Todd Greenberg steps down as NRL CEO

[BJ]

Greenberg seemed to think being seen as a buddy with key powerbrokers like Politis, coaches like Robinson and players like Cam Smith was what he needed to do to protect his position and to ensure this great game was going OK.

[afgtnk]

Todd Greenberg performed strongly in front of the cameras and by all reports he is a good person. I've been critical of him, and the NRL, because they have failed to treat all clubs equally in a range of ways. He's also been "king of the spin"... as they have tried to convince the public that well founded criticisms of the NRL are baseless. For example, they have spinned statistics on refereeing... they spinned the numbers on third party agreements, "forgetting" to tell us they left out half the total. Given their economy with the truth with the public, I wouldn't be at all surprised that that is how they treated other stakeholders. Eventually, people see through that.

So, I can't say that Todd Greenberg moving on is a bad thing.

There seems to be little doubt that we've seen a lot of money wasted and finances mismanaged. But Greenberg's hardly the sole person responsible for the current financial position of the game. A certain Welsh banker wasted lots of money. More recently, John Grant tried to buy an extra few months as Chairman by dishing out large amounts of extra cash to the clubs. Peter Beattie did little to ensure the game was living within its means. So let's remember... most things Todd Greenberg did was on the watch of the ARLC... and these Chairmen.

The clubs are hardly blameless. The NRL had to bail out the Knights, Titans, Tigers and Dragons off the top of my head. The clubs ganged up and demanded a whole pile of extra cash... running large losses regardless of how much of the broadcasting money landed with them. Only recently have small amounts been put aside for a "distressed club" fund. But if the NRL can rightly be criticised for having no assets or financial reserves... aren't the clubs also open to criticism constantly running at losses? At least the clubs with licensed clubs have organisations with assets backing them, I guess. The players have also demanded, and received, massive increases in the salary cap and share of revenues.

You might remember the NRL saying... when all that was happening... we need to be able to set financial reserves aside... we need to provide money for the grass roots. But we all know what happened.

There is significant criticism of the NRL starting to build a digital arm. Guess where most of it is coming from? The traditional media. They are under huge pressure. The old models don't work in a digital world... and they are trying to charge people for access to any digital content. They've now decided to close AAP, as it is easy to get that content for free. The NRL, on the other hand, has a duty to promote the sport and provide news and information to members and the public. And given what's happening in the broadcasting world, with streaming services challenging FTA TV and mainstream STV... it actually makes sense for sports to consider whether new technology will allow them to become broadcasters themselves. Particularly when you have a broadcaster that has hardly been great at promoting the code.

There's been lots of finger pointing... lots of agendas... and lots of greed. I don't think we can say it is all the responsibility of Todd Greenberg.

I'm pretty sure the NRL have something like 100-150 million in the bank, going from memory of their last annual report.

Maybe they could've had more, but that's not exactly chump change. It's being made out as if the game is down to its last dollar.

[greeneyed]

Todd Greenberg performed strongly in front of the cameras and by all reports he is a good person. I've been critical of him, and the NRL, because they have failed to treat all clubs equally in a range of ways. He's also been "king of the spin"... as they have tried to convince the public that well founded criticisms of the NRL are baseless. For example, they have spinned statistics on refereeing... they spinned the numbers on third party agreements, "forgetting" to tell us they left out half the total. Given their economy with the truth with the public, I wouldn't be at all surprised that that is how they treated other stakeholders. Eventually, people see through that.

So, I can't say that Todd Greenberg moving on is a bad thing.

There seems to be little doubt that we've seen a lot of money wasted and finances mismanaged. But Greenberg's hardly the sole person responsible for the current financial position of the game. A certain Welsh banker wasted lots of money. More recently, John Grant tried to buy an extra few months as Chairman by dishing out large amounts of extra cash to the clubs. Peter Beattie did little to ensure the game was living within its means. So let's remember... most things Todd Greenberg did was on the watch of the ARLC... and these Chairmen.

