What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bears / Manly whinging

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,411
Saw a guy walking along the ocean path in Perth with a bears top on at the weekend. he looked about 80. I'm guessing that is probably the avg age of Bears fans that are left?
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
55,529
So why did the Northern Eagles revert to Manly in 2003?

I am not sure what your quotr or my response has to do with this.

You said Norths weren't viable (an untruth, the NRL has saved Saints, Newcastle and the Titans by stepping in at the 11th hour to avoid them going into administration just this decade, and the Warriors actually did go under in 200! Would you call those four clubs unviable?) and that they could have done a Souths (not possible as they were under the control of administrator).
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,411
I am not sure what your quotr or my response has to do with this.

You said Norths weren't viable (an untruth, the NRL has saved Saints, Newcastle and the Titans by stepping in at the 11th hour to avoid them going into administration just this decade, and the Warriors actually did go under in 200! Would you call those four clubs unviable?) and that they could have done a Souths (not possible as they were under the control of administrator).

Tbf most clubs are only now starting to be viable due to a massive cash injection from the nrl. Most of them are pretty poor at running as a business it would seem. Would bears be viable? Probably but does the need another small club scraping along? I’d suggest not.

Historically the bears clearly weren’t viable or they wouldn’t have had to go into administration.
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,276
I am not sure what your quotr or my response has to do with this.

You said Norths weren't viable (an untruth, the NRL has saved Saints, Newcastle and the Titans by stepping in at the 11th hour to avoid them going into administration just this decade, and the Warriors actually did go under in 200! Would you call those four clubs unviable?) and that they could have done a Souths (not possible as they were under the control of administrator).

What I am getting at is that Norths were unviable. Otherwise they would still exist at the other half of the Northern Eagles merge
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
55,529
Tbf most clubs are only now starting to be viable due to a massive cash injection from the nrl. Most of them are pretty poor at running as a business it would seem. Would bears be viable? Probably but does the need another small club scraping along? I’d suggest not.

Historically the bears clearly weren’t viable or they wouldn’t have had to go into administration.


Utter bullshit.

The Titans went into administration in 2013, and the Warriors actually folded in 2000. Would you say they aren't viable and that is a legitimate reason for excluding them from the comp?

The ship has sailed on Norths but they got a rough deal. Seeing as they had a couple of seasons above 15k im attendances and came about 3rd on decade averages out of the sydney clubs I would say they could have been quite ok.
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
55,529
What I am getting at is that Norths were unviable. Otherwise they would still exist at the other half of the Northern Eagles merge

You're not paying attention. They didn't choose to be in a joint venture. They sabotaged it in the hope of crippling Manly and getting the license. Neither party came in good faith, and Manly was fortunate to have someone stump up a few million in August 2001 otherwise it would have been curtains for that club.
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,276
You're not paying attention. They didn't choose to be in a joint venture. They sabotaged it in the hope of crippling Manly and getting the license. Neither party came in good faith, and Manly was fortunate to have someone stump up a few million in August 2001 otherwise it would have been curtains for that club.

Ok, so let's go with that for a second. Norths were viable right through to 2002, but tried to sabotage a merger that they were forced into - they succeeded in sabotaging the merger obviously because it ceased to exist in 2003 - but Manly came out of it and played in the NRL and Norths didn't.

Were Norths viable in 2003? It doesn't seem like it.
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
55,529
What I am getting at is that Norths were unviable. Otherwise they would still exist at the other half of the Northern Eagles merge

You're not paying attention. They didn't choose to be in a joint venture. They sabotaged it in the hope of
Ok, so let's go with that for a second. Norths were viable right through to 2002, but tried to sabotage a merger that they were forced into - they succeeded in sabotaging the merger obviously because it ceased to exist in 2003 - but Manly came out of it and played in the NRL and Norths didn't.

Were Norths viable in 2003? It doesn't seem like it.

So because they weren't in the comp they weren't viable? Were Souths Viable in 2000 and 2001?
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,276
You're not paying attention. They didn't choose to be in a joint venture. They sabotaged it in the hope of


So because they weren't in the comp they weren't viable? Were Souths Viable in 2000 and 2001?

