e-a-g-u-e war, to upset the natives and ignite hostile relations between the game and its clubs.

The NRL is going to considerable lengths to portray the latest battle between itself and the clubs, expected to come to a head this Friday, as nothing more than amicable negotiations.

The clubs are a little less conciliatory.

On the surface it seems simple.

ARU Chairman John Grant is playing it cool on negotiations.

“We all agreed that when the licence were signed the funding would flow,” ARL Commission chairman John Grant said. “It has taken a little longer than expected.”

The NRL and clubs agreed to the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding last December.

The NRL finally submitted the written document in May. Club men fell down clutching their chests when they read it, a sudden tightening caused when they saw the terms had changed between the agreeing and the documenting.

The kindest description uttered from clubland was “terrible”.

Examining the fine print under a strong light the clubs discovered the agreement favoured the clubs roughly 90 to 10, which is poor odds in any business. Things like rescuing clubs in trouble.

The NRL wanted the other 15 clubs to rescue financially stricken clubs and not the League itself, as it is doing now with Newcastle and Gold Coast.

“If a club has got a financial strain and the NRL is monitoring them, surely they have the due diligence to notice it before it gets to breaking point,” one club official said on Tuesday.

“Why should we have to bail them out?”

The NRL argues that clubs are involved in their own small arms race and that greater control has to be exerted from head office to stop them from nuking each other. The new licences make each not only answerable to head office but able to be dictated to if the League believes there is a need to step in, kind of like a McDonald’s franchise.

The AFL has a similar structure.

The clubs have responded with a document closer to where they believe it should be but it remains unsigned as D-Day, or Money Day, approaches.

That would be Friday when the first $1.125 million grant from the new broadcast deal is supposed to be delivered.

The suspicion within clubland is the NRL deliberately changed the terms to such a degree there could never be agreement before Friday, a deliberate tactic to put the maximum financial pressure.

Some of the poorer clubs have budgeted on the money coming Friday. It won’t be now.

The NRL wants to shift the financial responsibility back onto the clubs.

Throughout the negotiation, representatives from the six of the independent member clubs — Penrith, Parramatta, Canterbury, Canberra, Sydney Roosters and Cronulla — sought independent legal advice.

At the same time, Brisbane sought its own legal advice.

Their lawyers fell on the same spot and have come together with the other nine clubs, including the NRL-owned Knights and Titans, to argue this is a long way from over yet.

While the poorer clubs fret the richer clubs have promised they will help through the short term. Given they are perpetual licences the clubs realise they have one crack to get this right.

On a positive note, the NRL has managed to unify the clubs for the first time in the game’s history.

Originally published as NRL and clubs at loggerheads over licence negotiations