The clubs are hardly blameless. The NRL had to bail out the Knights, Titans, Tigers and Dragons off the top of my head. The clubs ganged up and demanded a whole pile of extra cash... running large losses regardless of how much of the broadcasting money landed with them. Only recently have small amounts been put aside for a "distressed club" fund. But if the NRL can rightly be criticised for having no assets or financial reserves... aren't the clubs also open to criticism constantly running at losses? At least the clubs with licensed clubs have organisations with assets backing them, I guess. The players have also demanded, and received, massive increases in the salary cap and share of revenues.

You might remember the NRL saying... when all that was happening... we need to be able to set financial reserves aside... we need to provide money for the grass roots. But we all know what happened.

There is significant criticism of the NRL starting to build a digital arm. Guess where most of it is coming from? The traditional media. They are under huge pressure. The old models don't work in a digital world... and they are trying to charge people for access to any digital content. They've now decided to close AAP, as it is easy to get that content for free. The NRL, on the other hand, has a duty to promote the sport and provide news and information to members and the public. And given what's happening in the broadcasting world, with streaming services challenging FTA TV and mainstream STV... it actually makes sense for sports to consider whether new technology will allow them to become broadcasters themselves. Particularly when you have a broadcaster that has hardly been great at promoting the code.

There's been lots of finger pointing... lots of agendas... and lots of greed. I don't think we can say it is all the responsibility of Todd Greenberg.

I'm pretty sure the NRL have something like 100-150 million in the bank, going from memory of their last annual report.

Maybe they could've had more, but that's not exactly chump change. It's being made out as if the game is down to its last dollar.

That’s a bit of cash reserve that is quickly exhausted. The NRL was aiming to build an asset base originally... and a former a Chairman spent a modest start on that. Now they have no asset base and have to borrow solely against future earnings... which are a little up in the air right now.

[TongueFTW]

The part that concerns me the most - how much influence the media has on the game. Essentially, the broadcasters have come together to rid the game of its CEO, and are now in the position to renegotiate favourable agreements going forward. Fairfax used to be some sort of counterpoint to News Ltd, but now that Nine owns them, both are aligned to the detriment of the NRL. The NRL management has been complicit in this, as the way they have run the game has left them open to attack from all fronts.

The NRL needs to use the funds from this new agreement to set themselves up in a few years time to be able to rid themselves of Nine/News Limited - the game is obviously far too reliant on local broadcast revenue.

[simo]

Todd greenburgs tenure was a financial masterclass really. Its absurd to throw around suggestions otherwise.
My dislike of him was for his snakey political personality which just came across to favour certain clubs and brush others to the side (that could all have just been media though).
We are not in a stronger position without him in the top job

[gerg]

The part that concerns me the most - how much influence the media has on the game. Essentially, the broadcasters have come together to rid the game of its CEO, and are now in the position to renegotiate favourable agreements going forward. Fairfax used to be some sort of counterpoint to News Ltd, but now that Nine owns them, both are aligned to the detriment of the NRL. The NRL management has been complicit in this, as the way they have run the game has left them open to attack from all fronts.

The NRL needs to use the funds from this new agreement to set themselves up in a few years time to be able to rid themselves of Nine/News Limited - the game is obviously far too reliant on local broadcast revenue.

Speculation this morning of the broadcast deal being extended. I think we wait to see the details but it's dumb for the NRL to think this is a good time to be doing this.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

Unless the decision is necessary to prevent imminent collapse of the game then now is a horrible time to be doing that. Especially with a network who has publicly attacked at a time of weakness.

Suggests a huge degree of control from the networks within the NRL. We know where that led.

[Northern Raider]

Unless the decision is necessary to prevent imminent collapse of the game then now is a horrible time to be doing that. Especially with a network who has publicly attacked at a time of weakness.

Suggests a huge degree of control from the networks within the NRL. We know where that led.

Totally agree but I'll take these reports with a grain of salt. So much propaganda and bull**** on the topic being push out through the media right now, don't know what to believe.

[-TW-]

I've basically stopped reading them

Fox Sports are basically going round in circles, and channel 9 are just wheeling out random people to attack the NRL

Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk

[greeneyed]

NRL will put game's return before new CEO search

The NRL will prioritise getting the game back on the field ahead of searching for a new chief executive as it places its faith in interim boss Andrew Abdo.

