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!

End nears for suburban NRL grounds

Misanthrope

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
47,624
You really are making no f**king sense, BunniesMan. Sydney is a huge city geographically. You'll only drive fans away in their droves if you tell people from Penrith, Parramatta, Illawarra, or Manly that they need to make a 2 hour commute (at least) each way to see their team play in a largely empty stadium.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
73,465
Comes as no surprise this announcement. Cold hard business reality will decide for clubs what they decide to do. Reality we are only talking about Penrith, Cronulla and Manly really as the others could reach the three developed grounds without too much hassle really. ANZ shouldn't be counted imo as it is not fit for purpose as a club ground due to its size. ARLC wants a crowd avg of 20k+, going to need bigger stadiums to achieve that is the reality.
 

Misanthrope

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
47,624
One could argue that getting to that average probably means taking the game to areas where there is the desire to see the game. How you can tell Perth, Brisbane 2.0, Adelaide etc that you aren't needed and then - two weeks later - announce that all Sydney clubs will need to play out of the same two stadiums because their crowds are too low is just geniused.

I realise this isn't an NRL initiative as much as a government one, but if the game really does go down the track of having 7-8 sides playing out of two grounds, it's going to be a joke. These clubs aren't even able to fill grounds in their own back yard - what makes anybody think they can fill a 40,000 or 70,000 seat stadium a few hours train ride or drive away?
 

KiamaSaint

Coach
Messages
18,242
There's nothing logical about forcing Penrith fans to travel 2 hours to watch their team play. They won't attend and it may even drive fans out of our game completely. You can't just say "what works for my club should work for others". Souths are not Penrith. Manly are not the Bulldogs.

Sydney is vast and while some consolidation would be ideal it's not going to work for every club. There is no "one-fix solution". Personally I think this is all a big storm in a tea cup driven by the media. Didn't the ARLC already say they weren't going to abandon traditional suburban grounds some time ago?

SK, this post is clearly thought through and balanced, it does not belong here.
 

CrazyTiger

Juniors
Messages
1,835
Comes as no surprise this announcement. Cold hard business reality will decide for clubs what they decide to do. Reality we are only talking about Penrith, Cronulla and Manly really as the others could reach the three developed grounds without too much hassle really. ANZ shouldn't be counted imo as it is not fit for purpose as a club ground due to its size. ARLC wants a crowd avg of 20k+, going to need bigger stadiums to achieve that is the reality.

Does a television game require a crowd of 20k plus? All rugby league requires is that the
background is 80-100% full for the majority watching on TV.
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,188
Comes as no surprise this announcement. Cold hard business reality will decide for clubs what they decide to do. Reality we are only talking about Penrith, Cronulla and Manly really as the others could reach the three developed grounds without too much hassle really. ANZ shouldn't be counted imo as it is not fit for purpose as a club ground due to its size. ARLC wants a crowd avg of 20k+, going to need bigger stadiums to achieve that is the reality.

I used to work in the MacArthur region and the south line would take about an hour to get to lidcombe. Why would supporters from that part of Sydney take an hour plus journey each way on a train line that can only be described as "rough".

That region already gets barely any rugby league and there is a push from the AFL and soccer out there.
 

Misanthrope

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
47,624
All rugby league requires is that the
background is 80-100% full for the majority watching on TV.

If we're being realistic, rugby league as a game doesn't need that at all
 

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
Why on earth would people go to watch their team
play home games at a stadium that holds no historical significance what so ever?

.

Roosters , sports ground to SFS
Souths , Redfern to SFS then Homebush
Bulldogs , Belmore to Homsbush
Raiders , Seifert to canb stad

Tigers play games at the SFS & have at homebush & Balmain played at Parramatta at one stage
Parramatta play games at homebush
Canterbury have played at Parramatta
Parramatta have played games at Belmore

and the fans of these teams had no problem going to watch them play at venues other then their traditonal ground
why on earth
probably to watch some footy .... :sarcasm:
 
Messages
15,083
With the new TV money, I thought most of the clubs were 'secure'.

Keep getting told playing at Homebush secured Souths and Bulldogs future.

Yet their memberships have gone UP for 2013.
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,188
Belmore to homebush lmao they are about 6 km apart. Campbelltown and Penrith are about 50kms from the cbd. Let's rob an important rugby league region of any rugby league.

absolute madness. Sydney sprawls way too much to easily centralise the game.
 

CrazyTiger

Juniors
Messages
1,835
try telling the clubs accountants that :sarcasm:

I'm pretty sure that the NRL gives the clubs money from the millions of supporters who
watch the game on TV (TV rights). I think they also get money from sponsorship based
upon people watching the game (something to do with sponsors wanting a return on their
investment).

Attempting to increase crowds by 5k at the risk of undermining the fabric of a TV
game is probably something that is understood quite well by accountants. Maximising
the crowd and gate takings from the current supporter pool is something a club accountant
would like. Reducing the supporter pool, not so much.
 

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
The Dogs are still playing in their home area, using them to bolster a feeble argument is just stupid. For many of their fans getting to ANZ is no easier or more difficult than getting to Belmore. In the opposite end of the scale, the Roosters play in a large stadium close to their home area, does that mean the large stadium model doesn't work?

Souths ?............. 25k's from their " home area "

and despite indifferent seasons on the field have increased their crowds by 25% since moving to Homebush.

