This is exactly the case - the NRL have got special dispensation to re-start based on their high bio-security measures. Having the flu shot is one of those measures. Playing rugby league is classed as a high risk activity with regards COVID, therefore the NRL have had to show the stringent measures they’re putting in place to prevent infection (isolation in normal life, strict protocols around entry to training etc) , but also to ensure people are as safe as possible should they become infected (early detection, immunised from flu etc). If everyone has had a flu shot and somebody ends up with flu like symptoms, they can then make early assumptions there is a higher chance of it being COVID.
Throw in then the fact that the Aussie media will be headline hunting for anyone who sniffles or coughs at training (which would then see the government shut down the game), I can see why the NRL could go hard line on it....
All that being said, it looks like it will be the local governments that hand down the ‘no jab, no play’ rule though - the NRL wanted to just have the players who refuse the flu jab to sign a waiver accepting the increased personal risk if they do refuse the flu jab (though some have also refused to sign this), but the QLD state government have said this isn’t enough and are enforcing no jab, no play at the moment. Similar rules already exist in Aus around working in care homes etc.

It's a strange case.
Although it's not unreasonable to say that players who havent been vaccinated cannot compete.
It's then a simple choice for the players ?

At least one of the players who refused the jab, Nathan Peats, had a valid argument for doing so, having had a bad reaction to the jab previously. He's also said that he's going to get the jab now and that if he'd known how everything would blow up, he'd have just done it in the first place.

How is it high risk, to whom, not the players is it, or the coaches, or the back room staff, nor the players families that they go home to either right If they are removing themselves from vulnerable persons, so having a jab is even more meaningless on top of the fact a flu jab will not, nor cannot protect against C.19. It's utterly ludicrous, you cannot simply breach human rights using back of a fag packet 'science' when the risk of death from C.19 is no greater than for influenza itself.

To those saying there are no side effects to the flu jab, sorry but that's totally false, people die because of having the influenza vaccination, I work with older/vulnerable persons and I see the negative effects in those that are coerced/forced to have the jab, these groups are the ones that an inoculation has low % of efficacy.

Most players will obviously go for it, they like most just want a quiet life, to force others through threats on the back of zero evidence of the jab being effective or indeed even required (compared to other interventions) is unlawful.

Almost lost my mum because of a flu jab

The first time I had the flue jab I thought it was going to kill me I felt that bad so for 3 yrs after that I said no every time they said get one till I moved down south and when my doctor asked why and I told him he said try now it has been changed for the better so I did and have now had one every year since no problem