ARL Commissioners had lengthy meetings on Tuesday, just a day after Todd Greenberg fell on his sword as the game's CEO.

Read more: https://7news.com.au/sport/rugby-league ... h-c-991462

‘I don’t think I’ve ever been happier’: Greenberg’s first words since abrupt NRL exit: https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/no-reg ... 4eae75f829

[Seiffert82]

Good riddance.

The only journo I'm trusting through all of this is Paul Kent. Today he outlined the true financial position of the NRL. Originally the NRL said they had $104m in the bank and a further $25m in receivables.

Time goes on and it's revealed that the $129m included a $49m deferred liability to be repaid in 2022 and the $25m in receivables was only $15m. So the real account balance was closer to $70m...then we found out the players hardship and superannuation fund contributions had not been paid, so that was an additional liability against the NRL's cash balance.

Ultimately though, it's not just the mismanagement of finances that's the problem, it's the fact that there was absolutely no transparency or accountability for that mismanagement.

What the hell was the ARLC doing all these years? Why are they immune from criticism?

[afgtnk]

Todd Greenberg performed strongly in front of the cameras and by all reports he is a good person. I've been critical of him, and the NRL, because they have failed to treat all clubs equally in a range of ways. He's also been "king of the spin"... as they have tried to convince the public that well founded criticisms of the NRL are baseless. For example, they have spinned statistics on refereeing... they spinned the numbers on third party agreements, "forgetting" to tell us they left out half the total. Given their economy with the truth with the public, I wouldn't be at all surprised that that is how they treated other stakeholders. Eventually, people see through that.

So, I can't say that Todd Greenberg moving on is a bad thing.

There seems to be little doubt that we've seen a lot of money wasted and finances mismanaged. But Greenberg's hardly the sole person responsible for the current financial position of the game. A certain Welsh banker wasted lots of money. More recently, John Grant tried to buy an extra few months as Chairman by dishing out large amounts of extra cash to the clubs. Peter Beattie did little to ensure the game was living within its means. So let's remember... most things Todd Greenberg did was on the watch of the ARLC... and these Chairmen.

The clubs are hardly blameless. The NRL had to bail out the Knights, Titans, Tigers and Dragons off the top of my head. The clubs ganged up and demanded a whole pile of extra cash... running large losses regardless of how much of the broadcasting money landed with them. Only recently have small amounts been put aside for a "distressed club" fund. But if the NRL can rightly be criticised for having no assets or financial reserves... aren't the clubs also open to criticism constantly running at losses? At least the clubs with licensed clubs have organisations with assets backing them, I guess. The players have also demanded, and received, massive increases in the salary cap and share of revenues.

You might remember the NRL saying... when all that was happening... we need to be able to set financial reserves aside... we need to provide money for the grass roots. But we all know what happened.

There is significant criticism of the NRL starting to build a digital arm. Guess where most of it is coming from? The traditional media. They are under huge pressure. The old models don't work in a digital world... and they are trying to charge people for access to any digital content. They've now decided to close AAP, as it is easy to get that content for free. The NRL, on the other hand, has a duty to promote the sport and provide news and information to members and the public. And given what's happening in the broadcasting world, with streaming services challenging FTA TV and mainstream STV... it actually makes sense for sports to consider whether new technology will allow them to become broadcasters themselves. Particularly when you have a broadcaster that has hardly been great at promoting the code.

There's been lots of finger pointing... lots of agendas... and lots of greed. I don't think we can say it is all the responsibility of Todd Greenberg.

I'm pretty sure the NRL have something like 100-150 million in the bank, going from memory of their last annual report.

Maybe they could've had more, but that's not exactly chump change. It's being made out as if the game is down to its last dollar.

That’s a bit of cash reserve that is quickly exhausted. The NRL was aiming to build an asset base originally... and a former a Chairman spent a modest start on that. Now they have no asset base and have to borrow solely against future earnings... which are a little up in the air right now.

