1908 Runners up?

Discussion in 'Sports Trivia' started by Craig, Jan 31, 2004.

  1. mightybears

    mightybears Bench

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,342
    Likes Received:
    7
    darth bobo


    might have been the case once but i know that Rosenborg have won the last 12 Tippeligaen football titles [ Norwegian soccer ]


    you'd imagine outside trondheim [i think thats where rosenborg are] every one in norway f**ken hates rosenborg!
     
  2. mightybears

    mightybears Bench

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,342
    Likes Received:
    7
    thinking about it
    lots of eastern european comps have been dominated by one team since the soviet union went kaputski
    dinamo kiev [in the ukraine]
    and skonto? riga [in latvia]
    may well be on 11 plus titles in a row
     
  3. madunit

    madunit Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    61,282
    Likes Received:
    1,052
    August 15, 1908
    Semi Finals were played with Easts defeating Norths 23-10 at Agricultural Showground and Souths defeating Gleber 16-3 at Wentworth.

    As stated earlier, Newtown were decalred winners of the 1910 season, as they were minor premiers.
     
  4. Amadaca

    Amadaca Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,218
    Likes Received:
    0
    Newtown won on a countback. Stupid, irrelevant rule.
     
  5. madunit

    madunit Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    61,282
    Likes Received:
    1,052
    I wish that rule had've been in place in 1989
     
  6. Southern Rooster

    Southern Rooster Bench

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    3,972
    Likes Received:
    0
    Won 13 in a row and going for there 14th narrowly avoided relegation. Could have done an Ipswich of the 70's. `
     
  7. Razor

    Razor Coach

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2003
    Messages:
    10,077
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was at the time. But it's been beaten several times since. St George only held the record for 7 years. The previous world record holders (a team in the WAFL who won 10 comps in a row) held the record for 70 years. And the team that broke the Dragons record(a team in the Jordan soccer competition with 13 wins in a row) held the record for 21 years.

    The current record is 14 which is held by a club in the Latvian soccer competition. They've held it for 2 years so far.
     
  8. sixtynine

    sixtynine Juniors

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    826
    Likes Received:
    0
    no sh!it sherlock
     
  9. brendothejet

    brendothejet First Grade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    8,000
    Likes Received:
    0
    at the end of the day it was something i wish i had seen.

    As a point of interest, what do you think would happen if someone did that today?

    would you be interested or not?
     
  10. Bomber

    Bomber Bench

    Joined:
    May 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,103
    Likes Received:
    1
    I would imagine that a lot of people would lose interest in the competition very quickly if a team went on an eleven-premiership streak. Can you imagine if the Roosters won every premiership between now and 2017?

    Just to tidy up a few points for interested readers about the various final systems that have been in place in the NSWRL/ARL/NRL:

    * In 1908-1909, the competition had a four-team playoff where 1st played 3rd and 2nd played 4th in a knockout semi-final, followed by a final. Two points were given to the winner and 'unofficially' added to their regular season tally. Therefore, in theory, the winner of the final may technically not have been the winner of the competition if their opponent was still ahead on competition points. In 1908, Souths and Easts were level heading into the final (won by the Bunnies), whilst in 1909, Souths were two points ahead of Balmain. Had Balmain won the final, they would have been level on competition points and another final would have been needed. However, the Tigers forfeited the final because they refused to play as the undercard to the Kangaroos v Wallabies game. Source: "The Rugby Rebellion" by Sean Fagan.

    Only the top two teams made the 1910 final, with the Bluebags one point ahead of Souths on the table, forcing a final. A draw meant Newtown were premiers. Presumably, if the Bluebags were three points or more ahead at the top, a final would not have been necessary.

    The 1911 season altered the course of league history. Glebe were, on paper, the best team in the competition, with 56 tries scored and 16 conceded in 14 games, the next best tallies being 43 scored and 21 conceded. However, the Dirty Reds only finished two points ahead of their next best opponent, Easts and Souths. Because the Roosters and Rabbitohs could not be seperated (and for-and-against was not a factor in those days), a preliminary final had to be played, and was won by Easts 23-10. The final then went ahead and was won 22-9 by the Roosters. The NSWRL ruled that the result merely elevated the Roosters level on competition points to the Reds, and forced another game, won once again by Easts, 11-8. Glebe would be turfed out of the comp, premiership-less, in 1929.

    From 1912 to 1925, the premier was the team on top of the competition table, with a final being played only if two teams were level on competition points. Therefore, a team being two points behind what we would call the 'minor premiers' could not make the finals. A final was played in 1916, with the minor premier Tigers beating Souths; in 1922 (Norths beat Glebe 35-3), 1923 (Easts beat Souths 15-12) and 1924 (Balmain beat Souths 3-0, the first game broadcast on radio in Australia).

    In the mid-1920s, many of New South Wales's better league players were moving to Queensland for a combination of reasons, including the stronger competition of the time in Brisbane. Queensland also enjoyed a measure of success in the then-residental interstate series, winning the series in 1922, 1923, 1924 and 1925 - their first four successes. The reason was partly because of the relatively weaker NSW competition, which was being dominated by Souths, Easts, Balmain and, in more recent years, Norths. The remedy was to introduce a finals system which still gave great reward to the minor premiers and gave them a 50% chance of being acclaimed premiers all the same.

