Super League war


The Super League war was a commercial competition between the Australian Rugby League and the Australian Super League to establish pre-eminence in professional rugby league competition in Australia and New Zealand in the mid-1990s.
Super League, backed by Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation, competed with the ARL, supported by Kerry Packer and Optus Vision, in and out of court for broadcasting rights and supremacy in the sport. Super League had attracted several clubs disenchanted with the existing administration, and introduced two new clubs, as it attempted to establish itself as the dominant competition. After much legal action, when the ARL tried to block the new league, Super League ran one season parallel to the ARL's in 1997. At the conclusion of that season a peace deal was reached and the two leagues united to form the National Rugby League, which continues today.

Background

Early rumblings of Super League and the Bradley Report

Titled "Super League a must " the October 4, 1984 edition of Rugby League Week featured an interview with then Queensland Rugby League chairman Ron McAuliffe. In the interview with Tony Durkin, Ron McAuliffe brought to light a proposal to expand the then NSWRL competition with several new teams. McAuliffe's plans were for what he described as a "Super League" with 12 clubs from across NSW and Queensland across two divisions, with a system of relegation and promotion.
"From my point of view, the thoughts are preliminary at this stage," he said."It has yet to be discussed with the NSW League and the ARL. But it will happen, I've no doubt about that." McAuliffe was also noncommittal about the number of teams which would take part in such a competition, but he thought 12 would be an ideal number. "But if there are 12, it won't necessarily mean eight from Sydney and four from Brisbane," he said."And it won't necessarily be one single club. The way I see it, there is going to be much ground sharing and club sharing in the future." He continued "In fact, I can foresee club amalgamations in both Brisbane and Sydney."
On 9 April 1992, A blueprint for the expansion of Rugby League was tabled by the Premiership Policy Committee of the NSWRL, followed in August by an Organisation Review, by Dr G. Bradley, which was distributed to the premiership clubs. The Bradley Report, as it became known, was central to the ARL replacing the NSWRL as the governing body of the premiership. The report concluded that:
...to reduce the number of clubs in Sydney, will be very hard for the League to implement given the long playing traditions of some of those clubs. In the long term, however, it is likely that Sydney is not going to be able to support eleven clubs as it does at present. Therefore in the long term this is the only viable solution. Sydney based clubs are going to have to move to new areas, merge or be relegated from the League. This is going to be a painful process. In the long term I believe that the ARL should be looking to reduce the number of clubs in the National Competition to fourteen, thus allowing clubs to play two complete rounds. This will mean, assuming that only four new clubs are admitted from areas outside Sydney, that there will be only five clubs based in Sydney.

Each club received a letter of invitation for the 1995 season on 2 May 1994. Included were a number of admission criteria including the ability to "attract a minimum average home attendance of 10,000 people". Balmain, Easts, Gold Coast, Illawarra, Parramatta, Penrith, Souths, St George and Wests failed this criterion for 1995. After the privately owned Brisbane Broncos transferred a 20% share of their company to Northern Rivers Ltd, the new shareholders received the following:
Under the terms of the League's Constitution, it is necessary that, without exception, all clubs which wish to participate in the League's Premiership competition, must apply each year for admission. No club has any automatic right to participate in any year's competition and the League has the unfettered right to reject any club's application for participation.

