Peter V’landys has abandoned plans to spend approximately $1 million on a headline performer for the 2026 NRL Grand Final after negotiations with Tones and I broke down over her reluctance to guarantee Dance Monkey would appear in the set, instead directing the entertainment budget towards junior and grassroots rugby league.
The ARL Commission chairman determined that paying a major artist for an approximately 11-minute performance could not be justified when the NRL’s preferred Australian act would not commit to performing her most successful song.
“Rather than giving a performer $90,000 a minute, we would prefer to give it to grassroots,” V’landys said, according to Fox Sports.
V’landys argued the grand final would attract a capacity crowd and enormous television audience regardless of whether a famous musician performed before kick-off.
His position is simple: rugby league is the entertainment, and the money can generate a greater return by helping thousands of children participate in the sport.
Dance Monkey Disagreement Ended Negotiations
Tones and I emerged as the NRL’s preferred headline performer after the league abandoned its pursuit of a major international act.
The Australian singer has achieved extraordinary global success since releasing Dance Monkey in 2019.
The song reached No.1 in more than 30 countries and has accumulated more than 3.5 billion streams, making it the obvious centrepiece of any short grand final performance.
However, the singer reportedly would not guarantee the song would be included in her set.
That became a deal-breaker for V’landys.
If the NRL was going to commit close to $1 million to a brief performance, its chairman expected the artist’s biggest and most recognisable song to be part of the agreement.
The two parties were unable to reach terms, leaving the grand final without a headline musical act.
It would be inaccurate to portray the situation as a bitter personal feud. There is no suggestion of animosity between V’landys and Tones and I.
The disagreement was commercial and creative.
Tones and I was entitled to determine which songs she was prepared to perform. The NRL was equally entitled to decide the proposed show no longer represented sufficient value without the track most viewers would recognise.
V’landys Refuses to Chase an Expensive Replacement
The NRL could have responded by urgently approaching another Australian or international star.
Instead, V’landys decided against spending heavily on a replacement.
The league had budgeted approximately $1 million for its pre-game entertainment program but will redirect that money towards junior competitions, state leagues and participation initiatives.
V’landys believes the funds could cover registration or associated costs for between 2,000 and 3,000 underprivileged children who might otherwise be unable to play rugby league.
That provides a compelling contrast.
A headline artist would appear for approximately 11 minutes before disappearing from the event.
Supporting thousands of junior players could strengthen clubs, increase participation and potentially keep children involved in the sport for years.
From that perspective, the decision is difficult to criticise.
The NRL does not need to spend money merely because the AFL has assembled an expensive entertainment program headlined by Kylie Minogue.
However, the decision also creates a risk that rugby league’s biggest event will feel less substantial than competing sporting spectacles.
NRL Previously Claimed an Act Was Almost Secured
The cancellation represents an abrupt change from the NRL’s position earlier in September.
V’landys previously said the league had almost secured its grand final performer after publicly dismissing the importance of expensive international acts.
“We are the most watched sport in Australia, we don’t need international pop stars to come in,” he said at the time.
“Our entertainment is our game.”
The argument was somewhat undermined by the fact that the NRL had previously explored the possibility of recruiting British singer Olivia Dean.
V’landys acknowledged the league wanted Dean but said it would not pay the enormous amount required to compete with the AFL for global celebrities.
The NRL subsequently turned towards Tones and I, giving it a locally based performer with international recognition and one of the most successful Australian songs ever released.
That appeared to represent a sensible middle ground.
The league could promote a major Australian artist without paying the premium often required to secure an overseas star.
When those negotiations failed, V’landys chose to abandon the traditional headline-act model entirely.
The NRL Has Previously Attracted Major Performers
Grand final entertainment has not always been treated as an unnecessary luxury by rugby league administrators.
Teddy Swims headlined the 2025 event, while The Kid LAROI, Jimmy Barnes, Cold Chisel, Good Charlotte, Macklemore and Kelly Clarkson have all performed before recent deciders.
Tina Turner’s appearance in 1993 remains one of the most celebrated moments in Australian sporting entertainment.
Her association with The Best became part of rugby league’s identity and demonstrated that the right performer can provide more than background music before a match.
A successful entertainment program can reach casual viewers, provide broadcasters with additional promotional material and make the grand final feel like a national event rather than merely another fixture.
That does not mean every performer is worth $1 million.
It means V’landys should be careful about dismissing the entire concept because one negotiation failed.
Redirecting the Money Is More Than a Publicity Line
The strongest part of the NRL’s decision is that the money will not simply disappear into the league’s broader operating budget.
V’landys has committed to directing it towards grassroots programs with guidance from the New South Wales Rugby League.
Registration fees, insurance, equipment and travel costs can create genuine barriers for families attempting to keep children involved in organised sport.
If the redirected money gives thousands of children access to rugby league, the NRL will produce a meaningful legacy from the decision.
The league should ultimately disclose how the money was distributed and how many players benefited.
Transparency would prevent the grassroots commitment from becoming little more than a convenient response to the collapse of the Tones and I negotiations.
A clearly defined program would also allow the NRL to demonstrate that rejecting an expensive performer generated measurable benefits.
AFL Comparison Will Be Unavoidable
The timing guarantees the NRL’s decision will be compared with the AFL’s approach.
Kylie Minogue will headline the AFL Grand Final at the MCG, supported by G Flip and Michael Paynter, as part of an extensive pre-match production.
The AFL has invested heavily in entertainment during recent years, recruiting performers including Katy Perry, Snoop Dogg, Robbie Williams and Kiss.
V’landys has repeatedly argued the NRL does not need to follow that strategy because rugby league already attracts enormous audiences.
He has a point.
Few supporters will decide whether to attend or watch an NRL Grand Final based upon the identity of the musical performer.
The teams, players and premiership provide the overwhelming attraction.
However, grand final entertainment is not exclusively designed to sell tickets. It contributes to the scale, broadcast presentation and atmosphere of the event.
The NRL can believe its game is the main attraction without treating everything surrounding it as irrelevant.
Tones and I Was Right to Protect Her Set
Tones and I should not be portrayed as unreasonable merely because she would not commit to performing Dance Monkey.
Artists regularly develop complicated relationships with the songs that define their careers.
A global hit can become creatively restrictive, particularly when audiences expect it to appear during every performance regardless of the artist’s current material.
She was entitled to propose a set that reflected how she wanted to present her music.
The NRL was not purchasing control over her entire catalogue.
At the same time, V’landys was entitled to conclude that an 11-minute grand final performance without her most famous track would not deliver sufficient value.
Neither side was required to accept the other’s conditions.
The resulting failure to reach an agreement is a negotiation ending—not evidence that either party acted improperly.
The Decision Makes Financial Sense but Carries a Cost
V’landys has made a defensible financial decision.
Spending approximately $1 million on a short performance without the artist’s defining song would have been difficult to justify, particularly when the same money could remove participation barriers for thousands of children.
The NRL does not need to recruit a replacement simply to avoid appearing inferior to the AFL.
However, the league should acknowledge what it is sacrificing.
A polished entertainment program can enhance the grand final, provide a shared cultural moment and introduce the event to viewers beyond the traditional rugby league audience.
The choice does not need to be between an exorbitantly expensive global celebrity and no musical entertainment whatsoever.
Australian emerging artists, culturally significant performances or a showcase involving rugby league communities could still deliver an engaging program at a fraction of the cost.
V’landys is right that the match will sell itself.
Whether an empty entertainment slot makes the grand final better is a different question.
MORE NRL NEWS: View Our NRL News Here