    The system pitted 1st against 3rd, 2nd against 4th in knockout finals. The winners would play each other in the final. However, if the minor premiers lost in either the semi-final or the final, they had the right to challenge the winner of the final to a 'Grand Final Challenge' (the origin of the term 'Grand Final'), with the winner of that game getting all the marbles. The system first went into place in 1926, with Souths beating University 11-5. The first year that the Grand Final Challenge was required was in 1930, when minor premiers Wests lost to St George 14-6 in the final. The Magpies won their first premiership in the first grand final the next week, 27-2.

    The Grand Final Challenge system was in place between 1926 and 1955, with the exception of 1937 (just eight games and no finals, due to Kangaroo Tour). A grand final was required in 1930, 1931, 1932, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1951, 1952, 1954 and 1955.

    Because the NSWRL could not book the SCG for a grand final until it knew it was definately required, it often missed out to cricket and was forced to use the much smaller Sydney Sports Ground, thus missing out on valuable revenue. This lead to the introduction of the mandatory grand final in 1954 under a Top 4 system. With eight grand finals required in ten seasons, the public had grown used to the concept and the grand final was here to stay.

    Drawn Grand Finals
    In 1977, the first drawn grand final was played when St George and Parra tied 9-9 after twenty minutes of extra time. A replay was set for the following Saturday and was won 22-0 by the Dragons.

    Possibly thinking it would never happen again, and mindful of the timing of the Kangaroo Tour in 1978, the NSWRL decreed that any tied finals matches must be replayed on a Tuesday during the 1978 finals series. Also, inexplicibly, they discontinued extra time for the finals. The football gods went on to produce two tied finals that year, including the grand final. Both games involved Manly, and both replays were won by Manly, who had to play five elimination games in fourteen days to win the premiership. Quite an achievement!

    After that, the NSWRL reinstated extra-time, which was required once more in the 1989 grand final, as well as the 1990 major semi final (Won 30-12 by the Panthers after 12-12 at fulltime), the 1998 knockout final (Won 28-16 by Canterbury over Newcastle) and the 1998 preliminary final (Won 32-20 by Canterbury over Parramatta). Presumably, had any of these games been tied still after 20 minutes of fulltime, they would have required a replay.
     
  11. Amadaca

    Amadaca Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,218
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's easy to say people would lose interest, but that is purely a statement of retrospect. The proof is in the pudding. No one lost interest when it actually happened --- what more proof do you need? No one knows in advance if a team today won eleven straight, so there'd be plenty of excitement every time the Finals rolled around. As much as if the title changed hands each season? Probably not, but the sky wouldn't fall, either.
     
  12. Amadaca

    Amadaca Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,218
    Likes Received:
    0
    St. George fans are less keen to talk about the fact their boys won a measly four titles outside of their winning eleven in the space of 66 freakin' years (1921-55, 1967-98)!!! That's as pitiful as the eleven straight is brilliant.
     
  13. Lambretta

    Lambretta First Grade

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    7,886
    Likes Received:
    922
    Holy shit - serious?

    You do realise that the Northern Rugby League separated from the Union because the breakaway league wanted to pay the players?

    Union was strictly amateur and the Northern teams were formed around coal towns, steel towns and mill towns and the men couldn't play for the clubs and risk losing two or three days wages travelling to away games.

    The working class Northern clubs wanted to compensate their players for loss of wages but the rich Southern clubs that fielded wealthier players refused to let them do so.

    Rugby League was founded on paying players and have done so since day one.

    Union only became professional in the 1990's
     
  14. PARRA_FAN

    PARRA_FAN Coach

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2003
    Messages:
    14,682
    Likes Received:
    231
    Id take that comment back.

    They were getting paid but not on a professional level like today.

    Correct me if im wrong but on one Kangaroo tour, a number of Kangaroos players stayed in England to play half a season in their comp so they can get paid for travel expenses.
     
  15. madunit

    madunit Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    61,282
    Likes Received:
    1,052
    A salary cap didn't exist until 1990 in Australia.

    Initially players were only given recompense if they were injured playing and couldn't work. Then they got compensated for travel and game related expenses (meals/accommodation etc) Only once the game started to grow and become popular did players start getting paid to play.

    In Australia, the movement to paid players started after the 1909 Wallabies v Kangaroo's games in 1909 which saw the Wallabies players pocket huge money for the games.

    In France, the RU had been suspended from the IRB due to Shamatuerism (secretly paying amateurs to play, excessive on-field violence which resulted in several deaths in the late 20's and early 30's) RL came along and the fans flocked to it, as did all the players and the money. They immediately started with players being paid. The Vichy decree during WWII stopped them for the duration of the war.
     
  16. madunit

    madunit Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    61,282
    Likes Received:
    1,052
    The actually happened on nearly every tour from 1908.

    The 1908-09 tour was such a massive financial disaster that some players couldn't afford the boat ride home, so they stayed in England.

    Future tours saw many players get offered very large salaries to play in England, which many players took up.

    The tide turned in the 60's when British players started coming to Australia chasing the money NSWRL Clubs got from poker machines, which helped pay players salaries.
     

Share This Page