..... assets such as? I doubt that money is just sitting there in cash doing nothing.

Assets don't have to be physical either. Tournaments like the Nines can be considered assets. All the digital media they now control through the broadcast deals made are assets, which they're investing plenty in.

Sporting admins and CEOs are much like the refs. Everyone loves to blame them for anything and everything, even when the evidence shows them to be dead wrong. No one like's to look at themselves - the clubs have to share a large burden of blame should any financial shortcomings exist through their own self-interest, inability to see the bigger picture, and in some cases, plain ineptitude.

[greeneyed]

Todd Greenberg performed strongly in front of the cameras and by all reports he is a good person. I've been critical of him, and the NRL, because they have failed to treat all clubs equally in a range of ways. He's also been "king of the spin"... as they have tried to convince the public that well founded criticisms of the NRL are baseless. For example, they have spinned statistics on refereeing... they spinned the numbers on third party agreements, "forgetting" to tell us they left out half the total. Given their economy with the truth with the public, I wouldn't be at all surprised that that is how they treated other stakeholders. Eventually, people see through that.

So, I can't say that Todd Greenberg moving on is a bad thing.

There seems to be little doubt that we've seen a lot of money wasted and finances mismanaged. But Greenberg's hardly the sole person responsible for the current financial position of the game. A certain Welsh banker wasted lots of money. More recently, John Grant tried to buy an extra few months as Chairman by dishing out large amounts of extra cash to the clubs. Peter Beattie did little to ensure the game was living within its means. So let's remember... most things Todd Greenberg did was on the watch of the ARLC... and these Chairmen.

The clubs are hardly blameless. The NRL had to bail out the Knights, Titans, Tigers and Dragons off the top of my head. The clubs ganged up and demanded a whole pile of extra cash... running large losses regardless of how much of the broadcasting money landed with them. Only recently have small amounts been put aside for a "distressed club" fund. But if the NRL can rightly be criticised for having no assets or financial reserves... aren't the clubs also open to criticism constantly running at losses? At least the clubs with licensed clubs have organisations with assets backing them, I guess. The players have also demanded, and received, massive increases in the salary cap and share of revenues.

You might remember the NRL saying... when all that was happening... we need to be able to set financial reserves aside... we need to provide money for the grass roots. But we all know what happened.

There is significant criticism of the NRL starting to build a digital arm. Guess where most of it is coming from? The traditional media. They are under huge pressure. The old models don't work in a digital world... and they are trying to charge people for access to any digital content. They've now decided to close AAP, as it is easy to get that content for free. The NRL, on the other hand, has a duty to promote the sport and provide news and information to members and the public. And given what's happening in the broadcasting world, with streaming services challenging FTA TV and mainstream STV... it actually makes sense for sports to consider whether new technology will allow them to become broadcasters themselves. Particularly when you have a broadcaster that has hardly been great at promoting the code.

There's been lots of finger pointing... lots of agendas... and lots of greed. I don't think we can say it is all the responsibility of Todd Greenberg.

I'm pretty sure the NRL have something like 100-150 million in the bank, going from memory of their last annual report.

Maybe they could've had more, but that's not exactly chump change. It's being made out as if the game is down to its last dollar.

That’s a bit of cash reserve that is quickly exhausted. The NRL was aiming to build an asset base originally... and a former a Chairman spent a modest start on that. Now they have no asset base and have to borrow solely against future earnings... which are a little up in the air right now.

..... assets such as? I doubt that money is just sitting there in cash doing nothing.

Assets don't have to be physical either. Tournaments like the Nines can be considered assets. All the digital media they now control through the broadcast deals made are assets, which they're investing plenty in.

Sporting admins and CEOs are much like the refs. Everyone loves to blame them for anything and everything, even when the evidence shows them to be dead wrong. No one like's to look at themselves - the clubs have to share a large burden of blame should any financial shortcomings exist through their own self-interest, inability to see the bigger picture, and in some cases, plain ineptitude.

