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!
Brisbane playing the Cowboys in Round 1 is a hang over from the days when nobody thought the Cowboys would draw a crowd in Brisbane after they'd suffered the inevitable string of thrashings each year. But since the Cowboys got their act together, there's no longer any real reason for it to be played in Round 1. It's wasting a showcase match on a weekend that will always draw top crowds anyway. IMHO it would be better played later in the year with a more even spread of meetings including a pre-season clash. Say once in the pre-season, once in the lead up to Origin (around the same week as NSW's City vs Country), and once in the run down to the finals (say round 19 or 20). Over recent years the Cowboys vs Brisbane derbys have been all over by round 7 or 8, leaving another 10 months until they meet again. Way too long between drinks for the two most popular teams in Queensland. This year they've changed that but now it's at the expense of the pre-Origin meeting which has served as a defacto QLD City/Country clash.lockyno1 said:
Who said anything about extra games? I said each team gets their two NRL sanctioned trial matches (exactly as they do now). Instead of the Cowboys playing trial matches against the Warriors and Manly, they play the Titans and Broncos. Where's the extra matches? What strength team the respective sides choose to field in each match is entirely up to that team. Just as it is in the Charity Shield. And just as now there is nothing to stop the sides organising a third trial against a QLD Cup or Premier League side on one of their spare weekends if they want an additional light run.Mr Angry said:
I gave you four.lockyno1 said:
Why? Is there any reason not to take the games to remote areas *with* two QLD sides playing?
But is there any reason not to FFS? There is actually one very good reason to have Qld sides clashing - television. The Qld showdowns are matches that generate huge interest beyond the ground (ie. ratings) and something that Pay TV fall over themselves to cover. In the pre-season the built in rivalries of such a series would give television an angle they could easily market and a guaranteed audience. Just like the Charity Shield.
And how do you guarantee full strength teams any more than I can guarantee full strength teams for any of my proposed matches? It's still the pre-season! Are we really arguing that the Titans would take a trial match more seriously just because it's against a side also located next to a beach? At least I've got long standing internal state/regional rivalries to motivate the teams on the side of my proposal (particularly North v South and Brisbane v Gold Coast).Mr Angry said:
Quidgybo said:
So? The fact it would draw more in season doesn't say anything about whether it'd draw enough in itself to make it worthwhile for television. Even half the normal audience for a Qld derby is hardly an insignifcant number. You could play the Broncos v Cowboys at the bottom of a coal mine with the winner being awarded a can of XXXX and half the state would still want to tune in.lockyno1 said:
Ok, so let's examine where matches are played now and where I'm proposing. Cowboys vs Warriors in Mackay, Cowboys vs Manly in Cairns, Titans vs Parra at Lismore. And I've suggested Cairns, Rockhampton and Toowoomba. Throw in Mackay, the Sunshine Coast and northern NSW as alternatives. Virtually all these centres have hosted televised pre-season or premiership matches at some point, they're hardly off the map (or outside a three or four hour drive for an Outside Broadcast van). You seem to be under the mistaken impression that television facilties in these centres are still in some dark age vastly removed from those in Townsville or any other major regional centre.
Ahh, so after we've danced around it for a few posts, there's the real reason. Better give Benny a yell and get that Grand Final re-match against Melbourne called off. Probably should've held firm on canceling the WCC too. But it seems the potential spitefulness of these clashes weren't big enough concerns to to prevent the Broncos management and coaching staff from going ahead with not just one but both! Perhaps two hard hit outs is exactly what the longest serving professional coach in the game considers the club needs in the pre-season. I very much doubt clashes against the Titans and Cowboys could be any riskier.lockyno1 said:
Just as it does from Townsville. Yet Fox have managed it 11 or 12 times a year for almost the last decade. Cairns is hardly going to cost much different and I'd suggest Toowoomba, with its proximity to Brisbane, would be significantly cheaper.
Quidgybo said:
You are still ignoring the point (twice now) that they are already playing "ridiculously hard matches in which more injuries will happen" (eg. Cowboys and Storm, St Helens and Storm) when you "are less than a month away from kickoff!" How would the Cowboys (same as 2005) and Titans (subsituting for the Storm) be any different? Of course they wouldn't be any different, they'd still be just trial matches. Both the Broncos and the other teams would still be free to play their players in only 40% of the matches. I'll repeat that, they are still just trials. The fact we use some smarts to create a marketing opportunity is totally irrelevant to what happens on the paddock or how the clubs choose to make use of a trial.lockyno1 said:
