Third-Place Playoffs: A Recipe for Disaster or a Smart Business Move?

Peter V’landys, Chairman of the Australian Rugby League Commission (ARL), has proposed introducing third-place playoffs to the NRL season. He argues that significant financial incentives would make players and fans enthusiastic about the concept.

However, this idea raises serious questions about player welfare, the economics of professional sport, and the motivations behind it. While soccer has experimented with third-place playoffs for decades, featuring second-string sides, the NRL is a unique beast with an already demanding schedule. The 18-round regular season followed by six finals matches is unprecedented, pushing the boundaries of player safety and fair play.

Introducing another game would exacerbate these issues, especially considering the Rugby League World Cup begins just two weeks after the grand final. V’landys cites the soccer World Cup third-place playoff as an inspiration, but neglects to mention that England and France fielded second-string sides in 2018, a practice dating back to at least 1980 when the European Championship dropped the fixture due to player fatigue concerns.

The NRL would expect its top players to participate in this hypothetical game just days after missing out on the grand final. The lure of prizemoney is a powerful draw for professional sportsmen, but it’s unclear whether it would be enough to get players and clubs on board with such an additional fixture. Kurt Mann’s comments echo those of others: “If there’s nothing in it for [players], then it probably doesn’t need to happen.”

Injuries are already a major concern during the current 24-game season, with the RLPA pushing for a reduction in matches per club due to burnout concerns. Adding yet another fixture would increase the risk of long-term damage. The broader implications of this proposal also warrant consideration.

V’landys’ talk of “tribalism and prestige” is intriguing but comes at what cost? The pursuit of more content for broadcasters appears to be driving this initiative, rather than a genuine concern for player welfare or fan engagement. This aligns with the RLPA’s concerns about the NRL’s 2028 broadcast deal.

The introduction of new franchises and expansion plans may offer some solutions, but V’landys seems more interested in exploring every possible permutation of scheduling. While there are valid arguments to be made for introducing more competition and creating additional revenue streams, it’s crucial that we don’t sacrifice player welfare and the integrity of the sport in the process.

The ARL Commission will need to carefully weigh these competing interests – not just in terms of prizemoney and broadcasting rights, but also with regards to the long-term health of its players. Introducing third-place playoffs without addressing underlying issues would be a recipe for disaster rather than a savvy business move.