A couple of days before this year’s State of Origin decider, a punter walked across Brisbane’s famous Caxton Street, a few Wally Lewis spiral passes up the road from Suncorp Stadium, in the hope of having a meal.
He’d seen the precinct’s famous Gambaro restaurant and hotel, which had been in the news only weeks earlier due to its takeover from the NRL in a reported $25 million deal. But in the countdown to one of the most anticipated Origin matches in history, Gambaro’s doors were shut.
It was a Monday night, after all.
“I’ll get that fixed,” said Peter V’landys, the Australian Rugby League Commission boss who green-lit the purchase that has infuriated several club bosses.
The purchase of the hotel was supposed to be a low point in an increasingly fractious relationship between head office and its clubs and players.
But it has turned out to be a mere pimple on the NRL’s derriere after the events of the last week.
ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys and RLPA chief Clint Newton.Credit:Janie Barrett, Getty
There has been speculation of a rebel competition (a million to one and drifting), public mud slinging from either side of the world and selective media leaks and spin doctoring over the sport’s pay wars, which have seen rugby league’s new financial year start without a salary cap figure or promise of a club funding level.
So how did it get to this point and what are the main sticking points?
Well, money and how much the NRL actually has – and how much it is willing to hand over for the next five years of the broadcast cycle – is a good starting point.
As far back as November last year, the Rugby League Players Association requested access to the NRL’s financial position, as is their right under the previous collective bargaining agreement. How much they’ve seen, and what the clubs have also learned, is open to conjecture depending on who you talk to.
“We have seen the NRL’s revenue forecasts and high-level summary of where it intends to spend money over the next five years,” South Sydney chief executive Blake Solly said. “What we are most interested in understanding is the NRL’s operating expenses, which are estimated to be $415,000 a day every day for the next five years.
“If the NRL can’t afford to meet the funding requests of the clubs and players, it shouldn’t be too hard to take us through their own operating expenses and tell us why.”
The NRL claims it has been transparent with clubs and players about finances, but wrangling over the code’s performance during two COVID-ravaged years brought both parties to a standstill for almost nine months.
So why the hold-up? The main sticking point with the RLPA has been over the NRL’s financial performance during COVID. The players took pay cuts in 2020-2022 to help the game survive the pandemic. The NRL performed better financially during this time than forecast, so all parties agreed the players were due backpay. The problem was how much.
The Herald first revealed in February that the NRL had handed over an initial $11 million payment but the RLPA wanted more detail on the game’s financials and organised its own audit of the results. The backpay was subsequently increased to $38m but was finalised only in August, a little more than two months before the CBA expired on October 31.
The squabbling over the NRL’s books went on so long it meant other issues to be discussed in the CBA talks were put to one side as Hugh Marks, the former chief executive of Nine Entertainment Co (the publisher of this masthead), fronted the talks for the NRL until leaving for the US on a business trip.
But despite eventually agreeing on how much players were owed for the past three seasons, there is still no consensus on how much they should be getting until 2027.
The NRL’s offer is that the players share in 40.5 per cent of consolidated revenue from next year. The players’ union wants that figure to be about two per cent higher. The RLPA has also argued for only a small jump in the salary cap but for the game to instead prioritise money for hardship and retirement funds to support players’ medical costs after they retire or become injured and uncontracted. The RLPA also wants to direct the majority of the salary cap increase directed to lower-income players, raising the minimum wage to $150,000 a year.
Penrith Panthers winning the 2022 grand final.Credit:Getty Images
So how do you cut through the spin?
On the one hand, the NRL says it has tabled a $1.32 billion pay deal to players, the biggest in the history of the game. The NRL says that equates to a salary cap of about $12m and insists players will never have had it so good, adding that under its watch all clubs are now profitable for the first time in the game’s history thanks to handouts from HQ during the pandemic.
On the other hand, the RLPA says the CBA will have to cover more than 300 extra players through the introduction of a 17th NRL team (the Dolphins), the inclusion for the first time of supplementary players under the cap and an increase in the number of NRLW teams from six to 10. That means, says the RLPA, the players are going backwards in real terms – especially when inflation is factored in.
THE KEY DIFFERENCES
WHAT THE NRL SAYS
– players have been offered a $1.32 billion pay deal over the next five years, the largest in the game’s history
– clubs and players have been shown a detailed breakdown of the NRL’s finances
– it needs to keep an investment fund over the next broadcast cycle to build the game’s asset base and invest in grassroots
WHAT THE CLUBS SAY
– the NRL has provided only a high-level breakdown of its financials and refuse to further showcase operating costs
– they need a $5 million buffer above total player payments in their club grants, a request the NRL is yet to meet
– an agreement won’t be signed off until they are satisfied the players have also reached a deal with the NRL
WHAT THE PLAYERS SAY
– the NRL’s current proposal will send existing players backwards in real terms due to capturing more players in the collective bargaining agreement
– other non-financial proposals such as consultation rights on a myriad of issues, including a potential seat on the ARLC, are not being met
– the NRL has been slow to advance negotiations and Peter V’landys or any other commissioner is yet to come to the table
The RLPA and the clubs are forecasting a base salary cap of $10.5m for men’s teams in 2023, plus $400,000 for development and veteran player allowances, which they say means the average wage of a top-30 player would be about $360,000.
The RLPA also wants to introduce a match-payment system under which each top-grade appearance earns a player $2000, as well as State of Origin-style fees for those players who feature in finals games. It could net as much as $36,000 for a player over four finals appearances. It is unclear whether these payments will be included in the cap.
But it’s not just about salaries.
The NRL and players have butted heads over seemingly lesser issues, such as complimentary ticketing, which head office has told will cost players $22m in the CBA for a small allocation for family and friends at each game. The AFL has no such deal where tickets allocations are included in their employment conditions and most are gifted to players as a goodwill gesture.
NRL chief executive Andrew Abdo.Credit:Dean Sewell
That shows how the dispute has sometimes descended into quibbling over minor details. And it’s over such things that the negotiations are not only reaching boiling point, but being played out in public. The parties are still miles apart.
Then there’s the clubs.
Their objective is simple: they are arguing over the amount of money they will receive per year on top of the salary cap to cover all expenses outside of player payments. The clubs want $5m. Solly, Canberra boss Don Furner and Melbourne chief executive Justin Rodski said they had held a “productive” meeting with NRL chief executive Andrew Abdo this week, but still have to find common ground.
Further muddying the waters is a memorandum of understanding the clubs struck with former ARLC chair John Grant, which still has one year to run. The MOU said the total grant (including player payments) would be 130 per cent of the salary cap as well as an extra $1.825m per club on top of that. The clubs insist they could hold the NRL to that promise but they say they will settle for the smaller amount of $5m in 2023. Forecasts suggest the NRL’s current offer is for a grant between $4.4m and $4.7m above the salary cap to each of the 17 clubs.
“It’s just an absolute shit-show at the moment,” one club chief executive said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Former Australian Rugby League Commission boss John Grant.Credit:Lisa Maree Williams
While it’s more likely the clubs will come to an agreement with the NRL before the players, several club bosses contacted by the Herald said they won’t sign off on their agreement until the RLPA reaches a consensus with the NRL. It could leave the talks lingering into the new year.
The NRL has made concessions, too. Its initial pitch for a $120m investment bucket to future-proof the game with assets has been scaled down to just $50m over the next five years. V’landys remains adamant the game needs to have something to fall back on and money to fund the participation problem.
If people think they’ve seen this movie with V’landys before, it’s because they have. He’s turned Racing NSW, in which he serves as chief executive in his day job, into a financial behemoth.
Last week, Racing NSW released its annual report. It listed its cash and cash equivalents at $169m – and that’s before you count the dozens of assets, mainly property throughout regional NSW, the regulator has invested in.
V’landys remained tight-lipped on Friday about the CBA stalemate, but strongly refuted players would be going backwards in real terms under the NRL’s current proposal.
“We’ll continue the negotiations in good faith to reach a resolution,” he said.
RLPA chief Clint Newton was more forthright.
“Confidential information concerning negotiations are being deliberately and irresponsibly rolled out in the media and people are making comments that will only push us further apart,” he said.
“In the past week, we first saw clubs attacked for wanting to ensure their fans and members had strong and sustainable business. After that didn’t work, it now seems as though it’s the players’ turn because they won’t simply roll over for head office.
“To me, this sounds like a desperate attempt to poison the well. It’s hardly good for the game.”
Sports news, results and expert commentary. Sign up for our Sport newsletter.