The Super League war

Proposals for a breakaway competition

In 1993, after a dispute over sponsorship, the Broncos had moved out of the 32,500 capacity Lang Park and into the almost 60,000 capacity ANZ Stadium.
In May 1994, Ribot first discussed with some of the club's high-profile players the possibility of a hypothetical new competition with higher salaries.
One objective of the proposal was "to ensure that no other competition could exist in competition to Superleague". Accordingly, it was considered necessary to have at least four teams based in Sydney in order to maintain the game's largest base, and to ensure that all teams were privately owned. To ensure this outcome, the following steps were outlined:
  1. Approach four "continuing teams" to secure a 7-year commitment.
  2. Meet with representatives of the ARL in a "casual pleasant atmosphere" and offer "concessions", such as allowing the ARL to conduct Tests and to retain the profits from those matches. The ARL was also to be given a grant to promote the game.
  3. Meet at short notice with representatives of the 11 Sydney clubs and Illawarra, and offer a share in a team. Where there was more than one club in an area, each club was to be offered a percentage share.
  4. Announce that Super League was happening and to explain its structure.
  5. Deal with other clubs not included in the arrangements, such as the South Queensland Crushers.
The document noted that the co-operation of players and some clubs was essential for the new competition. It acknowledged that compensation might have to be offered to unwanted players and teams, and that it would be difficult to use current names and logos.
On 17 October, the board of the ARL resolved to hold a special board meeting to discuss several issues, including Super League and a "reduction in the number of Sydney teams". Three days later ARL Chairman Ken Arthurson warned the Brisbane Broncos that they faced expulsion over their involvement with Super League. He told The Sydney Morning Herald that "the League has the right, as you well know, to deny admission to any team in the Winfield Cup". Nonetheless, reports of a proposed breakaway competition continued, and on 6 November Arthurson rang his colleague John Quayle from England and instructed him to inform the President of each club that he wished to discuss the signing of 3 to 5-year loyalty agreements in order to continue playing in the premiership.
News began developing the Super League proposal for presentation to the ARL and its clubs, the final draft of which was presented to News representatives on 13 December. It concluded that the economics of an Australian Super League were attractive compared to the existing competition. Three strategies where identified for its implementation:
  1. The Establishment Approach in which a proposal would be presented to the ARL, followed by negotiations "to make Superleague happen". Risks identified with this approach included being "strung along" or "outbid" by Mr Packer and the possibility that the ARL would be unable to deliver.
  2. The Early Defection Approach envisaged that exclusive and reciprocal obligations to News after a proposal had been made. Only if the ARL responded favourably to the proposal, News use the first strategy.
  3. The Rebel Approach involved News manoeuvring with stakeholders to strengthen its position, signing up key clubs on confidentiality agreements and then securing the agreement of the ARL and unsigned clubs.
The proposed structure of the competition included:
  • 12 fully professional teams
  • Existing 20 clubs to remain, fielding teams in First Division competitions in NSW, QLD, ACT
  • News being shareholders in the 12 Super League teams
  • The ARL continuing as the governing body for rugby league, and retaining responsibility for Test matches
  • News being responsible for promoting rugby league nationally and internationally, and providing finance.
On 22 December, News sent five clubs - Brisbane, Canberra, Newcastle, Cronulla-Sutherland and the Western Reds - a document entitled Super League Confidentiality Deed. The purpose of this document was obtain feedback from these clubs with the view to making small adjustments prior a full presentation to the ARL in February. Throughout January 1995, News developed a presentation for the ARL and met with officials from the Auckland, Cronulla-Sutherland, Illawarra and St George clubs. On 25 January, ACP provided News with a report entitled Superleague Options that identified the "current proposal" as "News Super League via Clubs/ARL". It proposed that Super League would fund the ARL, the clubs and Super League Europe. News was also to take a management fee and buy pay television rights for $4,000,000 per annum. News did not agree with these figures.
News presented its proposal to the ARL on 30 January. The key points were.
  1. There would be a 12 team competition that would be an integral part of an international competition, with a worldwide audience of tens or even hundreds of millions.
  2. The existing 20 team competition would continue, along with the ARL's "pivotal role" in administering the game. The ARL would run the State competition and Test matches, and be responsible for the judiciary, referees and junior development. The existing 20 clubs would be shareholders in the licensed, privately owned Super League teams, thus eliminating any breach of players' contracts. The 20-club competition would be the "breeding ground for the stars of the future".
  3. The franchises would be based in Sydney, Queensland, Newcastle, Canberra, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth and Auckland.
  4. The current financial status of the game was a net loss. The Super League proposal would allow the clubs to benefit from News' global media network, and make it possible for $100m to be invested in rugby league.
  5. There would be a "fully representative Board of Directors", with three franchise board members and the ARL represented. The chairman of the ARL would be the chairman of Super League.
  6. Profit distribution between the ARL and News would be negotiable.