They were considering a portfolio of investments, which I've heard Cricket Australia has (although that's impacted by the fall in the markets). They were actually seeking advice from Politis on it not so long ago. The AFL bought a stadium... frankly, that's not a great asset to have IMO, but at least it acted as security for a $500 million loan to get them through. The Nines is not a great "asset"... when you can't play and you only play it once a year... and no one goes to it. The digital arm could have been built into an asset, but it is pretty much still worthless at the moment. If they'd become their own broadcaster... than that's a genuine asset.

BTW, my whole post was about saying that no-one in the game is able to say they're holier than thou. I pointed out the clubs and players lining up for money were critical reasons why the NRL has a poor financial position and grass roots have been underfunded. I won't repeat it all, it is above.

[gangrenous]

BTW, my whole post was about saying that no-one in the game is able to say they're holier than thou.

What about you and me GE? We’ve been well positive contributors to NRL cashflow

[greeneyed]

BTW, my whole post was about saying that no-one in the game is able to say they're holier than thou.

What about you and me GE? We’ve been well positive contributors to NRL cashflow

[-TW-]

Explain how a stadium isn't a good asset?

It has 12 month content between it's AFL club hirers, cricket, concerts, RMIT uses it for graduations

It's a constant stream of revenue

Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk

[greeneyed]

Explain how a stadium isn't a good asset?

It has 12 month content between it's AFL club hirers, cricket, concerts, RMIT uses it for graduations

It's a constant stream of revenue

Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk

They might run at a profit for an owner if the original owner took a huge haircut when selling... and the original investment is written off. Generally, these things only get built with significant public investment... they don’t genuinely make decent returns on the investment.

[BJ]

Yeah I don’t think stadiums in Australia make much net profit.

The stadiums often have to pay the clubs to play there, not the other way round. Plenty of Australian millionaires have found that out the hard way.

Also very difficult and rare for an individual stadium owner to have the land rezoned for higher value use.

[-TW-]

Marvel was mainly a private investment, which the AFL had a peppercorn agreement to buy in 2025, but bought early a few years ago.

Had very little public investment. They were pushing for it to upgrade it, but that will be on the backburner now

Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk

[afgtnk]

Todd Greenberg performed strongly in front of the cameras and by all reports he is a good person. I've been critical of him, and the NRL, because they have failed to treat all clubs equally in a range of ways. He's also been "king of the spin"... as they have tried to convince the public that well founded criticisms of the NRL are baseless. For example, they have spinned statistics on refereeing... they spinned the numbers on third party agreements, "forgetting" to tell us they left out half the total. Given their economy with the truth with the public, I wouldn't be at all surprised that that is how they treated other stakeholders. Eventually, people see through that.

So, I can't say that Todd Greenberg moving on is a bad thing.

There seems to be little doubt that we've seen a lot of money wasted and finances mismanaged. But Greenberg's hardly the sole person responsible for the current financial position of the game. A certain Welsh banker wasted lots of money. More recently, John Grant tried to buy an extra few months as Chairman by dishing out large amounts of extra cash to the clubs. Peter Beattie did little to ensure the game was living within its means. So let's remember... most things Todd Greenberg did was on the watch of the ARLC... and these Chairmen.

The clubs are hardly blameless. The NRL had to bail out the Knights, Titans, Tigers and Dragons off the top of my head. The clubs ganged up and demanded a whole pile of extra cash... running large losses regardless of how much of the broadcasting money landed with them. Only recently have small amounts been put aside for a "distressed club" fund. But if the NRL can rightly be criticised for having no assets or financial reserves... aren't the clubs also open to criticism constantly running at losses? At least the clubs with licensed clubs have organisations with assets backing them, I guess. The players have also demanded, and received, massive increases in the salary cap and share of revenues.

You might remember the NRL saying... when all that was happening... we need to be able to set financial reserves aside... we need to provide money for the grass roots. But we all know what happened.

There is significant criticism of the NRL starting to build a digital arm. Guess where most of it is coming from? The traditional media. They are under huge pressure. The old models don't work in a digital world... and they are trying to charge people for access to any digital content. They've now decided to close AAP, as it is easy to get that content for free. The NRL, on the other hand, has a duty to promote the sport and provide news and information to members and the public. And given what's happening in the broadcasting world, with streaming services challenging FTA TV and mainstream STV... it actually makes sense for sports to consider whether new technology will allow them to become broadcasters themselves. Particularly when you have a broadcaster that has hardly been great at promoting the code.