I remember souths fans saying they'd never follow them out there
similar to some of the bleatings from a few in here

well fine , stay at home you won't be missed.
the game will move on without them
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,969
All Sydney clubs should be working to have 20-25,000 stadiums. There is no need for 30,000 stadiums. Big games can be shifted to the big stadiums, as use to happen when the SCG had the match of the day.
 

Dragon_psa

First Grade
Messages
7,058
Stupid argument of the year award. Is that why we dont have the Western Reds anymore, because the lasy f*ck supporters wouldnt travel to ANZ?

There is absolutely a need for suburban grounds. RL is the only major sport that covers regional Australia (discounting A league as a major sport - another argument, but I'' argue that the CC Mariners exist because of Bluetongue, which was built for a regional NRL club anyway). We cover NQ, Gold Coast, Central Coast, Wollongong, Newcastle and Canberra. In the same way, RL is also the only major sport that covers suburban Australia - and it only does so in Sydney. Im sure if a Brookie/Kogarah/Leichhardt/Penrith type ground existed in Ipswich during our expansion phase we would have our second Brisbane team based there. This is why the Tigers play out of three grounds, not just SFS - it services their market.

The only reason Canterbury and Souths play at ANZ is because they get paid to do so - not because it's "a big world class stadium". Would anyone call Mt Smart or Dairy Farmers world class stadiums? Of course not - yet they serve their purpose well.

O'Farrell is tighter than a virgin pygmy tweenie. The could do the 50/50 thing with the feds and have a dual Pacific Highway from Hornsby to the Gabba, but despite finding an extra billion the other day, they cant even foot the bill for the f*cking paint! Yet, they are right to concentrate their $ on the main stadia because they have responsibility for them. Sad for Brookie I know, but in reality it still packs them in for big games - and it isnt f*cking Anfield-in-waiting. Suburban grounds - like regional grounds - are integral for those districts sports. The major difference between say Penrith Stadium and Canberra Stadium is that major sports - and half the knobs here - only look at cities as dots on the map, and ignore demographics. That's why Union put the ACT Brumbies in and there is no thought of another SANZAR team in Western Sydney. Nothing against Canberra here - they have a great ground servicing a population of 300k or so. As does Brookie.

Another argument is this "world class" drivel. What is world class? Anyone ever seen River Plate?

The game has to go to the people. Shiny stadiums do not buy tickets, people do. Clubs need to be near people, not just shiny stadiums. People go to see their team, not shiny stadiums. And those that DO put comfort before seeing their team at their local ground get Pay TV and sit in a leather recliner!

Finally, State governments can pay millions to keep Origins and Grand Finals in Sydney when they probably would have been there anyway - but cant finance improvements to local grounds?

We need to stop being apologists about our suburban and regional grounds. We should celebrate what they do for the game - take it to the people. Only Lang park, SFS, ANZ, Hunter, Parra, Canberra and the MEC are the only NRL grounds with the chance of hosting another major sport in any given year. The existence of DFS, Robina, Mt Smart, Brookie, Leichhardt, Kogarah, Penrith, WIN and Campbelltown make us the people's sport. End of story.

This.

:clap:
 

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
I'm pretty sure that the NRL gives the clubs money from the millions of supporters who
watch the game on TV (TV rights). I think they also get money from sponsorship based
upon people watching the game (something to do with sponsors wanting a return on their
investment).

Attempting to increase crowds by 5k at the risk of undermining the fabric of a TV
game is probably something that is understood quite well by accountants. Maximising
the crowd and gate takings from the current supporter pool is something a club accountant
would like. Reducing the supporter pool, not so much.

TV execs don't give a cr@p about 10K at the SFS
or 18K at Kogarah
the same 1 Million nationally will watch both if its a quality game & they're happy ....then
the clubs will get their TV money from the NRL as a result
thing is the club would probably make more in gate receipts in the game ...

at the SFS

see you can charge more for a seat thats under cover then a square of grass that isn't
any accountant will tell you that ;-)

time for RL to move forward & get with the times.
 

CrazyTiger

Juniors
Messages
1,835
TV execs don't give a cr@p about 10K at the SFS
or 18K at Kogarah
the same 1 Million nationally will watch both if its a quality game & they're happy ....then
the clubs will get their TV money from the NRL as a result
thing is the club would probably make more in gate receipts in the game ...

at the SFS

see you can charge more for a seat thats under cover then a square of grass that isn't
any accountant will tell you that ;-)

time for RL to move forward & get with the times.

It isn't about TV executives. They show what people want to watch.
Assuming that people are going to watch a game on TV that may looks like it has a
crowd that belongs at a Sheffield Shield game is not a good assumption. You
can feel the lack of atmosphere even on TV.

Moving to two stadiums (ANZ and the SFS) resulting in the death of clubs and mergers
may well increase the crowds at games by 5k. Moving from nine sydney teams to
four while creating the illusion of more crowds could result in a catastrophic loss
of support for rugby league in Sydney.

Rugby league is a TV game but its roots are in being a tribal game. Destroying clubs
to increase the gate at the risk of decimating crowds is something that some are
prepared to take, eg: John Ribot.

People can always watch something else. Rugby league is not the greatest game of
all. It is just the game we grew up with.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top