What is the best way to count Premierships??

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Sorry is this is already a thread and sorry for beginning a potential shitfght....

Im just wondering if its valid to count Premierships from the NSWRL in the current tallies.

It isnt really a problem now consideringthe NSWRL basically morphed itself into the NRL of today with some expansion teams, but what happens if a team like the Brothers or the Valley Diehards join the NRL? DO we count the Premierships they won in the BRL and QRL?

Or is it better to just begin in 1998 with the official formation of the NRL??

Or, alternately, is it better to meet somewhere in the middle and (disregarding the official comp branding) say the National comp began in the year 19-something because "event X was the true formation of a single National comp"?

Or can we go even further back and let the foundation teams include Premierships that won before the NSWRL was formed

Ive just always found it funny that we exclusively use the results of the Sydney comp when the NRL is apparently no sydney-centric and im just wondering what others think....

 

[thorson1987]

NRL is a continuation of the ARL which was a continuation of the NSWRL.

So no, if any of the old BRL sides came in their premierships in a comp that has no link to the current comp would not count.

 

[Uncle Kraka]

I find using numbers the best method

 

[BunniesMan]

This competition began in 1908. Abe Lincoln isn't any less of a president just because he was elected when women and black people couldn't vote.

You can only beat who you have infront of you. And besides, the professionalism of the Sydney comp was so far ahead of the Brisbane comp none of the Brisbane clubs would have been a factor if they were part of a national comp.

Every premiership counts and it is offensive to the men who planted the seeds that led to this incredibly successful league if you try and piss on most of the history.

 

[kdalymc]

NRL is a continuation of the ARL which was a continuation of the NSWRL.

So no, if any of the old BRL sides came in their premierships in a comp that has no link to the current comp would not count.

this is the only true answer.
on a side note, for this reason, Wally Lewis only played 80 top grade games and never won a premiership.

 

[TheDalek079]

f**k the BRL

 

[some11]

 

[Diesel]

f**k the BRL

That's pretty much what the Broncos did when they entered the NSWRL

 

[2012....Sharks Year]

Us Sharks fans have no issue with counting premierships!

 

[Timmah]

This competition began in 1908. Abe Lincoln isn't any less of a president just because he was elected when women and black people couldn't vote.

You can only beat who you have infront of you. And besides, the professionalism of the Sydney comp was so far ahead of the Brisbane comp none of the Brisbane clubs would have been a factor if they were part of a national comp.

Every premiership counts and it is offensive to the men who planted the seeds that led to this incredibly successful league if you try and piss on most of the history.

How can you possibly, in any way, shape or form, make such a ridiculous assumption?

You weren't alive back then and have only anecdotal evidence to base that on.

 

[BunniesMan]

How can you possibly, in any way, shape or form, make such a ridiculous assumption?

You weren't alive back then and have only anecdotal evidence to base that on.

Because the Broncos were basically the SE QLD all star team and it still took them 4 years to win. To think that regular clubs from the QRL could match it against the best of the Sydney clubs in the era before salary caps is nonsense.

 

[Timmah]

That is arguably the stupidest assumption I've ever seen. Please stop posting.

 

[Danish]

I'd be much more inclined to use state rep games as a measure of the 2 comps. NSW used to spank QLD every year, leading to the creation of state of origin to make it less one sided.

Then you could also use the number of national reps from each comp, which the NSWRL dominated as well

 

[Timmah]

Agree re; the state clashes, but re: national selection, you don't think that could be the selectors all being NSWRL based?

 

[adamkungl]

I find using numbers the best method

Agree. I think the best way is to count the number of premierships each team has won in the course of history, arriving at a total that, all things being considered, should be approximately in line with the exact amount of premierships they have in fact won.

 

[God-King Dean]

Agree. I think the best way is to count the number of premierships each team has won in the course of history, arriving at a total that, all things being considered, should be approximately in line with the exact amount of premierships they have in fact won.

You're a f**king idiot

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I'd use my teef to count. But I get stuck after one.

 

[alien]

 

[POPEYE]

If you believe the Premiership winner is always the premier team of the season you'd have no choice but use fingers and toes

 

[Lambretta]

This competition began in 1908. Abe Lincoln isn't any less of a president just because he was elected when women and black people couldn't vote.

You can only beat who you have infront of you. And besides, the professionalism of the Sydney comp was so far ahead of the Brisbane comp none of the Brisbane clubs would have been a factor if they were part of a national comp.

Every premiership counts and it is offensive to the men who planted the seeds that led to this incredibly successful league if you try and piss on most of the history.

Or to paraphrase - we'd only have 1 Premiership, the Roosters would have two and waaaaaahhh not fair