There's been lots of finger pointing... lots of agendas... and lots of greed. I don't think we can say it is all the responsibility of Todd Greenberg.

I'm pretty sure the NRL have something like 100-150 million in the bank, going from memory of their last annual report.

Maybe they could've had more, but that's not exactly chump change. It's being made out as if the game is down to its last dollar.

That’s a bit of cash reserve that is quickly exhausted. The NRL was aiming to build an asset base originally... and a former a Chairman spent a modest start on that. Now they have no asset base and have to borrow solely against future earnings... which are a little up in the air right now.

..... assets such as? I doubt that money is just sitting there in cash doing nothing.

Assets don't have to be physical either. Tournaments like the Nines can be considered assets. All the digital media they now control through the broadcast deals made are assets, which they're investing plenty in.

Sporting admins and CEOs are much like the refs. Everyone loves to blame them for anything and everything, even when the evidence shows them to be dead wrong. No one like's to look at themselves - the clubs have to share a large burden of blame should any financial shortcomings exist through their own self-interest, inability to see the bigger picture, and in some cases, plain ineptitude.

They were considering a portfolio of investments, which I've heard Cricket Australia has (although that's impacted by the fall in the markets). They were actually seeking advice from Politis on it not so long ago. The AFL bought a stadium... frankly, that's not a great asset to have IMO, but at least it acted as security for a $500 million loan to get them through. The Nines is not a great "asset"... when you can't play and you only play it once a year... and no one goes to it. The digital arm could have been built into an asset, but it is pretty much still worthless at the moment. If they'd become their own broadcaster... than that's a genuine asset.

BTW, my whole post was about saying that no-one in the game is able to say they're holier than thou. I pointed out the clubs and players lining up for money were critical reasons why the NRL has a poor financial position and grass roots have been underfunded. I won't repeat it all, it is above.

A quick search shows that maybe only be dating back to 2018. The start of the commission was 5-6 years before that.

This goes back to the whole argument about the SL era and the time under part News ownership, who setup favourable contractual terms to ensure they paid massive unders whenever the the broadcast rights negotiations came around (not to mention installing a lackey like Gallop who barely had a clue about building non-broadcast revenue). It's exactly where the game has been robbed, hundreds of millions, over a solid 15 years.

The game simply does not have the financial clout of Cricket or AFL because of that. One cannot ignore that and blame a relative lack of finances on a commission which has only been setup for eight years. They'll be playing catchup for a while yet.

[greeneyed]

The Commission started with the intention of putting funds aside for an investment reserve. The strategy didn’t last... because wrong decisions kept being taken. It isn’t just the fault of NRL HQ. The clubs cleaned them out at one stage... but conceding was a failure of NRL leadership too.

[-PJ-]

I remember when I mishandled funds. I was trying to put a 50 in the laser car wash and i lost control of it. It's gone on the wind, I'm out of the car chasing the gold note but I'm struggling. MrsPJ sitting in the car, we're on pole position at the car wash, cars backed up behind me a mile deep and he's PJ chasing a $50 note across the servo..finally stepped on it..phew.

Morale of the story...don't mishandle funds.

[Seiffert82]

Time to get over the Gallop thing afgtnk.

Pointing the finger at a guy who hasn't been in the CEO role for 8 years is as stupid as absolving the Commission who have been running the game for 8 years.

Your mate Greenberg did a terrible job and the ARLC needs to take responsibility for letting go of the steering wheel and allowing the NRL to waste their resources so blatantly.

[BJ]

If Afgtnk only held Greenberg to the same standard as Aiden Sezer.

[gangrenous]

We’d have a CEO able to throw 20m spirals either side? Not sure that’s super helpful...

[afgtnk]

Time to get over the Gallop thing afgtnk.

