Peter Davies writes:
>> What prices have been fixed? ground entry?, its cheaper to go and see a couple
>> of games of RL than to go and see a movie. Hold down wages? for who's benefit,
> Create said it was not monopoly. I'm asking where is the competition.
The Ericcson cup, the AFL, the rugby union competition, the local Brisbane
comp, the local Newcastle comp, ..., the Australian Opera.
The judge has ruled that the marketplace that the ARL competition competes in
is wider than just the list of rugby league competitions, and in fact extends
to all sporting competitions and other entertainments. He has also ruled that
the marketplace for players' talents, though not as wide, extends to other
sports besides rugby league. Hence the ARL do not have a monopoly.
> The judge has ruled that RL competes with other codes but does not understand
> or does not want to understand that true RL fans want RL and within that
> market the ARL have a monopoly.
Anyone can set up a rugby league comp in Australia and run it in competition
with the ARL, in the same way that anyone can brew a new beer. The ARL has
an advantage in that it has been at it longer, but that's life. The fact
that no one else has chosen to set up in opposition does not mean that no
The rulings against superleague are not about preventing other leagues from
competing with the ARL. They are about preventing a group who sought to
destroy the ARL and/or take over control of it in an illegal manner from
benefitting from their actions.
If News had simply set up their own competition and proceeded from there
their would have been nothing the ARL could have done. The fact is that
they were never interested in competing, only in gaining exclusive access
to a particular sport in order to gain pay TV subscriptions.
>> The judge is a soccer fan, I know people in Sydney (and who have always lived
>> there) who have no interest at all in RL and have no idea about the game at
>> all, there must be people like that in Canberra too.
> Yes but do you really think that the judge is one of them. To quote your hero
> Arko "Blokes don't just come from nowhere".
He has said he has no interest in league--why don't you believe him. You got
quite hot under the collar the other day when someone cast aspersions on
your own statements.
>> When he says *our* means everyone including himself, he could have said your
>> game but then that wouldn't include himself and he's part of the people!.
This business over using 'our' in a letter is really a matter of
interpretation, and while it is open to multiple readings (or at least I
assume so from the comments I have seen) I do think that you are placing too
much emphasis on it. It's most likely that John Quayle did not regard your
letter as very important--perhaps it was one of hundreds he recieved on the
same subject--and simply drafted a quick reply. The fact that he goes to no
effort to justify himself would support that. It would be interesting to know
just how many letters the ARL get from angry fans each time such an incident
> Competition improves things. If the ARL had to compete they would too.
Hopefully the threat of competition in 2000 will be enough to get some
> The game was run by all the Sydney clubs and the Country leagues. You have a
> lot of trouble with history don't you.
Mostly the Sydney clubs. Country sides have always played second fiddle.
You only have to look as far as the 1945 State Championships to see that.
James J Smith | One of the biggest obstacles to the future
Faculty of Engineering | of computing is C. C is the last attempt
Newcastle University | of the high priesthood to control the
--------------------------+ and the Pharisees who did not want the
masses to learn to read and write. -- Jerry Pournelle