Well souths are my point. If Norths were still viable after the split then they could have used the souths precedent to gain re-entry into the league. Why didn't they? Because they weren't viable as a club.
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
55,529
Well souths are my point. If Norths were still viable after the split then they could have used the souths precedent to gain re-entry into the league. Why didn't they? Because they weren't viable as a club.

The NRL was granted leave to appeal the ruling in 2001, and The high court actually overturned the ruling in 2003. Souths were allowed to compete in 2002 as a gesture of goodwill at a time when the NRL could have said no, as the matter was still in dispute. So no, they couldn't have used that precedent.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,411
Utter bullshit.

The Titans went into administration in 2013, and the Warriors actually folded in 2000. Would you say they aren't viable and that is a legitimate reason for excluding them from the comp?

The ship has sailed on Norths but they got a rough deal. Seeing as they had a couple of seasons above 15k im attendances and came about 3rd on decade averages out of the sydney clubs I would say they could have been quite ok.

I am saying they weren't viable when they went belly up, clearly! Should they have been booted? Well that depends on strategic importance to the NRL. At a time the NRL needed to reduce the comp and had a massive amount of Sydney teams already you cant blame them for not bailing the Bears out. In fact back then the NRL probably wouldn't have had the money to bail them out anyway and certainly didn't have the leadership. Arguably they saved Dragons, Knights, Titans and probably one or two others in recent times because they need 16 teams for contractual reasons as well as the strategic importance to the make up of the comp of those clubs.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,411
You're not paying attention. They didn't choose to be in a joint venture. They sabotaged it in the hope of


So because they weren't in the comp they weren't viable? Were Souths Viable in 2000 and 2001?

Arguably not, Souths won lotto, what are the odds of a multimillionaire Hollywood A lister being a fan? Pretty confident if Rusty hadn't come along Souths would likely be gone or also in hock to the NRL by now.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
Saw a guy walking along the ocean path in Perth with a bears top on at the weekend. he looked about 80. I'm guessing that is probably the avg age of Bears fans that are left?
40s through to 90s would be the hibernating supporter age range.
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
55,529
I am saying they weren't viable when they went belly up, clearly! Should they have been booted? Well that depends on strategic importance to the NRL. At a time the NRL needed to reduce the comp and had a massive amount of Sydney teams already you cant blame them for not bailing the Bears out. In fact back then the NRL probably wouldn't have had the money to bail them out anyway and certainly didn't have the leadership. Arguably they saved Dragons, Knights, Titans and probably one or two others in recent times because they need 16 teams for contractual reasons as well as the strategic importance to the make up of the comp of those clubs.

They didn't go belly up. They went into administration. Two quite different things. I wouldn't argue that an NRL club leading a nomadic existence waiting for their delayed stadium to be finished is indeed not viable, good thing it was ready in November 1999...

They didn't need bailing out either. They were quarreling with the Leagues Club at the time. The Leagues club offered to stump up the cash but by then the NRL had excluded them from the criteria and the administrator was considering merger offers from Manly, Parra and Newcastle. In classic Norths fashion they picked their moment to go into the shithouse and it was the exact worst moment in which to do it!

The Bears are done, but to suggest the 1999 edition of them couldn't have been forged into a club worthy of being in the NRL is utterly incorrect.
 
Last edited:

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
55,529
Arguably not, Souths won lotto, what are the odds of a multimillionaire Hollywood A lister being a fan? Pretty confident if Rusty hadn't come along Souths would likely be gone or also in hock to the NRL by now.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Who knows what would have happened without Rusty? My English football club went to the wall in 2010, lost out on a wealthy backer in 2015 and looked in trouble, but ended up landing a Thai Tuna magnate and now has more money than sense. Life is funny like that.

They've definitely got a massive fan base and I would argue that excluding from the competition was a terrible idea, which has been pretty much confirmed by the fact they are one of only 8 clubs to have ever averaged over 20k in a season.
 

Latest posts

Top