Pointing the finger at a guy who hasn't been in the CEO role for 8 years is as stupid as absolving the Commission who have been running the game for 8 years.

Your mate Greenberg did a terrible job and the ARLC needs to take responsibility for letting go of the steering wheel and allowing the NRL to waste their resources so blatantly.

The only journo I'm trusting through all of this is Paul Kent

Lol. How utterly embarrassing.

I'm not a huge fan of the job Greenberg did and apathetic to him leaving, btw. You seem to be able unable to draw a distinction between fact and emotion, like most avid Murdoch readers.

Have you considered putting your in application mate? The game could use your brilliant mind to fix up big ticket issues like those bloody damn refs, food prices at games, and finally sticking it Politis and those fancy TPA ladden Sydney teams so they stop takin everyone's jerbs.

[Northern Raider]

I'm not totally sure what the point being argued is.

[edwahu]

I'm not totally sure what the point being argued is.

I see you're new around here.

[afgtnk]

The point is News media says [insert public figure] is the devil and must be burned at the stake, which in turn which is lapped up by simpletons.

In an attempt to provide some balance to an expectedly one sided debate, I think two of the biggest achievements under Greenberg's watch are the 'Centre of Excellence' (shudder) fund which has the majority of clubs creating new training and admin facilities (good luck getting old mate Seiff to acknowledge 'Greenburger'/the Commission for something our club benefited MASSIVELY from ), and the way the game positioned itself and its needs to ensure four new top class rectangular stadiums are delivered, something we should've had access to long ago, particularly in Sydney.

It's a travesty that the game failed to ensure to have Stadium Australia, the game's premier venue, be converted to a fully rectangular stadium after the Olympics and let the AFL play out of there after making a paltry contribution to the conversion process. I don't think I agree with the likes of GE on much about the game but certainly agree that moving away from cow paddocks to 21st century, close to the action rectangular venues is the only way to go. The game has to move on in order to grow.

Ultimately News got what News wanted, just as they did with the previous CEO. Whether that's for better or for worse, who the hell knows. One thing is for sure though - the dynamic of the relationship between the game and broadcasters is still skewed towards them and needs to be worked on.

[Northern Raider]

I'm still not clear. Who is "News" and what exactly is it they want?

[greeneyed]

Raelene Castle now resigns.

[Seiffert82]

The point is News media says [insert public figure] is the devil and must be burned at the stake, which in turn which is lapped up by simpletons.

In an attempt to provide some balance to an expectedly one sided debate, I think two of the biggest achievements under Greenberg's watch are the 'Centre of Excellence' (shudder) fund which has the majority of clubs creating new training and admin facilities (good luck getting old mate Seiff to acknowledge 'Greenburger'/the Commission for something our club benefited MASSIVELY from ), and the way the game positioned itself and its needs to ensure four new top class rectangular stadiums are delivered, something we should've had access to long ago, particularly in Sydney.

It's a travesty that the game failed to ensure to have Stadium Australia, the game's premier venue, be converted to a fully rectangular stadium after the Olympics and let the AFL play out of there after making a paltry contribution to the conversion process. I don't think I agree with the likes of GE on much about the game but certainly agree that moving away from cow paddocks to 21st century, close to the action rectangular venues is the only way to go. The game has to move on in order to grow.

Ultimately News got what News wanted, just as they did with the previous CEO. Whether that's for better or for worse, who the hell knows. One thing is for sure though - the dynamic of the relationship between the game and broadcasters is still skewed towards them and needs to be worked on.

I'm genuinely interested in what funding the NRL/ARLC provided the Raiders for the centre of excellence? I always thought the funding was from the ACT and NSW governments along with the CDRL (Raiders leagues clubs).

I don't want to revisit the Gallop thing, but I think you fail to realise the way he was hamstrung by the post SuperLeague obligations he was forced to work within when negotiating broadcast deals.

[-PJ-]

Raelene Castle now resigns.

What a babe..

[greeneyed]

The NRL’s chief financial officer Tony Crawford has followed former boss Todd Greenberg out the door: https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... b328c69864

[Sid]

draining out the swamp #makerugbahleaguegreatagain